Implants in Science Fiction

[MKSheppard]

If there is one meme in Science Fiction that gets me worked up, it's the use of cybernetic implants to "boost" intelligence, to load languages or skillsets; or just having a computer in your head to place HUD like stuff over your vision like letting you know who is exactly who at some debutante ball...

Now, I know that eventually this kind of implant will be made; and that SOMEONE will get them; the big question is whether it would actually spread beyond the "biomod" weirdoes who get forked tongues, masses of piercings, etc etc and to society as a whole.

Speaking as someone who has undergone head surgery in his life twice for an implant....the risks are definitely non trivial -- after I had my second implant, everything tasted like cardboard for several days afterwards.

And that was for a simple implant where you simply place an electrode into a cochlear to stimulate it. What happens when you are placing them into the BRAIN of all places, or along the optic nerve?

There was one Science Fiction Series I read; I think it was the Genellan Series by Scott Gier, which actually addressed the very real risk of this kind of cybernetic integration -- we have enough problems these days with internet viruses etc messing up our computers. So what happens when the computer in question that's being messed up is interfaced directly to your wetware?

In the Genellan Series; some Scientific types actually got cybernetic implants, and this fad lasted only as long as it took for some bitter hacker who hated college professors to put together a Joker virus that infected the implants of the professors and stimulated the part of the brain that made you laugh -- and so the professors laughed themselves to death via spasm... and then nobody wanted implants anymore.

I mean, can you imagine hearing an ad for Sex Spam, or seeing Sex Spam in your vision near continuously after your cyberimplant got infected with a Trojan?

[Samuel]

You are talking about the Stark's War/Command/Crusade trilogy with the Joker virus... or several authors have used it.

I think the easiest way to deal with that sort of problem is to require that the implants get data through a physical connection and that they only accept data and not any programs. Someone with grounding in computers can probably explain how practical/impractical that is.

[MKSheppard]

Yes, Sorry Stark's War Series. I've been on a SF reading kick (The Genellan Series, the Clone Republic Series, Stark's War Trilogy, Vatta's War series) so they've blurred together.

As for physical connection; my implant operates via induction to deliver the electrical power to stimulate the electrode, but I don't know how well that would work if you required a high datarate.

[Ford Prefect]

Now, I know that eventually this kind of implant will be made; and that SOMEONE will get them; the big question is whether it would actually spread beyond the "biomod" weirdoes who get forked tongues, masses of piercings, etc etc and to society as a whole.

The difference between a Ghost in the Shell-style cyberbrain/external memory combo and any cosmetic body modifications is indescribably massive. The usefulness of being able to access the internet (or access private networks) by thinking about it, or pick up information just by glancing at anything with an RFID chip in it is pretty fucking great. If it gives a person an advantage, if it's affordable, if it's useful, then people will use it. Sure, there's going to have to be some sort of risk, especially initially, but there's a risk in how many cars are on the road at the moment.

[MKSheppard]

The usefulness of being able to access the internet (or access private networks) by thinking about it, or pick up information just by glancing at anything with an RFID chip in it is pretty fucking great.

And guess what?

They're working on external brain pickups now that don't require implanted electrodes or jacks.

Combine that idea with a pair of nice stylish shades and you get all the advantages of the cybernetically implanted stuff, like having stuff appear in your vision, accessing RFID information by looking at it; and with none of the disadvantages, such as implant becoming obsolete or requiring replacement if it breaks; no dangerous surgery required for upgrade or replacement -- just toss the shades. Same thing with spyware infestations, just nuke and format the shades.

Now, would you want to try nuking and reinstalling something intimately connected to your brain?

[Stark]

Most settings with widespread implants don't have a significant risk of table death. Either through nanotechnology, brain augmentation, or other technologies, it is often considered trivial to get what would to us seem like a massively dangerous and wasteful surgery performed.

If I could learn Spanish by eating some nanomachines or record everything I ever looked at by undergoing a procedure performed tens of thousands of times a year, why would I worry about table death because some guy born in the 80s did? If my brain was already in an artificial container (like Ghost in the Shell), why not constantly alter my body or interface?

The hilariously stupid idea of external penetration of headware is one of the reasons fourth edition Shadowrun is so amusing. That's a world where some guy in the basement can lace your bones with exotic metals and have you walking around again in a week; why would anyone worry about simple dataware?

