PDA

View Full Version : Good news everyone! - The hands of Jensen are already real!



aliko
18th Jul 2010, 19:53
DARPA-funded prosthetic arm reaches phase three, would-be cyborgs celebrate

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/07/7-17-10-jhuaplmpl500h.jpg

Last we heard from Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory, it wanted a neurally-controlled bionic arm by 2009. Needless to say, the school overshot that goal by a tiny bit, and have now been beaten (twice) to the punch. But DARPA sees $34.5 million worth of promise in their third and final prototype, which will enable the nine pound kit (with 22 degrees of freedom and sensory feedback) to begin clinical trials. Rechristened the Modular Prosthetic Limb, it will be grafted onto as many as five real, live persons, the first within the year. Using the targeted muscle reinnervation technique pioneered at the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, patients will control these arms directly with their thoughts, and for their sakes and the fate of humanity, hopefully not the other way around. Press release after the break.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/18/darpa-funded-prosthetic-arm-reaches-phase-three-would-be-cyborg/

:rasp:

Corpus
18th Jul 2010, 20:31
Put it in the collectors edition.

tartarus_sauce
18th Jul 2010, 20:56
Put it in the collectors edition.

Retail cost of Deus Ex Collector Edition: $2,000,000.

Fluffis
18th Jul 2010, 21:04
For some reason, I had an image of Professor Farnsworth delivering the OP as a lecture.

Exian
18th Jul 2010, 21:10
Retail cost of Deus Ex Collector Edition: $2,000,000.

Problem? I'm buying that ***** homie :D

aliko
18th Jul 2010, 21:16
For some reason, I had an image of Professor Farnsworth delivering the OP as a lecture.

That was intended, lol

K^2
18th Jul 2010, 22:24
I'm not ready to give up my fleshy arms just yet, but I always wanted an extra pair. I figure, I have enough unused input/output capacity left over to accommodate one. How much and where do I sign up?

KSingh77
18th Jul 2010, 22:50
Does it have a built in blade?

Fluffis
18th Jul 2010, 22:51
Does it have a built in blade?

No, but a Kung-Fu-grip.

Blade_hunter
18th Jul 2010, 22:53
This arm doesn't look like the Jensen's ones

K^2
18th Jul 2010, 22:54
Does it have a built in blade?
I'll install a machete blade in one of these for a few grand.

aliko
18th Jul 2010, 23:17
This arm doesn't look like the Jensen's ones

There's still some time till 2027... plus, color them black...

sonicsidewinder
18th Jul 2010, 23:33
The DARPA Chief???

TrickyVein
19th Jul 2010, 03:23
I'm not ready to give up my fleshy arms just yet, but I always wanted an extra pair. I figure, I have enough unused input/output capacity left over to accommodate one. How much and where do I sign up?

You have an extra pair of pecs? Are you referring to underused somatosensory space? It's conceivable that any muscle in the body could be trained to provide the correct input to operate the prosthetic:

"...the MPL is capable of unprecedented mechanical agility and is designed to respond to a user's thoughts...The team will develop implantable micro-arrays used to record brain signals and stimulate the brain. They will also conduct experiments and clinical trials to demonstrate the ability to use implantable neural interfaces safely and effectively to control a prosthesis, and optimize arm control and sensory feedback algorithms that enable dexterous manipulation through the use of a neuro-prosthetic limb."

I'm not really sure what they mean here. The prosthetic itself must be integrated with a specific kind of neural output/motor function. For someone without limbs, depending on how long they've gone without them, this would amount to thinking about moving the related phantom limb which could be translated as the relevant mechanical motion. But for someone who already has arms, like yours truly, what other muscles would I be left with to control/think about controlling, whose motor functions could be relegated to an extra set of prosthetic arms - would I lose control over their original physical motion, or would it be duplicated? More likely duplicated, as patients with phantom limb syndrome experience sensation on regions of their body proximate to each other as they are mapped out on the brain (is it along the pre-frontal gyrus? Don't remember). There's food for thought.

http://jeremylent.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/homunculus.png

tartarus_sauce
19th Jul 2010, 04:15
But the penultimate generation of prosthetic limbs already do this, leveraging little-used muscle groups in the back, shoulder, and abdominal regions. There's also a model that works using the toes and feet. Compared to this model, these seem downright clumsy, but it's still a very effective workaround for the problems you mentioned. It also gives hope to people who desperately want to have another set of arms for some reason.

