Most of you will agree with me that sensor technology is not new and we use sensors in almost every electronic items that we use. Our body is also full of sensors and there are five main sensors but they are limited in many ways. I would like Freescale to invest in new and novel sensors that can be used as an ad-on to the sensors that we already have in our body to improve our experience.
Neat idea, Himanshugupta, however I think the biggest challenge would be interfacing the sensor technology to the body. Also, I believe the first step should be to have sensors to provide people who have lost functions of their senses before we think about hightening the senses we already have. Research for this technology is already taking place.
Its really intersting to talk about the Human sensors, at this moment the one which comes to my mind is eye for the blind, thers is huge lot of research going on this specific sensor required to serve the blind.
Clairvoyant, as you rightly said we should concentrate on the physically challenged group. Many organisations are working on the same even something to do with handicapped people.
true Clarirvoyant, to be able to give back the function of the sensory organ to the needy people cannot be compared to anything. I know that research is going on in this field. One inspiring video about the research going on in MIT is on TED website: http://www.ted.com/talks/ed_boyden.html
If it works perfectly, I am sure it is a great way to help the handicapped folks that is less fortunate than we are. However, have we considered the failure risks? What happens if the device goes haywired? Also, what if people use it for unethical purpose? I can only conjure up images of robotic failure in those sci fi films
I don't think it is a good idea to replace a healthy human organ with a new technical sensor only for improving our experience as you said. Nevertheless, I totally agree that freescale should invent to technical sensors for people with disabilities.
Nemos, i am also not in favor of replacing the healthy human organs just for fun but i would be in favor of adding capabilities to our sensory organs. We in some way do it all the time, for example night vision cameras, telescopes, all kind of sensors etc.
Sensors replacing malfunctioning cells/genes in human seem good and futuristic considering the enomous of research activities being undertaking in many leading universities and research institutions as regard sensory. Risk assessment should play major part if technology fully matured and attained the level of its usage as an alternative to people that are mentally derailed.
This will improve the productivity around the globe, and it encourage all kinds of disabled pepole in pursuing education and enhance their skills. If we really utilize properly this will bring a revloution in the medical domain.
According to a new research work by German scientists published this week in one of the UK's local newpapers - Metro.
" Drivers could find themselves slamming on the brakes using their brain waves. German scientists stuck electrodes to the heads of volunteers that can detect a driver's intention to brake 130 milliseconds faster than a normal brake pedal response. They found that, driving at 62mph, this reduced braking distance by 3.7m"
It concludes that, sensor application to human brain in this area could reduce many road accidents. www.metro.co.uk.
Clairyoyant, you are right. human race of today will have to co-exist with electronics devices because they have really become a part of our lives and we can,t do without them any more.
Pocharle, i think driver can either choose to have electrodes in head or not. It has to do with level of safety, considering the response time without electrodes on. Though, let us wait and see it commercialised. Mercedes - Benz sensory car fittings sound very good too.
Adeniji i strongly believe research works are ongoing in diverse field of technology as well as measure to reduce their adverse effects on human beings.
Meanwhile, the type of sensor employed for that piece of project i think is environmentally friendly. I.e its working electrode contains bismuth with more mecury, that is not hamful. This can also be supported by research being undertaking at the university of Cincinnati on how sensor can be used to detect presence of heavy metals in humans published by US News and World Report - USnews.com.
You bring up a good point, Adeniji. With electronics getting to the point where they can be used closely with our bodies, we need to ensure there are no adverse affects from using them.
While i agree with the fact that we can hardly do anything without machines or electronics,I still find it to believe that Man will one day have to live with electronic devices in his body and there might not be side effect from chemicals or radioactive materials.
That's why there is so much $$ and resources poured into the field of Biomedical Engineering. These professionals are left with the task of making these types of possibilities become reality.
@pocharle. You are right and much also be spent to prepare us for the consequences, Man is not perfect and the efficiency of every machine is always less than 100% too
I think electronics utilization will help us to do my daily job at a less time but at the same time we need to think too much of electronic usage will ruin our health. The type of sensor used in designing will decide the harmful level and there is always a chance to improve it.
Just curious what might happen if the sensors are smart enough to help human think or people might cheat by hacking the sensor to give them superior edge over others. Would you still judge a student performance based on test scores?
Very interesting point, Hwong. As we start to get to the age where electronics can become attached to the human body, we are opening the doors to many possibilities, yet there will be many issues to overcome.
One thought to add to this - if you want to measure the true value of an individual, look at his ability to make things go right for the greatest range of dynamics. It's not so much the technology at hand, but how a person uses it that makes the difference. Here's a quick story to illustrate the point.