[Ford Prefect]

Combine that idea with a pair of nice stylish shades and you get all the advantages of the cybernetically implanted stuff, like having stuff appear in your vision, accessing RFID information by looking at it; and with none of the disadvantages, such as implant becoming obsolete or requiring replacement if it breaks; no dangerous surgery required for upgrade or replacement -- just toss the shades. Same thing with spyware infestations, just nuke and format the shades.

And these computer shades are somehow absolutely guaranteed to have the same level of functionality, speed and ease of use of outright brain modification? I can see your point, and it might well be true (in which case there is an alternative), if a series of implants have objectively better performance, then it's not exactly wildly unreasonable that they would be used.

Now, would you want to try nuking and reinstalling something intimately connected to your brain?

Is this some sort of trap question? It entirely depends on the actual maturity of the technology. Implants aren't going to exist in a vacuum; by the time they exist on a commercial market, uploading and downloading of perosnalities could well be hopelessly trivial, so even if you somehow managed to completely erase your brain your insurance company could just load up an older brain state that you recorded fairly recently. Obviously there's all sorts of philosophical questions and so on regarding this sort of society, but your scenario of impractical, difficult and outright dangerous transhuman modification is not necessarily any more plausible than a more optimistic view. Especially given that what we're speculating on is societal change and response to technology that doesn't yet exist.

[Count Chocula]

Peter Hamilton's series of Confederacy & Commonwealth novels are heavy on nanotech implants and cybernetic augmentation. His stories presuppose that negative physical effects from the implantations are, well, negated, and his version of implants are mostly tilted toward access to knowledge, machine control, and entertainment. Interestingly and understandably, going on the premise that brain-connected neural implants link the user to outside sources, there's a lot of emphasis placed on firewalls and anti-neural-virus updates (and the failures thereof due to unanticipated demons from the afterlife). Still, they're good reads IMO.

[ThomasP]

I just had the mental image of your stereotypical cyberpunk wire-head having to deal with a Nigerian money scam and some malware that keeps redirecting his search engine requests to porn sites.

I'd imagine that people would be way more careful about firewalls and AV software given implants with read/write access to their brains, but the idea of people still getting sex-spam in their brains makes me giggle a little.

[Darth Wong]

The usefulness of being able to access the internet (or access private networks) by thinking about it, or pick up information just by glancing at anything with an RFID chip in it is pretty fucking great. If it gives a person an advantage, if it's affordable, if it's useful, then people will use it. Sure, there's going to have to be some sort of risk, especially initially, but there's a risk in how many cars are on the road at the moment.

It's a different kind of risk. After all, the risk of driving is heavily influenced by your own behaviour. You can take numerous steps to greatly reduce your risk of dying in a traffic accident. Safe driving habits, restraint systems, stay off the road around the time people tend to leave bars, etc. Trusting your life to software engineers, on the other hand, is one of those "out of your hands" kind of risks which is, IMO, inherently more scary.

[Stark]

You certainly wouldn't want small errors or unpredicted behaviour in a piece of headware for (say) accurately gauging dimensions like size, distance, depth and such, that's for sure. Even if the surgery itself is perfectly safe, collapsing because your perception is completely broken isn't going to build consumer confidence.

[Darth Wong]

A lot of sci-fi writers tend to assume that software will just become auto-magically super-reliable in the future. I'm not really sure why people so often assume this is reasonable.

[Xon]

For consumers, the major reason software is more reliable these days is there is actually enough processing power avaliable to build the software properly and almost 2 decades of experiance in how humans can fuckup programming.

[Norseman]

A lot of sci-fi writers tend to assume that software will just become auto-magically super-reliable in the future. I'm not really sure why people so often assume this is reasonable.

Because, as I find as a Computer Tech worker, people think computers are magical and that programmers have magical powers, but don't really understand how it works.

[Sea Skimmer]

Is this some sort of trap question? It entirely depends on the actual maturity of the technology. Implants aren't going to exist in a vacuum; by the time they exist on a commercial market, uploading and downloading of perosnalities could well be hopelessly trivial, so even if you somehow managed to completely erase your brain your insurance company could just load up an older brain state that you recorded fairly recently.

That would be the death of you, and the birth of a clone mind occupying your former body. No thanks.

