How to ensure future brain technologies will help and not harm society

How to ensure future brain technologies will help and not harm society

assistive tech Assistive Technology BCI brain computer interface Brain-Computer Interface (BCI)

We need a more informed public debate on neuroscience

Image: REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon 

Written by

Murali Doraiswamy, Professor, Duke University Health System

Hermann Garden, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

David Winickoff, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Wednesday 1 March 2017

Thomas Edison, one of the great minds of the second industrial revolution, once said that “the chief function of the body is to carry the brain around.” Understanding the human brain – how it works, and how it is afflicted by diseases and disorders – is an important frontier in science and society today.

Advances in neuroscience and technology increasingly impact intellectual wellbeing, education, business, and social norms. Recent findings confirm the plasticity of the brain over the individual’s life. Imaging technologies and brain stimulation technologies are opening up totally new approaches in treating disease and potentially augmenting cognitive capacity. Unravelling the brain’s many secrets will have profound societal implications that require a closer “contract” between science and society.

Convergence across physical science, engineering, biological science, social science and humanities has boosted innovation in brain science and technological innovation. It offers large potential for a systems biology approach to unify heterogeneous data from “omics” tools, imaging technologies such as fMRI, and behavioural science. 

Citizen science – the convergence between science and society – already proved successful in EyeWire where people competed to map the 1,000-neuron connectome of the mouse retina. Also, the use of nanoparticles as coating of implanted abiotic devices offers great potential to improve the immunologic acceptance of invasive diagnostics. Brain-inspired neuromorphic engineering aims to develop novel computer systems with brain-like characteristics, including low energy consumption, adequate fault tolerance, self-learning capabilities, and some sort of intelligence. Here, the convergence of nanotechnology with neuroscience could help building neuro-inspired computer chips; brain-machine interfaces and robots with artificial intelligence systems.

Future opportunities for cognitive enhancement for improved attentiveness, memory, decision making, and control through, for example, non-invasive brain stimulation and neural implants have raised, and shall continue to raise, profound ethical, legal, and social questions. What is societally acceptable and desirable, both now and in the future? 

At a recent OECD workshop, we identified five possible systemic changes that could help speed up neurotechnology developments to meet pressing health challenges and societal needs.

1. Responsible research

There is growing interest in discussing and unpacking the ethical and societal aspects of brain science as the technologies and applications are developed. Much can be learned from other experiences in disruptive innovation. The international Human Genome Project (1990-2003), for example, was one of the earlier large-scale initiatives in which social scientists worked in parallel with the natural sciences in order to consider the ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) of their work. 

The deliberation of ELSI and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in nanotechnologies is another example of how societies, in some jurisdictions, have approached R&D activities, and the role of the public in shaping, or at least informing, their trajectory. RRI knits together activities that previously seemed sporadic. According to Jack Stilgoe, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London, the aim of responsible innovation is to connect the practice of research and innovation in the present to the futures that it promises. 

Frameworks, such as ELSI and RRI should more actively engage patients and patient organisations early in the development cycle, and in a meaningful way. This could be achieved through continuous public platforms and policy discussion instead of traditional one-off public engagement and the deliberation of scientific advances and ELSI through culture and art. 

Research funders – public agencies, private investors, foundations, as well as universities themselves – are particularly well positioned to shape trajectories of technology and society. Through their funding power, they have unique capacity to help place scientific work within social, ethical, and regulatory contexts. 

It is an opportune time for funders to: 1) strengthen the array of approaches and mechanisms for building a robust and meaningful neurotechnology landscape that meaningfully engages human values and is informed by it; 2) discuss options to foster open and responsible innovation; and 3) better understand the opportunities and challenges for building joint initiatives in research and product development.

2. Anticipatory governance

Society and industry would benefit from earlier, and more inclusive, discussions about the ethical, legal and social implications of how neurotechnologies are being developed and their entry onto the market. For example, the impact of neuromodulatory devices that promise to enhance cognition, alter mood, or improve physical performance on human dignity, privacy, and equitable access could be considered earlier in the research and development process.

