Researcher claims to read thoughts from neuronal activity

Mind reading developments seem to pop up every so often, but this particular case is somewhat extraordinary. How so? Probably because a University of Leicester researcher has outright proclaimed that his team "can read human thoughts from neuronal activity." Reportedly, Dr. Rodrigo Quian Quiroga and colleagues were able to optimize a decoding algorithm and use it to "infer the stimulus from the neuronal firing," and during tests in which patients were presented with a vast database of images, the team was seemingly able to "predict what picture the subject was seeing far above chance." Beyond giving sci-fi drama creators a bit more to work with, the technology could also be used to transmit thoughts to bionic appendages in order for paralyzed individuals to better care for themselves. Still, there's quite a few ethical / clinical issues that would have to be worked out before this stuff ventured beyond the lab, but we definitely can't argue with the premise.

[Via Physorg, image courtesy of University of Leicester]

[p-diddy @ Dec 7th 2007 3:59AM]

I for one welcome our... oh, they already know? never mind.

-p-

[Kevin K @ Dec 7th 2007 4:14AM]

he looks like an American Mr. Bean.

[Ed @ Dec 7th 2007 4:25AM]

I am absolute privacy nut willing to go to almost any length to protect my privacy and anonymity in this country.

That being said... They will only read my thoughts just ONCE. Especially after a few beers.

Either that or start charging by the minute.

[Generic @ Dec 7th 2007 4:30AM]

"the technology could also be used to transmit thoughts to bionic appendages"

say when having some kickass thoughts

I just couldn't help myself not say that.

[Ally @ Dec 7th 2007 9:20AM]

Bet you never saw that coming! :P

[TheCow5 @ Dec 7th 2007 11:52AM]

I bet this will be discredited as soon as otehrs take a look at it or they will find that they took too many leaps to get someones thoughts.

[JRo @ Dec 7th 2007 11:55AM]

Ummm...University of Leicester is in the UK.

[Gus @ Dec 7th 2007 12:46PM]

Matt Parkman's out of a job.

[daywalker2676 @ Dec 7th 2007 2:35PM]

Will this work on my cats? Lately they've been meowing at me a lot.

[tmnag @ Dec 7th 2007 2:53PM]

predicting what someone is seeing seems a lot more believable than predicting someone's thoughts. Predicting what someone is seeing should be as "simple" as decoding the system the brain uses to translate signals from the ocular nerves into vision. As I understand it, this is one of the more basic things that the brain does, and it should be fairly similar for all humans and other mammals (so, yes, it might work on your cat, assuming it's for real).

A much harder form of mind-reading would involve reading what someone is imagining, thinking, or remembering things. I don't think we are even sure what the relevant systems are for those higher functions.

[Valgas @ Dec 8th 2007 12:52AM]

I thought they meant what someone is seeing as in "imagining". I can't read.

[derX @ Dec 7th 2007 3:57PM]

I was thinking the same thing. We cannot even figure out a definitive purpose of certain higher level functions like dreaming, I am sure they are unable to read anyone's thoughts. It's probably, like you said, they're just seeing what image one is seeing and got lost in translation, somewhere.
-----------

Though I am sure you are unable to read thoughts, I am fairly confident you can read this:

I'm not buying it.

[crescentdavid @ Dec 7th 2007 5:10PM]

I would tell you what I really think about this article but 1. You already know and 2. They won't let me.

Curses.