[Ford Prefect]

It's a different kind of risk. After all, the risk of driving is heavily influenced by your own behaviour. You can take numerous steps to greatly reduce your risk of dying in a traffic accident. Safe driving habits, restraint systems, stay off the road around the time people tend to leave bars, etc. Trusting your life to software engineers, on the other hand, is one of those "out of your hands" kind of risks which is, IMO, inherently more scary.

That's a good point, as a general rule your behaviour won't be as effective at keeping your brain secure compared to safe driving practices. Being careful with your emails won't save you if some sort of super wizard class hacker suddenly rings you up and brainjacks you through your your ear. That said, the actual risk is dependant on a number of unknown software, hardware and even societal factors; to refer to Shep's example above, your implants may not be capable of altering your neurological processes beyond stimulating the visual cortex to produce entopic hallucinations (I don't think this is particularly likely, mind you). On the other hand, we know for a fact that contemporary commercial virus protection software is entirely useles, so ...

That would be the death of you, and the birth of a clone mind occupying your former body. No thanks.

I kind of didn't want to get into this particular debate, but if you saved brainstate contains the some total of all your experiences, and is essentially a snapshot of everything about you at the time, what's the difference? If your memories and neurological make-up aren't the defining factor in what makes you you, what is?

[Oskuro]

It's a different kind of risk. After all, the risk of driving is heavily influenced by your own behaviour. You can take numerous steps to greatly reduce your risk of dying in a traffic accident. Safe driving habits, restraint systems, stay off the road around the time people tend to leave bars, etc. Trusting your life to software engineers, on the other hand, is one of those "out of your hands" kind of risks which is, IMO, inherently more scary.

I don't agree. We could make similar statements today about computer use, since responsible users who keep their software upgraded and avoid dangerous sites or emails are less likely to have trouble, just as a responsible driver does.
Additionally, a car driver is, to some extent, in the hands of the engineer who put the car together.

Of course, if we are talking about an era were cyber-implants are operated almost exclusively by engineers (sort of like the first computers) then I agree, it's scarier.

[Dahak]

A lot of sci-fi writers tend to assume that software will just become auto-magically super-reliable in the future. I'm not really sure why people so often assume this is reasonable.

If you take enough money into your hand, you can get super-reliable software. It just won't be cheap, quick, or easy. You can use formal verification of your algorithms and models, and thoroughly test it.
A lot of software out there that we use just isn't important enough to splurge that much amount of money on it (and reduce profit margin).

[Shroom Man 777]

I for one would love to read about a dystopic sci-fi world where humans had their organ systems turned into consumer products and where factory defects end up causing people to die or get sick en masse, resulting in factory recalls and people getting refunds for things like acute renal failure or for getting strokes or for having defective uteruses that produce mongoloid children. I mean, who would not want to buy livers or kidneys that could allow you to drink stuff like antifreeze and enjoy it sweetness without dying from toxicity? After a while, your cyberpunk consumer kidneys would eventually be degraded or be outmodded with kidneys that can filter more EXTREME toxic products, and so you'd have to replace it because you want the latest kidney or because you damaged your kidneys.

People could live for thousands of years and spend all that time upgrading their entire body systems. It's like consumer electronics, like buying new phones or ipods or shit, but with your body and mind. That would be so excellent! New eyes that can take higher resolution photographs, brains that can process stuff faster and transmit brainwaves further. Man. This'd be all so EXTREME! Posthumanity, fuck yeah!

[Zixinus]

In my universe this is why most soldiers or even civilians still lug around masses of high-tech stuff and few people plug themselves to computers.

Because simply buying a high-tech toy for, say, soldiers is still cheaper than putting it into them, because the cost of maintaining those implants skyrocket: you'll need specilised people to take care of them, surgeory to replace or modify them (thus surgeons and a sterile environment), highly sterile containers, the recipient etc, etc.

All for what? Some high-tech equipment that only one soldier can access, cannot be safely passed on, has a constant risk of being lost or easily damaged (the soldier dying, the soldier's immune system acting up, etc) yet still has a change to be acquired by the enemy (operating it out of their body). All for something that you can avoid just by putting the gizmo into a robust, external shell that can be powered and interface with stuff that soldiers already carry.

You just increase the logistic overhead massively for something that you can get cheaper and easier.

Similar problems present themselves for civilians: your insurance rate sky-rockets, you'll have to hassle with every month or even week with a routine check for the doctor, I doubt social care will pay for your non-essential implants so you'll have to stand all the costs, you'll life expectancy and general health will be effected (because you have a piece of alien machinery in your body). The present has to be massively worthwhile to justify all that.