I used to visit a military component distributor in NY quite a bit. The warehouse was was among the more proactive departments in the industry. Blue plastic tote boxes hummed along conveyors with great precision, most of the time. However during after one upgrade, the boxes started slipping on angled belts causing inefficiencies and pile ups along the line. When I asked what the solution was to this issue, the QC manager said the solution was simple. He had the staff scuff the bottom of the boxes which provided the grip they needed to stay in line and on track.
So you see, the supreme test of an individual is his ability to make things go right.
I think brain sensors will really helpful in having the high productivity and to meet the quality standards. We need to very cautious in the handling these sensors as they may result in the wrong usage.
If having a sensor to enhance the brain the brain seems good , what about the effect of over enhancement of it. If my driver has one in his head, do i still regard him as human or robot because that means I have to have a kind of remote control to communicate with him somehow as part of the total benefit of a brain sensor.
Yes, Clairvoyant. Technology opens door to unlimited opportunities where human beings are still the drivers and at the center of every thing, as clearly analysed @Tvotakpa.
@Adeniji - Brain sensor? In what way and for what reason does a brain need a sensor.
Is a bit scary and might look very stochastic have sensor implant in human brain. I bet you, this could happen in near future.
A similar research works on human brian - a team of research from Intel, C. Mellon University and University of Pittsburgh currently engaging in research task - "decoding of human brain activity". According to Intel Research Scientist, Dean Pomerleau quoted the team has used Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (FMRI) machines to determine that blood flow changes in specific areas of the brain based on what word or image someone is thinking of. People tend to show the same brain patterns for similar thoughts.
It also stated further that, researchers are working to close on gaining the capability of building brain sensing technology into a headset which can be adopted for computer manipulation. It reports, the next step is development of a tiny, far less cumbersome sensor that could be implanted inside the brain.
Yes it is indeed scary, as with other major breakthroughs in science, they always will generate a huge source of concern and furor amongst the society.
A case in point Galileo discovering that the earth was not the centre of the solar system but the sun (he was branded a heretic). Another example is cloning.
Some of the concerns are valid and genuine, but I wonder if sometimes for the sake of advancement we will have to abandon ethics which could inhibit breakthroughs or accepts this limits and reject some forms of technological advancements.....
Good points, Damilare. Sometimes chances need to be taken with science and there are people who will take those chances where there are others who won't.
Adeniji, years back hardly can human beings term with sensory/ic or electronics or semiconductor components implant to any part of our body. Looking at it today, we have seen bionic devices and others being used to substitue defficient or lost body part of amputees.
Convergency of medical, biotechnology and nanotechnology with aid of sensory might not take longer maturing in their applications.
Am afraid, technology would soon take over virtually everything we human beings engage in. A typical example of this, Google's driverless car gradually nearing commercialization --- courtesy of Sensor, Artificial Intelligence and GPS technologies
@ wale, You are right on that. I read about the Google,s driverless car too and really that is a technological wonder some how. As years roll by we are becoming more dependentnon machine or so to say technology.That will forever be part of our daily lives. But then are you saying we should also look forward to things like "Universal soldiers" or "Robocop" in the future too?
A bit of digression - Goggle has also been awarded patent for the driverless car in US. I hope by the time car of this type reach full commercialisation, no patent infringement court case to happen.
Implanting micro or nanochips to the brain to enhance the capabilities of the human brain seems like a good idea at first. Having a direct interface to the brain to allow controlling devices around us may certainly improve our lives. This new interface will certainly need to have some type of wireless interface to it and will probably be able to accept input from various devices in order to enhance our perception and to make us more aware. That is where potential risks come with this sciencefiction technology.
With the above capabilities, this technology opens the possibility of external interception straight to our brain in order to control our actions, biochemical cycles, our thoughts and even our health. Obviously, this is quite scary as such interceptions will certainly include malicious ones too. Such technology will certainly create new human rights and privacy problems. It will open up the gate to a new concept called 'human hacking'.
There has to be a limit on how much we should allow high tech to penetrate our lives as such penetrations may be almost impossible to take back. Personally, I would rather rise from my sofa to turn the kettle on by hand for a brew than simply activating it by thought while running the risk of other parties intercepting to my brain via a biochip implant.
Such technology will certainly create new human rights and privacy problems. It will open up the gate to a new concept called 'human hacking'.
Human rights and privacy issues certain to set in considering the risk. And also, has war against security of information & communication technology ever won generally? I think, that remains a valid & tough challenge to combat with it - hacking.
I do this right now when I use my night vision optics. (I spend time in the country, where there are no street lights, and the night vision optics let me see some of the wild life in the area. I also used them to view a faint comet.)
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
