i can't take drugs are essential for millions of patients, or are they, they want that pill that they hope will take care of their problem thoroughly and rapidly in the short term they really work. the problem is, in the long term, they're mostly disastrous. suddenly stopping a drug can cause withdrawal symptoms more serious than the condition it was meant to treat instead of the beneficial effects of these different medicines ending up to something wonderful. very often they're harmful effects and up to something terrible can bill. so of all ills, or are we trying to mitigate life itself? i just think i was like, i was just scared, scared little girl, the 24. and like me didn't have to be so complicated.

mm. welcome to so think of visionary michelle chevry not to run through the human body with technology has long cease to be sy fy. but now it's merging computers with the most sophisticated machine of our own. the human brain is it creates a fantasy or some or not so distant future. well, i asked the world 1st sidebar, professor of cybernetics, that commentary and reading universities, kevin warwick, kevin war, race, professor of cybernetics, and comment tree, or reading universities and the world 1st. cyber kevin, so great to have you with us. so many things have been coming up in the news lately, so the technology of implanting alex roads into the brain cortex is at least 20 years old. and electrodes in the brain have already been used to control electric

and people. yeah, musk narrowing project is presented as a giant leap forward. why? well and that's why it's been presented that way, but it is good in some ways. but the moment is just been experimented on with pigs as i understand. so there's no human trials yet. that amazing, but i'm the type of electrodes they're using, not rigid. the electrodes that i had implanted in my nervous system were hard, like, like a hair brush, spikes. and the potential there is that i can break off and cause firing them into the system and be quite dangerous to the 100 spikes in my nervous system. so i think if we're looking at the very, if you know, you can move them around the type of electrodes, the musk is talking about,

then that's much better because they can move with the brain or the nervous system . but the issue i have is how do you imply them in a human? because with the implant i have just hammer, it's in very quick, very swift. but with the type of electrons must refer to i can't say how that's possible. so i have big questions yet how it will work as far as humans are concerned, as opposed to just the pigs. so there's been try the lesson, let speculate a bit. if i get it right, the idea of narrowing is to trans, transmitting our thoughts directly to the computer without the need of any middleman technology and at a much higher speed, right? how is it supposed to work exactly? like will i have to say what i want inside my computer to deliver on that? what do you make of it? to me at least we don't know how well it's going to work. what's been done so far,

more motor signals. so make any movement. and those new oral signals can be sent out site to a robot on because it to move. so you can move technology remotely. but also in terms of sensory information, you can feed that back into the brain. so it's motor and sensory. that's what's been done. so far, but the big advantages of course, is when you, what you're referring to, the possibility of sending all sorts of brian signals from the brain to the, not just to a computer, but potentially into another brain or into a machine, an artificial intelligence. right? so the, the whole possibility of communicating by thought back and forth for me in tremendously exciting. but we've done rudiments like telegraphic communication from nervous system to nervous system. but i think a long mask is, for example,

is way away from doing an experiment, sending signals from brian to brian, which i think would be one of the big advantages. there's lots of other advantages . here. our brains are flexible and they're constantly changing according to what we do with them. does that imply that a chip implant would have to be upgraded and updated all the time just as well? like i don't mobile applications? i don't think so. i think what we're looking at ra chip implant, it's a bit like a port. i don't know if people are aware of the film, the matrix yet, rapes either a load of sockets in the back of his head into his brain. it's a bit by opening up the force into the so that your then able to send brian signals by the connection to wherever and signals back into the brian. so the chip

is not really doing anything in the brain, so i don't think you need to upgrade the technology with the beautiful thing is that the human brain cells? what, what i do? what brian. so these really communicate either from brian cell to brian cell or from the outside world, into the brian and so on and brain. so i was like to communicate. and i, i really feel here that once you get the port in the brain, the brain cells will adapt, that they are flexible, they can make new connections even when you're older. they still make new connections. and hence, i think they will accept an implant quite readily, no problems about the materials. that's not an issue, but they will accept what they can do. and when the brain cells can communicate in a whole new way, they will go for it. the brain cells will yeah, we want to do this effectively. and so we will have quite to switch is not just the

