OT: How Amazing
 

Its amazing how we have the technology to capture what we see with such definition and detail that it is truly amazing to see, however we cannot take that image capturing ability, digital video, and convert it into technology that can give a blind man sight.

The mergance of Mechanical, electrical and biological technologies into a new technology that can give sight to the blind, hearing to the death, and artifical limbs that look and work as if a natural part of the human body are still decades if not centuries away from become a reality.

This is so very sad.

Speaking of Amazing things, what new technology do you think we will see in say the next twenty years or so? With how much our technology has evolved and changed over the Last decade it is easy to speculate that new technologies are sure to come as rapidly as they have spawned in the past.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

I saw a couple things about letting blind people see. One was shown in my engineering class, an engineer jacked into the optical sensors(I think) in his brain and hooked it up to almost a mini video digital camera. Supposedly he had very good sight from it, but wll not expand on the idea because he fears the radiation from his device will cause brain tumors. Another device shows the differenc in light with white and black dots, giving partial sight to the blind. They showed what the blind person would see with this device, and it looked decent at least. I think the latter was shown on ripley's believe it or not once

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

Actually those technologies you mention are not as far away as you think.

We already have crude artifical ears. It's called a cochlear implant, and it's in wide use already. In fact one of the biggest detrements to them to this point is they work so well that many deaf people are resistant to it on philisophical reasons.

We may have artificial limbs that respond to thought commands and give tactile feedback to the sensory centers of the brain within the next decade or two. They already have labratory experiments with primates that have shown remarkable success.

Artifical eyes will probably take more then ten years. What they are already working on is a sensory device that you wear like clothing that gives feedback to the brain about objects around you. It's not the same thing as eyesight, but the brain uses it as visual clues. Some studies show we are very close to a practical device sensite enough to allow differention between different peoples faces. Actual artifical eyes that are implanted and give the same kind of information as biological ones are probably far off, but I would expect they will be much closer to decades then centruries

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

I agree, I have some vision problems due to surgery on both eyes from complications with juvenille diabetes. Would be neat to see advances to restore and improve vision. they actually did develope a kind of "visor"--i cant recall the specifics, but i saw it on the news. perhaps before long the technology will advance. (we need to build more reasearch center III http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

I am blind in my right eye and loosing vision in my left and for me life is not worth living without vision.

It is easy for someone to say otherwise until they themselves walk a mile in my shoes. Only then will they understand how very important sight is.

[ March 24, 2004, 00:31: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

One good thing is that for people who have not been blind from birth, the brain is already wired and trained to process colour, depth perception, word shapes and all sorts of similar skills.

Simply providing a bridge over some damage to a brain that is ready and waiting for visual info is a much simpler prospect than trying to give someone a sense they have never had the use of before.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

That is an excellent point SJ. Thank you for making it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It seems to me then that this is an issue you should be talking to blind people about. There are a lot of living blind people, so I would guess that there are a lot of blind people who have found compensations.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

If they layed off some of the harshness re: stem cell research, we might even be able to regenerate your eyes for you Atrocities!

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Last I heard, stem cells were gotten from the unborn.
and I suggest that discussion break off here.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not so sure. I think if you gave such a device to someone who didn't have eyes, their brain would learn to use the device using techniques optimized for the device, instead of adapting previous techniques from another organ...

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Then you haen't been keeping up to date. Stem cells can now be found in all kinds of places that do not involved aborted foetuses or "the unborn" at all.

Imagine someone in need of a new kidney giving a DNA swab from their mouth, and having stem cells grown from that, and from those stem cells a new organ being grown specifically for them. Since the genetic material would be their own, there would be no (or very little) risk of rejection, which would make the process infinitely more successful.

Not to mention the fact that it spares a potential donor (assuming one can be found) the risk and inconvenience of having one of their own kidneys removed.


Here's a quote: "Adult stem cells have been isolated from numerous adult tissues, umbilical cord, and other non-embryonic sources," from
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/prentice.htm
That same site on adult stem cell research has a statement about its ethics in which it specifically states that it is opposed to taking cells from pre-birth sources: http://www.stemcellresearch.org/statement/index.html

[ March 24, 2004, 10:49: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not so sure. I think if you gave such a device to someone who didn't have eyes, their brain would learn to use the device using techniques optimized for the device, instead of adapting previous techniques from another organ... </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This is half true. The brain can adapt to just about anything, if you get to it fast enough. If the brain doesn't achieve certain key milestones during development it never will (or at least not up to a completely functional state). An example of this ould be "phantom limbs". Where an amputee can still feel their missing limb. This is quite prevalent among adult amputees because their brains have adopted a configuration that includes the missing limb. The brain essentially still has a 'slot' open for it. Child amputees, on the other hand, never have phantom limb. Their brain is still in development and so the unused portion of the brain devotes itself to other things. Simply, the brain edits out that the limb was ever there. This may mean that adult amputees would be eligible or cybernetic limp replacement but a now-grown child amputee would not.