3. Open innovation

Given the significant investment risks and high failure rates of clinical trials in central nervous systems disorders, companies could adopt more open innovation approaches in which public and private stakeholders actively collaborate, share assets including intellectual property, and invest together.

4. Avoiding neuro-hype

Popular media is full of colourful brain images used to illustrate stories about neuroscience. Unproven health claims, including those which give rise to so-called ‘neuro-hype’ and ‘neuro-myths’. Misinformation is a strong possibility where scientific work potentially carries major social implications (for example, work on mental illness, competency, intelligence, etc). 

It has the potential to result in public mistrust and to undermine the formation of markets. There is a need for evidence-based policies and guidelines to help the responsible development and use of neurotechnology in medical practice and in over-the-counter products. Policymakers and regulators could lead the development of a clear path to translate neurotechnology discoveries into human health advantages that are commercially viable and sustainable.

5. Access and equity

Policymakers should discuss the socio-economic questions raised by neurotechnology. Rising disparities in access to often high-priced medical innovation require tailored solutions for poorer countries. The development of public-private partnerships and simplification of technology help access to innovation in resource-limited countries.

In addition to helping people with neurological and psychiatric disorders, the biggest cause of disability worldwide, neurotechnologies will shape every aspect of society in the future. A roadmap for guiding responsible research and innovation in neurotechnology may be transformative.

Aussies on the verge of bionics ‘Holy Grail’ ahead of human trials of brain machine interface technology

Aussies on the verge of bionics ‘Holy Grail’ ahead of human trials of brain machine interface technology

als amyotrophic lateral sclerosis assistive tech Assistive Technology BCI Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) mnd

JUNE 1, 20165:38PM

Australian researchers are leading the way with brain machine interface technology.

Nick Whighamnews.com.au

• Email a friend

IMAGINE being able to communicate with a machine using nothing but your thoughts. 

That is the goal currently being pursued by a team of researchers and engineers at Melbourne University who are leading the way in the hugely significant field of developing brain machine interfaces.

In an effort to accomplish what has been likened to machine telepathy, they have developed a tiny biocompatible implant called a stentrode which gets implanted into a blood vessel next to the brain. The tiny implant records electric activity from a specific part of the brain and the information is then fed into a decoding algorithm which interprets the electric activity, or thoughts.

Dr Tom Oxley is leading the research and perhaps the only thing more impressive than the science involved is the story behind how he secured funding to embark on the project.

While on holiday in New York about four years ago, Dr Oxley sent a cold call e-mail to US Colonel Geoffrey Ling who at the time he had just become the director of the Pentagon’s science and research unit DARPA.

Much to the surprise of the trainee neurologist at Royal Melbourne Hospital he was quickly invited to the US Defence Department’s research agency and found himself pitching his bold idea to its top brass.

They agreed to give him $1 million to get started on his work.

“I don’t think any other body in the world would’ve funded it,” Dr Oxley tells news.com.au. “It was something that was so blue sky and out there.”

Dr Thomas Oxley has been working on this idea since 2007.Source:Supplied

There was some unfounded stigma that come attached with working with DARPA.

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

“There are a lot of cynical representations of DARPA about conducting black box evil work,” he says. “But my experience was that of an open, academically and creatively rich environment to pursue next generation research.”

It’s a misconception that extends to his work in brain machine interfaces.

Given the incredible nature of the science, many are quick to jump to lofty conclusions about its future capabilities including speculating about far flung military applications and mind control.

The technology is “an incredible step forward... but it’s a little bit overblown with what’s likely to happen here,” he says, referring to the more “science fiction” possibilities of the technology.

Dr Oxley stressed the implanted device is simply used to record information from the brain, not implanting information into it. “So when people start talking about mind control and things like that, actually this is a technology that is totally controlled by the user… it doesn’t actually work the other way around.”

His team is purely focused on the life altering benefits the technology can bring to the medical industry, primarily in the treatment of paralysis and epilepsy.

