You've made some fair points, but there's an underlying assumption: that we are only going to be able to do what we are doing today. Of course, my example is not that good, but imagine things like increased spatial sensing, instant data analysis, better (supervised) sleep, bigger muscle and organ efficiency.
Pretty much, yes. That just sounds like better sensors or information presentation, faster computers, medical advances and maybe some genetic engineering. We've been doing all of that stuff for decades.
The way I see it brain interfaces aren't necessarily a huge game changer by themselves, in fact it's conceivable they might actually be slower than existing interfaces but more convenient for some tasks. It's more likely to be about overcoming bottlenecks that might arise in our existing technological advance trajectory, so we don't stall out.
Comments
You've made some fair points, but there's an underlying assumption: that we are only going to be able to do what we are doing today. Of course, my example is not that good, but imagine things like increased spatial sensing, instant data analysis, better (supervised) sleep, bigger muscle and organ efficiency.
Are those in your opinion still more of the same?
Pretty much, yes. That just sounds like better sensors or information presentation, faster computers, medical advances and maybe some genetic engineering. We've been doing all of that stuff for decades.
The way I see it brain interfaces aren't necessarily a huge game changer by themselves, in fact it's conceivable they might actually be slower than existing interfaces but more convenient for some tasks. It's more likely to be about overcoming bottlenecks that might arise in our existing technological advance trajectory, so we don't stall out.