case. we're putting the implant in and it will do what it can do. i think over a period of time the, your brian will adapt to the new possibilities. well, i know you get excited about the prospect of communicating with each other without words in the future with the help of alex roads in planet and our neural system. but i'm thinking like the beauty of a star is sometimes in fact that it's private when they want to choose not to broadcast it, i just shut up a. so if we all communicate by thought some day, right, what happens if we don't one similar assaults to be transmitted? well i, i have to disagree with that because i think with technology, what we've seen, what we've actually seen with facebook and also it's a different may twitter and so on. is that when humans can communicate in a whole new way that i really go for it. that's what whether you're a child,

whether you're an adult, you can communicate in a new way that is exciting for you because that's what your brain. so want to do. it's not that you're going against what your body is, what your brain so wanted. and so the privilege say is not an issue. we don't worry about credit odds and having information on us all the time. and by could companies and shops. because the advantages we get by being able to do that, to use the technology and with communication, we don't worry too much, it's all about the privacy issues. if we go on social media because of the advantages we get in the new ability to communicate. and so i think that is going to be the critical factor we will want to do it. we will want to communicate directly, brian and brian, even though it opens up possibilities of people literally hacking into our brains binding what some of our most thought. so it's the interface,

essentially between the, the human brain and technology. that's the problem. and once we integrate the too much more, i believe, maybe we won't worry about our inner most thoughts because we're gaining so much all we build up a new way of operating that we have inner most thoughts because your brain is not just one organ, it's a lot of different organs effectively that do different things. and so maybe within part of your brain you can have the thoughts. yes, this person is silly or i don't like them, whatever, but you don't want them to know that and be in communicating even brian, brian, you are able to filter that, but at the moment we don't know because we simply can't. but let's not say don't do it because of the loss of privacy. we need to do the experiments now to find out. and if there are issues that you're saying, then maybe we pull back from it a bit. but i, i suspect that won't be those issues, but okay,

it's one thing to implant. alex tried to reach signals saying one or 2 brain regions. but our thoughts are the product of billions of neural connections. how can electronic device connected self to every single neuron made task seem improbable? i don't, i don't think we're connecting to everything on your own. that's not the idea at all. even with a lot must a lot must be talking or perhaps thousands of connections. all i had so fi and the experiments i've done is a 100 inaction and, but when you are communicating now, you don't use all of your brain cells to communicate. use a small, relatively small number of them. so i think it is this, this port. you're still looking maybe thousands, maybe it might be millions or connections in the end. but relative to the 100000000000 neurons that you've got, it's still a relatively small number. so don't think you're looking at each. brian's cell to

an electro. that's not what we're looking to do by any means, but a small number. my number is fairly large because it opens up lots of possibilities . but there are questions as to which neurons in the brain. do you just connect the mode to neural is you connect with the sensory neurons and so on. all the years spread it around much more. so where the electro position is something we will need to learn over time with, which is the best positions and so on. karen, we're going to take a short break right now when we're back. we'll continue talking about what's going to happen when, when merged technology with our brain, talking to kevin warwick, professor of cybernetics of commentary and reading universities and the 1st cyberg ever stay with us.

the war on drugs nodded as a way to come back. a great problem. what's the one? it's part of the attitude of the nation, not just of north dakota. and it's got to be something that you could get elected. this time, the fight against drugs took, trying to shake, told us that andrew was competing short form. this is way too dangerous for him to be doing. clearly, they put him in harm's way. a rural college student does interest get shot in the head and found in a river like that. something else had to be happening. the

the and we're back with kevin war, rick, professor of cybernetics. at common korean reading university, also the world's 1st cyberg. we're talking about what's going to happen to us when technology and brain merge. kevin, you said one of your interviews that we humans are pretty limited in what we can do particularly mentally. and we just have a bunch of brain cell isn't surprising because it seems to me that especially mentally, we still don't know our limits. i mean, we keep on studying our brains and keep on being amazing how complex and powerful they are. why do you feel that humans are limited? we have a finite number of brain cells and certainly i agree with you that we could do more

with the brian cells we've got. and maybe this link will allow us to learn what the possibilities are. but at the same time, we can see when you look at computer technology, particularly artificial intelligence, some of the things that it can do just the speed and complexity of the way. can my calculations, communication community better computer computer communication is much better than human communication. so it does a lot of things better than we do. so the possibility, not just being restricted with the brains, we've got with the finite number of brain. so, but even even just combining to human brains together. i mean, up to me has a lot of advantages, not just because of the communication, but because of the, the addition and thinking in terms of not communicating,