The stentrode is inserted into the blood vessel using a catheter.Source:Supplied

From the DARPA funding, Dr Oxley and his team was able to use that to leverage Australian government funding.

Back in Melbourne Terence O’Brien, the head of Melbourne University’s Department of Medicine embraced the project with gusto — something which he referred to as the “Holy Grail for research in bionics”.

He introduced Dr Oxley to engineers Tony Burkitt and David Grayden who at the time were working on a bionic eye. In the following months postdoctoral researcher Nick Opie joined Dr Oxley as a lead researcher on the project.

Fast forward to 2016 and the team had successful results of animal trials published in the journal Nature Biotechnology.

“It’s one thing to prove that we can record that type of data but the next stage is to demonstrate in a human that we can get the human user to control that signal in a way in which is useful,” Dr Oxley says.

Ultimately, the process hinges on the ability of the technology to translate the electric brain activity into useful information. To do so, they require a tailor-made decoding algorithm.

“There is a lot of work being done in this space but what’s lacking now is a kind of framework for people to continue to improve on these algorithms,” Dr Oxley says.

“We are modelling as best we can the decoding algorithms to make it work but really until it’s in (humans) it’s going to be challenging to improve on these systems.”

The group is aiming to carry out human trails in the near future, most likely next year, when the project will really begin to take shape.

“The beginning is probably going to be slow. We are aiming for basic control of a couple different directions on a computer screen with a cursor and then with that we hope to use that to manipulate mobility assist devices such as exoskeletons,” Dr Oxley says.

For those suffering from paralysis or severe spinal cord injuries, the technology offers “the capacity to get information out of their brain to modulate movement systems that will basically enable them to interact with their environment again.”

Another objective is to allow doctors treating a patient with uncontrollable seizures to have a constant data stream of what’s happening in their brain in order to predict and address the issue.

The team is keen to get the human patient trials under way and is certainly optimistic about the potential.

“I think what we’re seeing is the start of a whole new field,” Dr Oxley says.

Dr Tom Oxley and Dr Nick Opie, the lead researchers on the project. Picture: David CairdSource:News Limited

Is it possible for a machine to read your mind?

Is it possible for a machine to read your mind?

als amyotrophic lateral sclerosis BCI Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) mnd motor neuron disease

Those suffering from motor neuron disease such as Lou Gehrig's struggle to turn thoughts into words. A scientist from University of California, Berkeley, aims to overcome this through advanced technology.

The idea that Professor Robert Knight has is to develop a machine that could communicate people's intended thoughts via an electronic speaker or writing device. This would be a direct aid to those with the spectrum of motor neuron conditions. A motor neuron disease refers to one of five neurological disorders that selectively affect motor neurons (these are the cells that control voluntary muscles of the body.) These conditions are: amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, primary lateral sclerosis, progressive muscular atrophy, progressive bulbar palsy and pseudobulbar palsy. Lou Gehrig's Disease is an alternative name for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS.)

The idea of machine recording thoughts and playing these back through a speech device or other form of electronic communication has been the stuff of science fiction. However, this concept is no longer far-fetched. Already neuroprosthetics allows people to control artificial arms with their thoughts. 

While a fully working machine remains may years away, some recent success has been reported. Professor Knight's team have managed to playback a word that someone was thinking by monitoring their brain activity and interpreting the brainwaves. 

This impressive feat involved decoding electrical activity in the brain’s temporal lobe — the seat of the auditory system. Speaking with the Daily Mail, Professor Knight outlined the next steps: "Now, the challenge is to reproduce comprehensible speech from direct brain recordings done while a person imagines a word they would like to say."

To achieve the single word recognition has taken years of research, analyzing brain waves through electrodes and attempting to discern the relationship between brainwaves, words and the interpretation of language, The ultimate aim is to develop a fully-working brain implant. 

Some of the work to date has been published in the journal PLoS Biology ("Reconstructing Speech from Human Auditory Cortex.")