K^2
19th Jul 2010, 04:42
Vein, when your nervous system develops, there are certain pathways connecting specific parts of the body to specific areas of the brain, but the mapping is rather loose. Pretty much the only requirement is that two areas that are close together on the body are linked to two areas that are close together in the brain. The brain learns to interpret the rest.

You can use that to completely remap the entire body, or just map certain portions to new location. Brain will eventually learn to interpret the new mapping. It can, however, take some time, so it's a good idea to do the mapping in a way that doesn't disturb the pathways that are currently used.

I'm sure that if you tap into brain directly, there are even unused or little used areas. Something like that would feel very unusual in the beginning. Most likely, you'd end up feeling sensory input in completely wrong, and perhaps fairly random places, and instead of controlling the new limbs, you'd be randomly twitching them, but the brain will eventually learn to associate the random twitches with the jumbled sensory input, giving you ability to consciously control movement, and feel the limbs in correct "place".

Edit: There are a few demos I could show you but they are a bit difficult to explain in text. One in particular that shows that you don't actually feel sensory input in correct parts of your body in many cases, and use input from different senses to correct for it.

TrickyVein
19th Jul 2010, 13:12
^^ It's great stuff, I know - I remember covering brain plasticity in my first year at University - how doing a simple task such as moving one finger or providing stimulation on one part of the body for an extended period of time will result in the brain setting aside more space to process incoming sensory-feedback from the relevant body region. I know of one "demo" where the participant places their arm underneath of a table with a fake arm sitting directly on top. As you say, feedback from your other senses helps the brain to create a map of where the body should be in space - in the case of this demo, merely watching someone else stroke the fake hand - which is in the same place where your real hand could be - results in the brain thinking that the fake hand is real and that it is processing tactile sense from a piece of rubber.

Great_Ragnarok
19th Jul 2010, 13:58
This is actually a bit disturbing. The problem with modern society is that solutions are
distributed with vested private interests. So solutions are rarely properly distributed to mankind.
so if existing solutions have trouble being distributed then how much difficult would it be to distribute
super technology like this? The already wide gap between the poor and the rich will continue to get wider.
I hope they won't patent it.

TrickyVein
19th Jul 2010, 17:06
^^ Study history. Solutions have always been "distributed" to the highest bidder. That's what drives innovation in the first place. Be thankful you're on the winning end if you are, and take full advantage of what's available to you - especially if its exclusive.

Angel-A
20th Jul 2010, 04:31
For some reason, I had an image of Professor Farnsworth delivering the OP as a lecture.

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/quiz/43700_1217861739459_500_375.jpg
GOOD NEWS EVERYONE! The hands of Jensen are already real!

3rdmillhouse
20th Jul 2010, 17:36
I want mine with a .45acp subgun instead of hand.

Pretentious Old Man.
20th Jul 2010, 17:52
Why is it "good news"? Does anyone actually want the world of Deus Ex to come true?

pringlepower
20th Jul 2010, 21:18
Why is it "good news"? Does anyone actually want the world of Deus Ex to come true?

Giving cripples working hands seems good.

Until they rebel and use their hands for evil.

Angel-A
21st Jul 2010, 08:03
Why is it "good news"? Does anyone actually want the world of Deus Ex to come true?
Good news because, as we all know, "in the future" anything tends to end up over/under/just-the-wrong-damn-way shot. Knowing this technology isn't too far out makes the future depicted seem more realistic and less of an unlikely guess made for the sake of good storytelling.

K^2
21st Jul 2010, 08:42
The technology isn't the problem. It's fairly predictable. It's the human response that EM will invariably get wrong.

If you asked anyone in the 60's, they'd tell you that in 2000-2010 everyone would own a personal flying machine, and that internet would be just a more convenient way to send a telegram, used about as often. It was absolutely clear that we would have technology for both by this time, and we do. But personal flight remains a rare form of recreation, and internet is used for bloody everything.

We now know with absolute certainty that in a few more decades we will be able to replace just about any part of human body with a prosthetic or artificially grown organs. We have no idea which people will choose, and how everyone will feel about these who received said transplants. EM is guessing that people will choose mechanical and that there will be a lot of opposition. I see no reason to call it one way or another.