not sending just signals as we do now. but in terms of the emotions failing ideas, concepts, the whole thing, the whole gamut was kelly, clean our brains. we have the possibility of communicating in a much better way. so linking just to brian's together, we can try and sort of transfer ideas from person to person. i would believe in a much better way. in math claims narrowing has a huge, there are paddic potential being able, one day to help paralysis. alzheimer parkinson's disease can ural influence, bring back the actual ability to here to see well, i think that there appear to excite things with one of the things that will drive it forward. yes, already, parkins and implants and depression and so on. but there's a lot of other neurological problems kits. the frame. yeah, i think is one of those things of the moment is not been tackled electrically,

because we have to remember the brain is electro chemical. hotly electrical, probably chemical. whereas most medicine is chemical. and with all sorts of side effects, if you have a headache, you take aspirin and it has side effects, and it probably still doesn't. so the headache that you've got, whereas we could potentially tackle things like that electrically. so there's all sorts of sarah pure possibilities to it. i think when we look to the future in maybe some of the things that we do at the moment, particularly in terms of communication, we won't do in the future, we will move on. we will evolve with the technology and so this way of communicating after oil will die out because we don't need to communicate that way . when we think to each other, reason communicate in a much richer for much, but

a much better why. and we will find it quite well. people leave the those that the evolved from us will look back in psycho, how did they communicate in such a limited way? all those years. back in 2020 you know there's an example of a colorblind man having an antenna that lets him sense the colors. so i read you talk about things that lead one feel ultrasound or are getting for read vision. what else is like real possibility for you in terms of adequate for humans? what can you see is an actual doable thing in the nearest future versus theoretical possibilities? what one of the things i say is how we understand the world around us. we tend to, to human brian operates in 3 dimensions. we look at space and architecture and saw as a 3 dimensional thing, which is go, space is not 3 dimensional space in space. and you can put as many dimensions as to

the understanding of it. which of course, with machine technology was artificial intelligence. the machines can understand the world around this in hundreds, thousands of dimensions, which is much more complex. and i really fail realistic thought it is in the years ahead. we will understand the universe in many more dimensions than we do at the moment, and that i hope will change face travel, for example, is the moment because we think in 3 dimensions. so it takes us a long time just to get to the moon, which is almost nowhere in the universe when they go to mars. we though it's just going to take several years to get that because we're thinking in 3 dimensions. when we start to sing this joint human machine of thinking in terms of dimensions or 30 dimensions, then we can, we can,

we can just do that through other dimensions. i sincerely hope that is going to be a possibility. i don't like to think of us just being stuck in this one part of the universe cannot acknowledge you actually improve my brain function. mentally, theoretically, me can. i implanted cheap and was finally able to learn language, solve complex math problems, or be able to play by flawlessly, without 20 years of practice and experience. yeah, that's good question. i'm going to find out about things i would love to do and i'm not very good planning musical instruments. i absolutely terrible language is. my wife is jack and i still, i'm not very good on running the checked language. so if there was some help on that i was going to check, but i mean with things will change with languages. i don't know that we will need

languages where we're going. i sincerely hope that when we can communicate just by thinking to each other because a lot of things we, we think about sitting in a chair, i'm sitting in a chair. we can think of those things and the ideas of those things. but then we use languages to describe it to someone else. if we're not using speech, potentially we don't need language. those things will change dramatically. i know philosophers are we thinking language? i don't believe we do think specifically in some language construct. i think we put language is on it, but it's something that will change dramatically and i may be abilities. motor ability is the ability to play golf and song which again, i'm not particularly good. but if, if i can down load and i think that's got to be some short term possibility,

download a number of movements into my body, which will cause me to play golf a little bit better. i probably still won't be as good as the professional gulf is are, but i can't see why those particular movements in a sort of robotic way can be done loaded into my brain. so i perform some set of actions, but my body is not a professional. gulf is body, so still probably wouldn't be as good, but it would be a lot better than i was beforehand. so if the grain in a more distant future will be connected to a network ca cheap of some kind, and that network will be run by artificial intelligence. therefore, artificial intelligence will be able to map all processes that go on inside a brain if it will. if it will know and be able to sort of look at the process inside a brain, will it lead to see radically having consciousness? what i want to say is, could the desire to enhance humans lead to