Of course there could always be workarounds. Using unrelated motor impulses to stimulate the new limb would be posible but awkward (imagine having to control all of your leg movements using kugi-kiri hand gestures).

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

Mankind always developes new technologies. Its just that the time between major steps seems to grow proportional. Im not talking about different engines (i.e. oil -> hydrogen) but rather steps like animals->engines->? and stuff.

I have to admit that, at the current position mankind stands still, is maybe even moving back. I dont know what will be in a few douzen years, but if things not change fundamentally we will go back a few hundred, if not even more, years.
Technology is all good and fine, until certain people decide technology shouldnt be used for human's good.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Then you haen't been keeping up to date. Stem cells can now be found in all kinds of places that do not involved aborted foetuses or "the unborn" at all.

Imagine someone in need of a new kidney giving a DNA swab from their mouth, and having stem cells grown from that, and from those stem cells a new organ being grown specifically for them. Since the genetic material would be their own, there would be no (or very little) risk of rejection, which would make the process infinitely more successful. etc...
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, that's a load off my mind. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

First off, I like Atrocities have a disability. I am totally deaf in one ear because I have a disease that ruins my hearing. I take comfort at least that if my other ear goes I can still play SE4 (with the sound turned off) and uses the internet, plus I can still read (in fact I can read while blocking my good ear with one finger). Anyway back to the topic. Every month I go to the Library and read Popular Mechanic and Science. Its amazing what technologies are being built. As well as the monkey strapped into a machine so only the bionic arm run from cables in its head moves, there are replicators being built. Not molecular ones, but simple ones printing 3 dimensional shapes. In the future you could have your replicator in your workshop and when you need new cutlery or crockery or maybe furniture you just "print" one out.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

Yeah, they use those 3D printers to make models of new cars and things. It's really sci-fi looking.

Talking about "printing" 3D objects- I can't remember if it was here or somewhere else but I read about a new type of printer- that "prints" buildings! it's a robot that scoots around and leaves a trail of concrete behind it. It "draws" out the outline of the walls, waits for the concrete to set, then lays the next layer of concrete on top, and the next...

It can only do single-story buildings with domed roofs, but it sounds like a way-cool toy.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

Another technology I keep my eyes out for are Solar Chimneys. Basically you have hot air from green houses rising up the chimney turning turbines. All you need are plenty of space to build Kilometer tall buildings, and 16 hours of sunlight a day, which here in Australia we have nothing but. They've built small prototypes and Last I heard our parliament had allowed it, but I'm not sure what progress has been made since.

Edit: oh, and a year or two ago I read of Mechs being developed to use in construction.

[ March 25, 2004, 07:23: Message edited by: Randallw ]

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

*sigh* a few solar power satalites are all a country needs...

[ March 25, 2004, 07:59: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">At present, in theory, satelites could be constructed that would capture enough energy to power things sure - but there are some catches:
1) Size: There isn't too terribly much difference in the wattage the sun delivers to a square foot on Earth as it does to a square foot in space, ignoring for the moment the day/night cycle and weather - any such satellite would need to be absolutely enourmous, which causes some difficulties in getting it up there.
2) Transmission and Transmission Safety: Once you have the satellite up there, collecting energy, you have to get all that energy back down where you want to use it. Sure, you could maser it down or something, but what then happens when a solar storm causes the satellite to wander slightly off course? For a communications or weather satellite, a small change in facing doesn't much matter, as there isn't enough energy in the transmissions to mean anything; it can be corrected with manuvering jets or gyroscopes at a later time, with the only drawback being the use of fuel (for jets only) and the downtime. For a power sat, with the distances involved, an extremely minor change in facing could very well cause all that energy to destroy a city, as it turns into heat and causes very bad fires at an unprepared site rather than being properly converted at a prepared site (a large change in facing wouldn't be as bad, as the distance involved means it is more likely to miss Earth entierly). This is complicated by several factors: the Earth is moving, the satelite is orbiting (probably spinning, too), the moon tugs on things, et cetera.
3) Expense (part of 1, in many ways): For the moment, it is ludicrously expensive to get something into orbit. The expense a solar sat would entail would likely makes other, earth-bound energy production mechanisms such as nuclear power plants positively cheap in comparison, although the majority of that is likely the initial expense rather than the ongoing matenince costs.
4) Transmision loss: Every time you ship energy around - especially when changing the form the energy is in - an amount is lost to a waste form of energy that you can't use (heat, mostly). The most expensive solar panels are around what 20% (?) efficency - which means that only one-fifth of the light that hits them is turned into useful electricity, the rest is lost. Changing that electricity into microwaves for transmission intruduces another ineffeciency, as does capturing the microwaves on the ground and converting them back into electricity. By the time the energy has finally reached the ground, we'll probably be lucky to manage 1% overall capture. That can be made up for in size, of course, but then you get back to 1 and 3.
5) Unknown effects: There really isn't any way of knowing beforehand what the effect of pouring that much energy through the air in a concentrated beam will do to such things as the weather, both long term and short, even assuming you can get past 2.