Just about everything we've seen in Deus Ex, Invisible War, and from what I can tell Human Revolution, can be. How much of it will be, I do not pretend to know.

tartarus_sauce
21st Jul 2010, 10:44
"Does anyone actually want the world of Deus Ex to come true?"

I certainly do. Give me an immortal, unstoppable robot body any day. Just don't call me a Laputan Machine. ;)

Pretentious Old Man.
21st Jul 2010, 12:15
"Does anyone actually want the world of Deus Ex to come true?"

I certainly do. Give me an immortal, unstoppable robot body any day. Just don't call me a Laputan Machine. ;)

Flatlander woman.

Fluffis
21st Jul 2010, 12:20
Flatlander woman.

Burn!

Dead-Eye
21st Jul 2010, 17:53
For some reason, I had an image of Professor Farnsworth delivering the OP as a lecture.

Probably because he started with "Good News Everyone".

Angel-A
21st Jul 2010, 21:11
Probably because he started with "Good News Everyone".

Captain Obvious... TO THE RESCUUUUUUUE!

Great_Ragnarok
26th Jul 2010, 23:44
^^ Study history. Solutions have always been "distributed" to the highest bidder. That's what drives innovation in the first place. Be thankful you're on the winning end if you are, and take full advantage of what's available to you - especially if its exclusive.

History simply shows two forces at work!
First there's the force of necessity that motivates individuals to find solutions.
and second a force that motivates individuals to be selfish in regards to said solution.
one is constructive the other is destructive.

TrickyVein
27th Jul 2010, 01:33
Animals live by necessity. We only need food, a place to live, and to procreate - that doesn't drive civilization, or set grounds for technological advancement. Overcoming necessity is a goal of progress and civilization in general, I would say. I don't need to wake at the crack of dawn and plow my fields so that I can eat. I don't need to build my own lodgings out of cattle dung and pieces of wood so that I can sleep in relative safety. I am living in a society where most of these basic necessities have been taken care of such that I may turn my attention to other things which do drive civilization. Astronomy, engineering, all science (heck, let's throw in the antiquated "progress") happen when basic needs have been taken care of.

This second, opposing force you speak of which drives individuals to be selfish - you're not clear. Are you saying that people aren't selfish, but are somehow coerced into thinking this way? By what?

People are selfish. We are that kind of social animal - hostile to each other in large groups, and completely self-motivated as individuals. I don't mean to be disparaging, and "selfish" isn't a dirty word. If this robotic arm makes the company and its creator(s) boat-loads of money, that's a good thing - especially - if lots of people benefit along the way by regaining some manual dexterity.

Shralla
27th Jul 2010, 02:21
Hilariously related to the Farnsworthy topic title.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d1e_ys15UI

Here comes Bender!

Suyen
27th Jul 2010, 03:26
You guys know what else is real?

Secret Society and Illuminati. Check out this guy's channel. He does a very well presentation on what "they" are doing within the media and how ii is their most powerful source on earth.

http://www.youtube.com/user/FarhanK501



The technology isn't the problem. It's fairly predictable. It's the human response that EM will invariably get wrong.

If you asked anyone in the 60's, they'd tell you that in 2000-2010 everyone would own a personal flying machine, and that internet would be just a more convenient way to send a telegram, used about as often. It was absolutely clear that we would have technology for both by this time, and we do. But personal flight remains a rare form of recreation, and internet is used for bloody everything.

We now know with absolute certainty that in a few more decades we will be able to replace just about any part of human body with a prosthetic or artificially grown organs. We have no idea which people will choose, and how everyone will feel about these who received said transplants. EM is guessing that people will choose mechanical and that there will be a lot of opposition. I see no reason to call it one way or another.

Just about everything we've seen in Deus Ex, Invisible War, and from what I can tell Human Revolution, can be. How much of it will be, I do not pretend to know.

Knowledge of truth my friend.. and knowledge is power

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. "

Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

ThePrecursor
27th Jul 2010, 10:42
What a load of bull**** Suyen.

Conspiracy is a concept conceived by the everyday man to give his dull, repetitive life more meaning. When you start looking for conspiracies you'll no doubtly find them (at least that's what you make yourself think by then). You'll look for any pattern, any clue, any number, any letters... anything really, as long as it keeps you busy instead of returning to the life you resented. I don't say we know of everything that's going on, but global conspiracies are just a figment of imagination.