Read more:  http://www.digitaljournal.com/science/new-device-promises-to-turn-brain-waves-into-speech/article/466626#ixzz4ALI6DpQO

Brain-Computer Interfaces Unlock the World for People with Paralysis

Brain-Computer Interfaces Unlock the World for People with Paralysis

als amyotrophic lateral sclerosis Assistive Technology augmentative communication BCI brain computer interface mnd motor neuron disease

Via http://alsn.mda.org/article/brain-computer-interfaces-unlock-world-people-paralysis

by Catherine G. Wolf, Ph.D. on Wed, 2013-11-06 09:35

 

The author, who has ALS, explains what's new in BCI technology

Brain-computer interface systems (BCIs) — all of which are still experimental and not yet commercially available — allow users who have lost the ability to move or communicate to do so by focusing attention on specific signals from a computer. The system then translates this attention into action, such as choosing a letter or word, controlling a thermostat, or moving a limb or wheelchair.

Article Highlights:

• Cathy Wolf of Katonah, N.Y., has had ALS for 18 years and has lost nearly all voluntary movement, including speaking ability.
• Wolf has been testing brain-computer interface (BCI) systems and assisting with their development since 2006.
• BCIs that are well along in development either sense brain activity through the scalp or through electrodes implanted into the motor cortex of the brain. They show promise in restoring a user's ability to communicate and perform various actions.

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) enable a person with no voluntary movement to communicate, surf the Web, write emails, and even move a wheelchair. For people with advanced ALS, spinal cord injuries, stroke or other neuromuscular conditions, BCIs promise to give them back the world.
There are no commercially available BCIs yet. But pilot studies in users’ homes are in progress to find out how to make these systems easy to use for both the user and the caregiver.

A user-interface expert

 

I have had ALS for 18 years. In that time, I’ve lost the ability to move my arms and legs, eat by mouth, speak and even breathe. I do have some movement in my face. But ALS is unpredictable. I might lose the small movement of my eyebrows and mouth in the next six months or the next year.

Wearing an electrode cap containing conductive gel in the electrode spaces, Cathy Wolf operates her computer by paying attention to single characters or function shortcuts on the monitor.

I have been participating in the Wadsworth Center’s development of BCIs since 2006 (the center is part of the New York State Department of Health). I serve as a user and also the user-interface expert because of my long history in human-computer interaction at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center.

I am not yet dependent on the BCI. For now, I am using an infrared switch which I activate by raising my eyebrows to select letters and words from an onscreen scanning keyboard. This method is currently faster than the BCI. I participate in the research both for myself and others with movement disorders.

Wadsworth BCI picks up brain waves through the scalp

The Wadsworth BCI is based on electroencephalogram (EEG) signals picked up from the surface of my scalp. I wear an eight-channel electrode cap with electrode gel on my scalp. The signals are sent to an amplifier and then to a computer.

When I started my participation with the Wadsworth Center, the only application available was typing and then hearing back what I had typed in text-to-speech, the mechanical voice in which computers speak.

Since then, many improvements and applications have been added.

 

P300: The 'a-ha' response

 

On a large screen, I look at a matrix of quickly flashing letters and symbols that flash in a quasi-random, but known, order. My task is to count the number of times the symbol I want flashes. The computer is looking for a component of brain waves called P300. The P300 response is often called the “a-ha” response because it occurs about 300 milliseconds after someone sees something significant. The computer uses an algorithm to pick the symbol with the highest P300 amplitude.

 

Word prediction

 

One improvement in the Wadsworth BCI system is word prediction. Word prediction is based on the frequency of the next letter, given the preceding letter. For example, if I type “w,” the words “when, was, with, we, who” would be listed. If the desired word is on the list, I pick it, instead of typing the entire word. There is also next-word prediction based on the previous word. These changes increase speed and accuracy.

The Wadsworth researchers also experimented with different flashing patterns. One had seven different colors for the symbols in the matrix, and I was instructed to name the colors of the desired symbol. In an independent study with seven people who had ALS, the use of color seemed to increase accuracy.

