The first human recipient of a Neuralink brain implant has shared new details on his recovery and experience of living with the experimental assistive tech.
I think it’s an amazing advancement and that’s awesome for a quadriplegic person to interact with the world.
The part that I haven’t heard anyone mention is what is the life cycle of these chips. Computers and cell phones all become outdated so quickly. Are recipients guaranteed upgraded chips as they become available?
I was reading an article recently about people who have had implants in their eyes that help them to see become obsolete. One because the company stopped supporting the specific version that was in the patient. The other because the company had gone out of business.
Even if the chip never went obsolete, the scar tissue build up around implanted brain devices interferes with signal over time and they need to be replaced.
Also, each installation/replacement has a few percentage point chance of leading to a life threatening infection.
Unless both those issues are solved, irrespective of obsolescence this is only the sort of thing that makes sense for patients who feel that their life is effectively over without it and have low risk thresholds for treatment options.
The story of “Second Sight” and the folks that depended on them is pretty sad. I hope there’s some kind of backup plan in case the company goes under, gets acquired, or decides to abandon existing technology. Like placing the key tech in a trust of sorts.
This tech is extremely experimental and nowhere near ready to market as a consumer device that a regular person can purchase, so a lot of those questions don’t really have answers.
Part of the study is to see how long it lasts. It’s replaceable in theory but there’s things like are there complications with redoing it (e.g scar tissue) to be explored.
As a human trial, he may never get an upgrade, and it might fail in a few months unexpectedly.
It’s part of the risk of being in a trial vs waiting until it’s a finished product.
Many have mentioned that so you didn’t look very far then. It’s like the first thing people wonder. They have no answer of course, this is research and not a product
I suppose the counter argument is people don’t ask that kind of question when they get a pacemaker. At some point you have to get an implant if you need an implant you can’t go oh well our weight six months because then version 2.0 is out
I think it’s an amazing advancement and that’s awesome for a quadriplegic person to interact with the world.
The part that I haven’t heard anyone mention is what is the life cycle of these chips. Computers and cell phones all become outdated so quickly. Are recipients guaranteed upgraded chips as they become available?
I was reading an article recently about people who have had implants in their eyes that help them to see become obsolete. One because the company stopped supporting the specific version that was in the patient. The other because the company had gone out of business.
Even if the chip never went obsolete, the scar tissue build up around implanted brain devices interferes with signal over time and they need to be replaced.
Also, each installation/replacement has a few percentage point chance of leading to a life threatening infection.
Unless both those issues are solved, irrespective of obsolescence this is only the sort of thing that makes sense for patients who feel that their life is effectively over without it and have low risk thresholds for treatment options.
The story of “Second Sight” and the folks that depended on them is pretty sad. I hope there’s some kind of backup plan in case the company goes under, gets acquired, or decides to abandon existing technology. Like placing the key tech in a trust of sorts.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/bionic-eye-obsolete
This tech is extremely experimental and nowhere near ready to market as a consumer device that a regular person can purchase, so a lot of those questions don’t really have answers.
Part of the study is to see how long it lasts. It’s replaceable in theory but there’s things like are there complications with redoing it (e.g scar tissue) to be explored.
As a human trial, he may never get an upgrade, and it might fail in a few months unexpectedly.
It’s part of the risk of being in a trial vs waiting until it’s a finished product.
“Sorry, your brain is out of warranty.”
Many have mentioned that so you didn’t look very far then. It’s like the first thing people wonder. They have no answer of course, this is research and not a product
I suppose the counter argument is people don’t ask that kind of question when they get a pacemaker. At some point you have to get an implant if you need an implant you can’t go oh well our weight six months because then version 2.0 is out