We are merely animals that got lucky in nature's process of evolution. You keep that in mind.

Corpus
27th Jul 2010, 10:53
So what if they are real? What are you gonna do about? If they are real then that means their controlling the majority of the population. You can't convince people if they think you're crazy.

Nyysjan
27th Jul 2010, 19:17
"Paranoia is a very comforting state of mind, if they're after you, it means you matter."

Delever
27th Jul 2010, 20:09
Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat...


And who knows, tomorrow they may find out it is hollow (http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/holearth.html)! Are you seriously getting on this hook?



... and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet.

Knowledge of truth my friend.. and knowledge is power


Knowledge is knowledge, and power is power. Getting excited about something does not mean it is truth.

What you have are people who observe the trends in the world, then give credit for these trends to single source, mastermind. What you need to do is to get more actual knowledge in many different areas, until you finally will be more scared then ever to realize that no one is in control.

Try to use knowledge from all available sources. I know, I know, learning actual stuff like biology, cosmology, geology or physics is hard. But it is very rewarding.

For you, I prescribe few weeks of neural science and genetics with a dash of palaeontology.

TrickyVein
28th Jul 2010, 04:04
are you and I not animals?

You take me so literally! By this I mean of course that people are not restricted by a certain lack of capacity to think creatively or engage in higher levels of thinking which is otherwise so pervasive throughout the rest of the animal kingdom. This is not to say that other species can't also play and have fun with crayons - don't get all Jane Goodall on me here. I have intentionally limited the definition of necessity to that of a biological one so that I can more precisely make my point: most people part of a sufficiently advanced culture/civilization will not be required themselves to attend to their most basic needs. And it is overcoming and doing away with all subsequent "necessity" which drives innovation. But this is really just splitting hairs.

You say that "discovering or inventing a solution is very difficult but administering a solution is considerably easier?" Ah - here I disagree with you. It's easy to come up with new tech. But you'd be hard pressed to get people to stop using the internal combustion engine after more than a century, for example. It is administering the correct decisions which is exactly so difficult to do. This is why NASA refers to Washington DC as the (however many square miles) "thought-free zone."

But you attribute all of this to the "arbitrary money systems" imposed by banks? Capitalism works. Why did so many scientists flee the soviet union? Why are state-employees so lazy? There's no incentive to work or to work harder under communism or for the state. Incentive is provided by hard earned cash. And this is a working, trusting relationship that people understand. As a case in point, remember the foot-operated water-pump that was available to Kenyan farmers some time ago? Well, it wasn't doing so well until individuals starting selling them to locals instead of "administering the solution" and handing them out to people for free. Here's why. (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/social_issues/july-dec10/kickstart_07-13.html)

So to go back to your original comment, that you hope that this arm doesn't get produced - I still fundamentally disagree with you as to why. First of all, there is absolutely no way in which to predict what tech-solutions work, which one's don't, and which one's end up "benefiting the whole of mankind." Again, if you know your history, you'll see why it's so farcical to try and predict what will become of today's tech tomorrow - simply put, specific, moneyed, private interests provide the best incentive for the best solutions. This arm is one of those solutions. Further still, it's silly to think that it exists in a vacuum and that what the APL is doing won't influence the rest of the field of prosthetics - if the arm is successful. The little people get theirs too. Everyone benefits from super expensive and sophisticated stuff like this.

KSingh77
28th Jul 2010, 06:01
Wonder if the arm can crack a glass?

tartarus_sauce
28th Jul 2010, 06:15
The little people get theirs too. Everyone benefits from super expensive and sophisticated stuff like this.

Quite right. Most new technologies are at first only availible to the priveleged few, but once economies of scale kick in prices tend to drop. Arguing against new technologies because "only the rich will have access to it!" is ludicrous and juvenile. These are the same sorts of people that regarded the automobile as the end of civilization, or the electric lightbulb as a conspiracy against the common candle-usin' folk.