a very enhanced artificial intelligence instead? yes, a good bad my my were is if we don't do this, then that could be dangerous. in our we could have artificial intelligence in a with a form of consciousness. the potentially is very different. the human consciousness, this is what alan turing said. many machines, why can't they be conscious? well, it can be, but it's probably different human punches. but when we look at something that is an amalgamation, then i, i would be quite happy. i would love to have a mix form of consciousness, not just the human type that we've got, but also a machine element to that consciousness because it would give me all sorts of abilities and abilities to think in a much deeper way. so i think there are lots of advantages to it, but there are also potential dangers that you're alluding to and not something

we're going to have to be very careful. very wary off. anyway, i think we're, the artificial intelligence is separate to humans, particularly in the military to my and how much are we going to allow it to do the financial sector and so on. and without humans being in control of what's going on, as opposed to this mixed form. and we link human brains with machine brains and the possibility of having this hans mixed consciousness part i part human. so you point out the close connection between technology and the human brain will affect the issue of autonomy of human beings and our last point blank right? once our brains are connected to computers, will this be the end of us as fully autonomy as beings? because i mean machines will be able to make us think certain things and modify our behaviors accordingly. i think you're quite right. i mean, even now we really autonomous beings the possibility of living just

yourself, one person in the world that we live in now. is it sick straight? maybe some people i don't think i could. i'm not sure that my body would take the different foods that i have to wait. whether i would be able to survive in a world where i was the only person effectively. so i think we need our network, we need other people. we need technology now to live in the world. we're in and, and this is just taking it that bit further in terms of understanding what is going on in the human brain. i think with fair reputed methods. now one of the projects i'm working on for parkinson disease where the electrodes in the brain to teach the brian how to behave in a way that overcomes the, the problems of parkinson disease with those electrodes. and using what we did,

we learn how the different brian parts of the brain are behaving, particularly those that are affecting parkinson disease. so it's modeling the brian in an artificial intelligence system. and you can get, for example, 11 pa, before the, the typical tremors are associated with parkinson disease before they start. the artificial intelligence system can know several seconds ahead. they seem to stop. so the person themselves doesn't know they're going to have the trauma starting with the computer does. so i think we can get advantage of understanding the human brain much more through computer technology, which we can use for therapy, which help people that's going to be a good thing. but also we can enhance the way we're thinking, you know, the computer to knows what we got to think before we think is that you all know a hierarchy voice and opinion that augmenting yourself with tac will be a thing of rich people. mostly. and i mean, of course, like in the beginning,

like it was with automobiles or cell phones, it certainly will be, but this time we're not talking cell phones, we're talking evolutionary level change will a whole layer of people be excluded from having new abilities will the to to like could split humanity into 2 tires and wealthy enough to be cyborgs and the rest. but like the common folks. well, i mean, i would love to be, oh yes, now everything's going to be all right. but if we look realistically with technology, as you've said, with cell phones with autism, and they are, some people have them, some people have more of them and some people don't have any of them at all. i think what that does is it stretches society in terms of societies abilities. so those with the technology can communicate in all sorts of ways and an interaction can benefit from it. and those without any of the society really have very limited

capabilities in comparison sort of stretching society a bit like an elastic bands. i think this will do is further stretch it. so yes, those are the money, those, the one to experimental bit get in that 1st will have abilities and those that don't have implants in there. brian will not have anything like those abilities. but the key thing is, i think it was stretches a bit like an elastic band, but most likely that bond is going to break. so that we end up with those that having plants that will connect can communicate just by thinking to each other and so on. we'll have the ability to weigh b on those done so i think he could easily create it, stretch the bound, so we just split, evolve into those within plants and those without. all right, kevin, it's been such a pleasure talking to you. good luck with everything. we're talking to kevin war, rick, professor of cybernetics. that commentary and reading universities on the world's

for a sideboard. ah, ah. when i would show the wrong one, i'll just don't rule out the thing because after an engagement equal betrayal, when so many find themselves well, the part we choose to look for common ground in

the the families that up with the mark i took marking your function you would like to go to some way to show me what to do. john got, i've got that limit and i wanted them to put that on the schedule back to do the work for me about the run, the less about me

and the the, the the the job biden's approval rating dropped into the lowest of his presidency after the chaotic withdraw from afghanistan, but the administration sticking to the belief that some good payoff can still shift public opinion away from the objects paleo across the atlantic now calls into question america's role. as a global superpower, the british premier say he saw the fall of cobbled coming rasp joe biden. it came as a surprise to us partners in the u. tooth rethink their dependence on washington with topped up to that saying they can't rely on american military support on the block perhaps needs to.