What are the implications of this? Does it pass the "So what?" test?
FWP
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Emlyn wrote:
> Has someone got more on this? It comes from the article posted below:
>
> "We already have technology for electronic devices to communicate with
> neurons in both directions that requires no direct physical contact with the
> neurons. For example, scientists at the Max Planck Institute in Heidelberg,
> Germany, have developed "neuron transistors" that can detect the firing of a
> nearby neuron, or alternatively, can cause a nearby neuron to fire or
> suppress it from firing. This amounts to two-way communication between
> neurons and the electronic-based neuron transistors. The institute's
> scientists demonstrated their invention by controlling the movement of a
> living leech from their computer. "
>
> Emlyn
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Max More" <max@maxmore.com>
> To: <extropians@extropy.org>
> Cc: <max@maxmore.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:44 AM
> Subject: MEDIA: Ray Kurzweil piece in Business 2.0
>
>
> > I don't think it's been mentioned yet, so here's a link to a piece by Ray
> > Kurzweil in Business 2.0 (Sept. 26), titled "Dear PC: R.I.P." This is part
> > of the issue's "Future Shock 2" feature, beginning with updated thoughts
> by
> > Alvin Toffler.
> >
> > Two other people in that issue that "get it" are Peter Schwartz and Newt
> > Gingrich (yes, really).
> >
> > http://www.business2.com/content/magazine/indepth/2000/09/12/17734
> >
> > Max
> > Max More,
> > max@maxmore.com or more@extropy.org
> > www.maxmore.com
> > President, Extropy Institute. www.extropy.org
> > Senior Content Architect, ManyWorlds Consulting
> >
> >
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Machine Psychology:
<http://users.uniserve.com/~culturex/Machine-Psychology.htm>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:38:37 MDT