It is very likely all of those can, given time and research, be overcome. For now, however, ground-based energy production is more feasable ... but that will likely not stay true forever.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

I would like to see more sight and hearing technology being developed myself. I'm 41, and not getting any younger. When I was a child, I had a surgical procedure to correct a "lazy eye" in my left eye. I think it's back. I find it very hard to focus on the same spot when I'm reading. And when I'm not doing computers or vegging in front of the tv, I read a lot. It gets frustrating at times. Also, about 5 years ago I developed a constant buzzing in my right ear. No matter how many times I see the doctor about it and I get a temporary reprieve, it comes back. It does make listening on the telephone kind of hard, as that's one of my functions at work, and being right-handed, I usually try to listen with my right ear. I'd probably go to the doctor more often, but they always want to talk about possibilites of high-blood pressure or other such stuff, as I'm a few pounds overweight. And Last year when I got my eyes checked for new glasses, the optometrist didn't even mention anything about the lazy eye, even though it was apparent to me, and I thought to her, that I was having trouble focusing. So yeah, I'd be interested in more advances in the above techonogies.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">can you please explain the significance of the sigh. Without jumping to conclusions I would like to know what it means. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yeah...it's unlikely. Costs to much, to many concerns. See Jack's post for a summery.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

Talking about alternative energy... I was driving to my brother's the other day, which involves spending half an hour on scenic country roads going through quaint villages. Every now and again on roads like this you'll see signs campaigning for local causes- "We need a bypass" or "No open prison in our village".

However the other day I saw signs saying something like "No to giant wind turbines on our hills". I felt like putting up a sign beneath it sayin "Yes to oil-burning power station."

What the hell is wrong with these people? What's wrong with wind turbines? I think they are beautiful to look at, and even if I didn't I would rather support a clean, renewable energy source than continue with what we have.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

We have wind turbines here in Tasmania. You'd think conservationists would love them, I certainly thought so. But the local "Green" party hates them (but then agin they hate everything. I sometimes thinks their stance is to be against everything). Whats the problem?. Well, think birds flying along peacefully. Suddenly theres this big fan in front of them. They keep flying. You can see the problem. I try not to hate anyone, but when I see the Greens on TV its hard. Now I like nature, being Tasmanian I can't help it, but these people love trees more than people. Its "kill people when there a problem, but god forbid we harm a tree"

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

I was thinking about this the other day.

If by chance we do begin to explore the stars our technology, even though advanced, would be compareable to the old wooden sale vessels that we used for centuries here on Earth.

Those wooden ships were the ticket for how many centuries before the invention of steam came along and then metal ships and ultimately neuclear power?

When we start exploring space, and I believe we will never do this, but the ships used will be a standard design for many decades.

Think of it this way, we used those wooden ships for centuries before Steam power was developed, and a new form of locomotion was adopted. The same can be said here. We will use the technology we have at the time and it will slowly improve until one day a major break through will occur that will propel our understanding of space flight technology forward by leaps and bounds.

How long that will take only time can tell us.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">They wouldn't be PETA members, by any chance? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">can you please explain the significance of the sigh. Without jumping to conclusions I would like to know what it means.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">They wouldn't be PETA members, by any chance? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I doubt it, "Greens" don't have ethics (or if they do they are the opposite of what I consider ethical). These are people who protesting against sheep being exported to Muslim countries broke in and fed the sheep ham. Apart from the fact that now the sheep can't be sold and the farmers (in the middle of a drought) lose money, it is also an insult to Muslims.

Re: OT: How Amazing
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think in part it will depend on the government. I'm not sure how long NASA held onto microwave ovens and velcro, but I don't remember them being out until the late 70's. If by some chance a cure for cancer or some other deadly disease is discovered, do you truly think that with the government as it is now, beholden to every lobbyist under the sun, would release that knowledge to the general public? I don't think so. I think that whatever doodads come out will be more time-saving things, like microwaves were 30 years ago. Stuff to make us more fat and lazy, and not wonder about all of the vast scientific knowledge we should be accumlating. Maybe in a century or so things will change so that the government will release more of this life-saving techonology without costs, but I don't think that will happen anytime soon.