Email

 

Another, and more important, BCI application was email. I can email anyone, and there is a feature for remembering recent email addresses. I often email members of the project with suggestions about the user interface, and other suggestions.

Rich site summaries

 

There is also a Web application based on RSS (rich site summary) feeds. I can read The New York Times, ALS news, and even listen to music on Pandora.com. There is a YouTube application in which you type a subject matter, like the Beatles or cats, and you get a list of YouTube videos on the subject. There’s also a picture viewer application.

My recommendation: Caregiver alerts

 

I noticed that when I am using BCI, my caregivers sometimes occupy themselves with other things. I suggested adding the ability to call my caregiver or announce a problem with the ventilator. These messages are repeated until someone comes to turn them off. The messages can be customized.

My recommendation: Adding mouse 'emulation'

 

For all the BCI-specific applications, there are always several that were not included. So at the Users’ Forum at the Fifth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting in June 2013, in which I was a remote participant, I said my ideal BCI would work with any computer or Internet application, just as my scanning keyboard and switch can be used. This would require adding mouse emulation [imitation] to the Wadsworth BCI, but some BCIs already have the ability to move the mouse.

BCIs in the pipeline

 

At the same meeting, in the session called “BCIs for Users with Impairments,” a variety of modalities was presented:

• Auditory binary choice (two choices) BCI: The user is asked a yes/no question while in one ear “yes” is repeated and in the other ear “no” is repeated. Randomly, “yep” replaces “yes” and “nope” replaces “no.” The user answers the question by either counting the number of yeps or nopes.
• Visual binary choice BCI used with the eyes closed: The user is fitted with special glasses which contain LEDs flickering at different frequencies in each eye. The LEDs can be seen with the eyes closed. The user answers a yes/no question by attending to the appropriate eye.
• Visual BCI that uses eye blink in addition to EEG: Eye blink is detected by a different brain response.  

Although these were laboratory experiments, not for home use, I am sure the goal is to move them out of the lab. Thus, if you have movement disabilities, there is likely to be a BCI in the works that meets your personal needs!

The iBrain may monitor sleep but can't steal thoughts

 

Then there is the NeuroVigil’s iBrain, a one-channel dry electrode mounted on a headband that picks up EEG. The only application listed on the company’s website is in-home sleep monitoring, but the iBrain has been recently touted as “hacking” into the mind of Stephen Hawking and another person with ALS, Augie Nieto (co-chair of MDA’s ALS Division).

The iBrain was used to pick up brain waves when they thought of moving their left or right hands. Curious about the iBrain, I sent email twice to NeuroVigil. I got no response.

The word “hacking” connotes unauthorized access. When applied to the mind, it implies unauthorized access to one’s thoughts.

I don’t know whether the iBrain could function as a BCI. But I want to reassure everyone that the iBrain or any BCI cannot read your thoughts. BCIs require conscious effort to work. Counting how many times a symbol flashes is hard work. There is no way these systems could steal your thoughts.
As to whether the iBrain could function as a BCI, I suggest you wait for studies in peer-reviewed journals, and not be swayed by demonstrations.

BrainGate: An implanted BCI

 

Another approach to BCIs is illustrated by the BrainGate Neural Interface System. In such systems, explained neurologist Leigh Hochberg, a sensor is implanted on the surface of the motor cortex of the brain, in an area about 4 millimeters by 4 millimeters.

Once the sensor is implanted, the user imagines moving a limb, often the arm or hand. The sensor transmits the electrical signal to a decoder (one or more computers and software) that turns the brain signals into a useful form for an external device. The external device may be a computer with a cursor, a prosthetic device, a robotic arm or a device that controls the environment [such as the temperature in the room]. The recording is done intracranially [inside the skull] and is called electrocorticography (ECoG).

