Hacking Ourselves
Mon, 09/12/2005 - 17:52
Systems Design
Embedded systems are one thing, but it takes on a whole new meaning when the systems are embedded in us. An EE Times story discusses the advent of the so-called Bionic Man, where electronics are directly interfaced with human nervous systems to either replace or enhance the natural abilities.
This is a familiar staple of science fiction, but there is quite a bit of current science fact as well. I am fairly familiar with the cochlear implants mentioned in the story, since a number of my wife’s relatives are deaf. One interesting point not brought out in the EE Times piece is the amount of resistance to this technology among the deaf community. Their argument is that being deaf is not a disease, and therefore does not need to be cured. In essence they are defining deafness as a natural state of being, one that creates a valid subculture.
This is a fascinating twist on the Frankenstein mythology. Is it a crime against nature to revert someone to the norm? If we have the technology to “cure? this condition, is it rather a crime not to do so if the person desires it? If we accept this modification, then is it acceptable to use the same technology to enhance beyond the norm?
These are the kind of knotty questions that tend to come up when we contemplate modifications to the devices that are ourselves. In one respect we are simply meat machines that are as hackable as anything else. From another point of view such ideas are blasphemy. Personally, I would love to jump to the end result of a neural interface and be able to jack into cyberspace. If nothing else, maybe I would get to wear one of those cool black leather coats.
Larry Mittag
This is a familiar staple of science fiction, but there is quite a bit of current science fact as well. I am fairly familiar with the cochlear implants mentioned in the story, since a number of my wife’s relatives are deaf. One interesting point not brought out in the EE Times piece is the amount of resistance to this technology among the deaf community. Their argument is that being deaf is not a disease, and therefore does not need to be cured. In essence they are defining deafness as a natural state of being, one that creates a valid subculture.
This is a fascinating twist on the Frankenstein mythology. Is it a crime against nature to revert someone to the norm? If we have the technology to “cure? this condition, is it rather a crime not to do so if the person desires it? If we accept this modification, then is it acceptable to use the same technology to enhance beyond the norm?
These are the kind of knotty questions that tend to come up when we contemplate modifications to the devices that are ourselves. In one respect we are simply meat machines that are as hackable as anything else. From another point of view such ideas are blasphemy. Personally, I would love to jump to the end result of a neural interface and be able to jack into cyberspace. If nothing else, maybe I would get to wear one of those cool black leather coats.
Larry Mittag
