the challenges for social acceptance

[Abolitionist]

IMO the technical challenges for creating an iPlant that could be an
optional therapy for enhancement are much less than the ideological
barriers. It's socially taboo as we like to think we have free will
and fear elite control.
Addressing the safety and security concerns will go a long way towards
improving social acceptance.

Let's make a list of the technical challenges and how we can address
them;

1. damage from the procedure (brain lesions and/or bleeding);

Robot assisted surgery with concurrent brain imaging can provide the
precision as well as real-time functional mapping of the brain
neccessary to avoid damaging blood vessels and surrounding tissue;

http://www.abolitionist-society.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=749

2. efficacy;

Diffusion imaging prior to electrode placement;

http://www.abolitionist-society.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1072

Implanted electrodes to measure brain activity and ensure the
stimulator is doing what is intended. MIT researchers are working on
miniture MEG sensors that could be implanted.


3. security;

a hack-proof ecu that is still user accessible is a challenge as
someone could be forced to give control of their ecu to another.

4. maintenance;

batteries charged through the body's heat and kinetic energy can make
battery replacement obsolete. regular scans can ensure that the
surrounding tissue is healthy and the implant is intact and
functioning as it should.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6272752.stm

http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/20278/

5. control;

we don't want people becoming iPlant addicts so the tech will have to
be regulated to ensure that people don't self stimulate in self
destructive ways.

6. Upgradability;

we want to avoid having to go back in so the ecu that monitors
activity levels and directs stimulation will need to be updatable non-
invasively

[Abolitionist]

Here's the link to tiny magnetometers;

http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=20239