LyreOfNero
28th Jul 2010, 06:58
What I want to know about this arm is how much customization is necessary. One size fits all would be a bit difficult to accomplish because not everyone's amputations happen in exactly the same place (though there could be an argument for a standardization amongst the surgical community but I don't know that as I'm not a surgeon). On top of that not everyone is the same size so proportions would be a bit off in many cases. This isn't just an aesthetic issue either, length and weight affect balance and movement and (while no one is perfectly symetrical) if a person is too asymetrical it starts to affect the rest of their movement. And most important is the interface: if it rewires nerves to other muscle groups to interact with the prosthesis, will everyone be able to use the same muscles? And it it interfaces directly with nerve endings, are all the nerves exactly the same in each amputee (That probably seems obvious to anyone with more medical training than me but again I just don't know)? My main point: these almost seem designed to be custom machines. Rolling them off an assembly line en masse seems a bit of a problem. What could be done to correct this? Or are my concerns invalid for some reason I have failed to realize?

Irate_Iguana
28th Jul 2010, 07:38
Or are my concerns invalid for some reason I have failed to realize?

Prosthetics are custom jobs. The final fitting needs to be done on a person to person basis. What you can do is generate all the necessary components on a grand scale. Think of it like a computer. There are endless variations on the internals of a computer. Instead of stocking all possible variations the computer store just stocks all the components and then puts them together at the last moment to the specifications of the customer.

Cralus
29th Jul 2010, 09:52
Right my first posst! alright here goes first off the arms are amazing paint 'em stealth black and i may lose an arm just so i can get one! (lol JK) any way @Great Ragnarok Do you know what econmic modle we would have to live without money with? Barter or communism i cant see another choice now Communism doesnt work at our current level of development as a species it will only work not when we can make everyone poor but when we can make everyone rich and Barter was given up about 2000 years ago in favour of money because money is an easy way of standising transactions You seem to have a lot to say about the evils of money but your not offering a lot of alternative ways of living in a stable society.

As for your comments on laws of physics Vs laws of logistics/economics actually the laws of physics are much easier to pin down and they stay constant so actually they are easier to predict. I doubt there are people as you seem to think there are who stand in the way of distrabution when a new product ccomes out at first you are right it is limited to thoes who have more money But! the distrabuters of said piece of technology want to have more sales and make more money so they work on getting costs down so more people can buy so they can expand there markets (this is true in virtually all cases exept itmes like sports cars and rolexs which are meant to be high ticket items)

I also disagree with you on your points about necessity It can only be biological anything else is abstract we are not animals because we can think abstract thoughts (ie Thoughts about thoughts) If we were creatures purely of necessaty we would still be hunter gathers just like lions and tigres they dont think to corral the antalope up do they? so they dont have to roam the plains. Technology is developed in times of our *percieved* necessity it is not actually neccasary that we make it money provides that perception otherwise we would have to rely on people just inventing stuf because they feel like it, while that might work it would be much slower than our current march of progress.

Now on poverty yes poverty sucks but it is evident in both Capitalism and communism If you ever think of an economic modle that removes poverty from our current society with our current level of technology please let me know :) unfortunaltey there is always a bottom it's the price of there being a top we can try to make the conditions at the bottom better but it will still be the bottom and poverty is abitrary to the top.

TrickyVein
29th Jul 2010, 15:19
It isn't arbitrary. I explained why. I'm not saying that necessity can't be any of these things. I am choosing to use the term in a specific way. You're barking up the wrong tree.

The laws of the natural universe are immutable and unchanging - predictable. Human behavior is the polar opposite of this. You still think that distribution - which involves people - is the easy part? OK - but I think you're confused. You go on to say that distribution of technology is in fact handicapped - people get in the way because it "benefits the selfish desires of a few."

So which is it? You're arguing against your original point here.

You keep telling me that money is "arbitrary." I guess it bears to be repeated again (third time here :)): know your history. A monetary system is as old an institution as most trade between people itself. Archaeologically, one of the qualifiers of an advanced civilization (using Childe's definition) is the existence of some kind of barter system or money system. It illustrates a capacity to think abstractly and shows a sufficient means to accumulate and process goods. It usually goes hand in hand with some kind of fledgling politics (look at Uruk). Trade and contact between people grows and culture flourishes as a result. Does everyone get a piece of the pie? Absolutely not. It's no different today.

You're right about the Kenyans. They didn't know what to do with the water pump. Because it was free, basically a handout, anyone and everyone could obtain one. Only when people had to make decision as to whether or not to purchase one did it start to be successful. Did its function change throughout all of that time? No. Only when farmers felt that they had to invest in it did they place value in the product and make use of it (more so than before).