“My personal goal — shared by our BrainGate team — is to develop systems that provide a person with advanced ALS, or locked-in syndrome from brainstem stroke, or traumatic brain injury or other disorders, with 24-hour-a-day continuous point-and-click control over a computer cursor, enabling that person to communicate readily and to use any software on any computer that could be controlled with a point-and-click,” said Hochberg.

Implanted devices are potentially more natural for performing complex actions, especially when recording from several brain locations. One goal is to eventually use implanted intracranial devices like the BrainGate to bridge the nonfunctional motor neurons in people with conditions such as advanced ALS, brainstem stroke or spinal cord injuries, allowing them to move their own limbs.
The field is in its infancy, Hochberg noted. Still, there have been impressive advances. Three test users with quadriplegia were able to use the BrainGate to operate either a prosthetic arm or a three-dimensional robotic arm to reach and grasp. One tester used the BrainGate system for more than five years. After five years, the signals from the array were still useful to control external devices, though not as robust as the first year. This is significant because it shows that the BrainGate could provide use over a “clinically valuable time period,” Hochberg said.

Interestingly, implanted ECoG systems may make the noninvasive EEG systems more accurate. At the recent BCI meeting, a paper was presented about the successful use of ECoG to predict EEG in six people.

Although the goal of intracranial systems like the BrainGate is to seamlessly turn thoughts into movement, there is no danger that private thoughts could be stolen. Such systems reside in the motor cortex, not the area where complex thoughts and planning take place.

While some people may prefer the convenience of implanted systems, others are concerned about the risks.

Restoring abilities

 

The advances in both EEG and ECoG systems can now give people with no movement the ability to speak, the most human ability, and for me the most important.

Already, in pilot projects, they are enabling paralyzed people to use computers and control the environment. It is my hope that such systems will soon be available to all who need them.
For an in-depth look at the state of BCI science, see a summary of the Fifth International Brain Computer Interface Meeting sessions, with links to research articles.

---

Cathy Wolf, 66, earned a doctorate in psychology from Brown University in Providence, R.I., after which she began work in the field of human-computer interaction. At the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., she worked on speech and handwriting recognition and natural conversational interfaces, registering nearly a dozen patents.

In fall 1997, Wolf learned she had developed ALS. Since then, management of the disease has included a tracheostomy, a ventilator and a feeding tube. Unable to speak, Wolf communicates with her husband Joel and the rest of the world using a WiViK onscreen keyboard; E-triloquist speech program software; and a SCATIR switch that works through detection of a reflected beam of light and which she operates with her eyebrows.

In addition to writing for the MDA/ALS Newsmagazine and American Academy of Neurology’s magazine Neurology Now, Wolf is an amateur poet and has published two poems in peer-reviewed journals. She was profiled in the January 2007 issue of the MDA/ALS Newsmagazine.

Are you ready for wearable tech? It's coming

Are you ready for wearable tech? It's coming

aac Assistive Technology augmentative communication BCI Brain-Computer Interface (BCI)

Article by: BRIAN GAAR , Austin American-Statesman         

• Updated: October 22, 2013 - 5:41 PM

Now that capital is flowing into the sector, products are in the pipeline.

• 0

The digital domain is creeping off our desktops and onto our bodies, from music players that match your tunes to your heartbeat to mood sweaters that change color depending on your emotional state.

There are even fitness bracelets, anklets and necklaces to track your calorie burning.

 

At Chaotic Moon Studios, an Austin, Texas, mobile software firm, developers and engineers are working on a competitive product to Google’s upcoming Google Glass — eyewear that can log onto the Internet. And they’re designing other wearable projects for several other customers, from applications to full-blown products.

 

Chaotic Moon co-founder William “Whurley” Hurley said wearable technology will have as much of an impact as the smartphone revolution did a few years ago.

 

“I think we’re about to enter a whole new phase in the next 12 months, 16 months probably on the outside,” Hurley said. “There’s going to be a whole new phase. It’s just like when the iPhone came out and there was this mad gold rush. It’s gonna be the same thing.”

