|j||Johnny||7h||New Code Written Nightly. Not a GM.|
|a||Mench||1h||Doing a bit of everything.|
|-||ReeferMadness||42m||May the bridges I burn light the way.|
|And 32 more hiding and/or disguised|
Quote: from Kevlar on 7:56 pm on May 30, 2003[br]Isn't this how the technology for the matrix got it's start?
Quote: from Kevlar on 8:09 pm on April 25, 2003 [br]Isn't this exactly how it started in The Matrix?
...deja vu... isn't that exactly what I just typed about something that happened in the matrix?
...this could go on all night...
Anyway, that's beside the point.
The technology seems to be the converse of metaverse/matrix technology, if you can't see that, well *shrugs*.
Creating a bi-directional neural interface, possibly through providing neural stimuli that is dependent on physical input from the user...is rather different to essentially reading a persons physical state, feeding this back to them graphically, and allowing them to mentally change the physical state that's being read.
Biofeedback is about changing oneself in the end, whilst I see the Matrix as the opposite.
In a metaverse information is being fed to, not read from the person, and the person in turn almost changes the matrix with input, rather than changing feedback, by changing themselves.
Changing ones physical self is such a difficult and primitive interface that having 3 keys on a keyboard would be far superior. Unless people can spontaneously change their physical state, under a controlled will, its use doesn't really seem to go beyond providing a medium for self control, or making for some nice AI behaviour in games etc, which -would- be a very good application of it.
Reading biological life signs is very different to reading neural signs, or providing neural stimuli.
Heck the technology that allows blind people to see light shapes (forgot the specific name), by actually having a jack in their head, and electrical neural stimulator pad things attached to the inside of their skull, in turn connected to a table full of computer hardware by a nice thick cable is a lot more like the technology that will lead to the development of the matrix.
That, or stimulating certain nerve cell clusters with a probe and a mild electric charge which has been working well since the 50's is a lot more appropriate.
Okay, I've nonsensically rambled far too much, sorry.
Erm, maybe the principle technologies that we view as one day allowing the matrix to exist differ?
Were you drawing a parallel between biological control and neural control?
*runs off to actually do some work*