TrickyVein
30th Jul 2010, 16:06
You don't know when to stop digging, do you? :hmm:

Based on what I could make out from your response, I'm guessing that you're a relativist. Correct? All meaning is subjective (except that statement, of course :rolleyes:)? Next you'll tell me words have no objective meaning, are fabricated, and have no relevant truth in and of themselves. Am I right?

Here are some links to help you out:

Childe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Childe)

Trade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade#History_of_trade)

If you have some trouble reading all of that, here's an excellent TV series to watch too (it's bloody brilliant, by the way): Connections (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_%28TV_series%29)

Pinky_Powers
30th Jul 2010, 16:44
Fear the reaper. Of posts. The post-reaper.

Shralla
30th Jul 2010, 19:04
Hilariously related to the Farnsworthy topic title.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d1e_ys15UI

Here comes Bender!

My alcohol-powered robot link got lost because conspiracies blah blah blah.

TrickyVein
31st Jul 2010, 02:58
Pinky, as a large black woman living in the rural south during the 19th century under slavery, I find that image to be very offensive.

Pinky_Powers
31st Jul 2010, 10:11
Then everything seems to be going according to plan.

TrickyVein
31st Jul 2010, 13:46
That you made me gain 100lbs, get a sex change, undergo skin-pigment therapy (I find I guy who does that) and then transported me back in time 150+ years?

Keiichi81
1st Aug 2010, 00:17
There's also THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KxjVlaLBmk&feature=player_embedded).

Deus Ex-style robotic limps may not be all that far off after all...

TrickyVein
2nd Aug 2010, 03:22
This is my fault for trying to instigate a serious discussion
on the most perverted and powerful force that conditions human experience.

Please, enlighten me. What are these noble truths which you behold, and yet, I fail to see? What do you think makes this "infrastructure" as you say - possible? On what very real thing does it base its existence? Fairy dust? Some peoples just magically find themselves with the capability to produce and create great technology and culture? What makes you so quick to vilify a human institution as integral to building and advancing a civilization as trade - a monetary system? You've mentioned a couple of times that the concept of value which we place in a transaction is fabricated and therefore irrelevant. Correct? It that's not being a relativist, I don't know what is. What's wonderful to think, is that relativists talk the talk, but no one is going to insist that they should walk out of the supermarket with all of their groceries unpaid for because "money is a fabrication and should therefore not be used" - or something along those lines.

I really do want to hear (or read) what you have to say. It's fascinating to me how someone could have such a greatly *different* understanding about the world around him. We all think differently, I know - this is particularly obvious between different age groups: a matter of life-experience you might say.

K^2
2nd Aug 2010, 06:55
I'm a realist! Someone who appreciates the very consequences of actions, instead of relying on an arbitrary evaluation to determine the value of things.
Funny. I mistook you for a human being with a central nervous system that relies on collection of fairly arbitrary signals from various receptors to construct a response based purely on previous experience of similar stimuli.

But obviously, I was mistaken. You must be one of these higher beings that perceives objective reality directly, and has access to axioms at foundation of this universe as a priori knowledge.

It is very nice to finally meet someone of your kind. How be things on higher planes of existence?

Romeo
2nd Aug 2010, 07:13
Funny. I mistook you for a human being with a central nervous system that relies on collection of fairly arbitrary signals from various receptors to construct a response based purely on previous experience of similar stimuli.

But obviously, I was mistaken. You must be one of these higher beings that perceives objective reality directly, and has access to axioms at foundation of this universe as a priori knowledge.

It is very nice to finally meet someone of your kind. How be things on higher planes of existence?
...Tall. :hmm:

user-9
2nd Aug 2010, 08:51
Great thread!

Have a look at this vid of a Bebionic hand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICpnqf8kN6s&feature=PlayList&p=5A67C101BCDAD298&playnext=1&index=23

Check out the bloke 50 seconds in - Looks alot like the barkeeper from The Hive!

:D

TrickyVein
5th Aug 2010, 13:24
Allow me to quote you on this: "I never spoke of money on relative grounds. I said monetary value has NO inherent reality whats or ever [SIC]."

This is probably why you're so confused. You don't actually know what you're talking about.

Fine, delete your posts. That means to me that you have no confidence in what you have to say. What a shame.