 

Another Austin mobile developer, Mutual Mobile, is working on Google Glass applications for a variety of clients. They include doctors who might use the glasses to pull up patient information, and warehouse employees who could use them to look at real-time inventory or scan bar codes.

“People are starting to get into it,” said Sam Gaddis, the company’s chief marketing officer.

Gaddis says connected devices of all types are the future — because sensors that can measure a variety of data are becoming so cheap.

 

Mutual Mobile has hosted “hackathons” to encourage its developers to see what they can invent.

After one recent event, its developers created a football with a sensor that can detect the quality of the throw, and a boxing game that measures how much you’ve hit the target.

Adding sensors to everyday objects “is just adding this new layer of data that didn’t exist before,” Gaddis said.

 

Experts say that wearables are the next big thing in tech.

 

“Everyone agrees the race is just beginning, and I think we’re going to see some very, very big leaps in just the next year,” tech entrepreneur Manish Chandra said at a wearable technology conference and fashion show in San Francisco that was buzzing with hundreds of developers, engineers and designers.

 

Wearable technologies have long been a sideshow to mainstream laptop and smartphones, but this year Google’s glasses and rumors of Apple’s iWatch are popularizing the field. Analysts forecast swift growth. Last year the market for wearable technology — from hearing aids to wristband pedometers — totaled almost $9 billion. That should climb to $30 billion by 2018, said analyst Shane Walker at IHS Global Insights.

 

Hurley said Google’s public relations campaign for its glasses sparked an influx of venture capital into wearables.

 

“And that’s what’s been missing for the last 20 years in this area, is people actually funding these projects,” he said. “So now we’re getting all these clients because there’s all this injection of funding.”

 

Other areas like gaming will also be affected, thanks to products like the Oculus Rift, a virtual reality headset that enables 3-D gaming.

 

At Austin’s recent Captivate tech conference, Robin Arnott was showing off a program he’d created for the Rift. After users strap on the headset, the program uses their vocal tones to display a series of tunneling images, creating fantastical visual effects.

Arnott called it a “meditation experience” that he hopes to release with the device in another year or so.

 

“It’s like you chase yourself down the rabbit hole,” he said of the program.

Arnott described devices like Google’s glasses, which overlay the Internet on top of the real world as “augmented reality.”

 

Wearables “extend your abilities as a human, just as your phone does,” he said.

“I really feel like this is an extra organ,” he said, grabbing his smartphone.

 

As wearable technologies proliferate, humans will need to adapt, said Georgia Institute of Technology professor Thad Starner. He advises Google on its glasses, which are lightweight frames equipped with a hidden camera and tiny display that responds to voice commands. Starner has worn his for several years.

 

“We’re talking about paradigm-changing devices,” said Starner. “Capabilities that people haven’t thought of before.”

 

He said that, unlike computers and tablets that people engage with, wearable computers are designed to be in the background, secondary to the wearer’s attention. “It seems like a paradox, but when you pull the technology closer to your body, there’s a seamless interaction, it’s more an extension of yourself,” he said.

 

But there are sure to be cultural and social issues. Google Glass — and some emerging competitors — have raised concerns of people who don’t want to be surreptitiously videoed or photographed. And what about interacting?

 

In a newly released survey from Cornerstone OnDemand, 42 percent of workers said they would not be willing to strap on wearable tech for their jobs, with older and more traditional employees more reluctant than their counterparts. The survey polled 1,029 Americans age 18 and over in August, and had a 3.1 percent margin of error.

 

And then there’s an issue of bandwidth, said Ritch Blasi, a consultant with Comunicano who researches the wearable technology market. At this point, there simply isn’t enough network service to support universal and constant wireless use, he said. But that, too, will catch up.

“It almost makes you think everyone is going to turn into a cyborg,” he said, referring to a fictional, prosthetic-laden high-tech comic-book superhero.

 

And will they? “When you look at the world and everything people are doing?” Blasi said. “I think the answer to that is yes.”

 

Via http://www.startribune.com/business/228847451.html?page=1&c=y