[phongn]

Shep's concerns about implants are very real: for example, pacemakers have radio transmitters for remote diagnostics and updating its settings without cutting someone open. At least one academic group has succeeded in ordering a pacemaker to malfunction remotely.

[Samuel]

That would be the death of you, and the birth of a clone mind occupying your former body. No thanks.

I kind of didn't want to get into this particular debate, but if you saved brainstate contains the some total of all your experiences, and is essentially a snapshot of everything about you at the time, what's the difference? If your memories and neurological make-up aren't the defining factor in what makes you you, what is?

This is the old continuity of consciousness argument. Needless to say people really don't buy "it is an exact copy of you" because the origional (aka the one fitting the bill) will be dead.

[Starglider]

Now, I know that eventually this kind of implant will be made; and that SOMEONE will get them; the big question is whether it would actually spread beyond the "biomod" weirdoes who get forked tongues, masses of piercings, etc etc and to society as a whole.

Those people are doing it for its own sake. There are currently no tangible benefits to such modification. However implants of the type you describe would give overwhelming advantages in many fields of endeavor. The top practitioners in every field will use them (except sports where they're banned, which will only create unregulated alternatives) - so everyone who wants to compete will have to. They will be a necessity for soldiers, starting with special ops, and they may not be removable when those soldiers retire.

And that was for a simple implant where you simply place an electrode into a cochlear to stimulate it. What happens when you are placing them into the BRAIN of all places, or along the optic nerve?

Surgical technique is one of many things that will have to improve a lot before any of these things become possible. In particular, having languages and skills instantly available is a very, very difficult proposition. I suspect the low level physical side effects will be a solved problem long before we get to the really unbalancing modifications.

we have enough problems these days with internet viruses etc messing up our computers. So what happens when the computer in question that's being messed up is interfaced directly to your wetware?

IMHO, in historical retrospect the virus problem will prove be a temporary one. Eventually we will have decent, high-level formal verification systems and other software engineering tools that will prevent these kind of vulnerabilities from occuring. Plus super-sophisticated virus scanners, virtual machines and firewalls as a back up.

this fad lasted only as long as it took for some bitter hacker who hated college professors to put together a Joker virus that infected the implants of the professors and stimulated the part of the brain that made you laugh -- and so the professors laughed themselves to death via spasm... and then nobody wanted implants anymore.

Just look at the rate of virus infection on cellphones; modern smartphones have as much computing power as a PC of ten years ago, but virus penetration is much much lower, due to more secure design. The primary reason the PC platform has so many viruses is that it's built out of legacy crap, largely by criminal incompetents (e.g. most Microsoft developers).

[AdmiralKanos]

Just look at the rate of virus infection on cellphones; modern smartphones have as much computing power as a PC of ten years ago, but virus penetration is much much lower, due to more secure design. The primary reason the PC platform has so many viruses is that it's built out of legacy crap, largely by criminal incompetents (e.g. most Microsoft developers).

Is that the primary reason, or is it the fact that a cell-phone has an extremely simplistic operating system compared to a PC?

[Starglider]

As for physical connection; my implant operates via induction to deliver the electrical power to stimulate the electrode, but I don't know how well that would work if you required a high datarate.

It works fine, but at higher frequencies you're basically just beaming very-short-range RF. It should go well into muli-gigabit bandwidth before broadband absorption becomes a serious issue.

They're working on external brain pickups now that don't require implanted electrodes or jacks.

There are inherent limitations with that; the spatial resolution, the fact that neurons can't directly train on it and the one-way nature of the communication.

Now, would you want to try nuking and reinstalling something intimately connected to your brain?

Input-only scanners are harmless whether they use an electrode array or remote scanning. Two-way devices are equally dangerous whether they're implanted or not; in fact an external device is probably more dangerous, as it will have to use higher powers and can probably affect much more of the brain's volume.

That's a world where some guy in the basement can lace your bones with exotic metals and have you walking around again in a week; why would anyone worry about simple dataware?

Shadowrun has that silly 'cybernetics literally eat your soul' thing going.

Is that the primary reason, or is it the fact that a cell-phone has an extremely simplistic operating system compared to a PC?

Not really. Iphone OS and Google Android are at least comparable to Windows 98, arguably more sophisticated.