Skin-deep Answer will put Mobiles into the Wrist Business

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.businessweekly.co.uk/news/view_article.asp?article_id=7598' target='_blank'>http://www.businessweekly.co.uk/new...article_id=7598</a><br /><br /></div>"Advances in nanotechnology mean that the lost or stolen mobile phone could become a thing of the past, according to technology research hothouse BTexact. Ian Pearson, Suffolk based BTexact’s futurologist believes that the concept of ‘active skin’ – whereby incredibly small electronic circuits are inkjet printed onto the surface of the skin – could become a reality by 2010. <br /><br />This, he says, will open the way for the integration of electronic devices such as the mobile phones or televisions literally ‘into’ the human body. According to Pearson, circuits could be factory assembled in thin polymer membranes that adhere to the skin like children’s temporary tattoos and large-scale circuitry could be embedded in stick-on patches similar to plasters. The combination of layers allows entire gadgets to be built, and permits links between the body and electronic domains such as the internet."<br /><br />This is a fascinating article! It's very "pie in the sky" in that it's full of ideas, with little thought to how they would be implemented, but I love reading about this type of conceptualization. What do you think? Will technology merge with biology to the point where we'll be wearing our computers, or will technology always remain an external component of our lives?

[thadrool]

Great concept, but impractical in the sense that it'd open up the door to a whole bunch of privacy concerns. It'd probably just be too invasive to many.

[PlayAgain?]

I'd be interested to hear what other Christians have to say on this matter and whether they see it as being in any way significant.....

I know a lot will and do.

[Jason Dunn]

I'd be interested to hear what other Christians have to say on this matter and whether they see it as being in any way significant.....

Depends who's controlling the technology. :wink: If it's something that I go out and buy myself, that's fine. If the UN declares I have to have a chip in my hand to be a part of the world economy...that's a little different. But did you have to bring this up? Religion and online forums are a dangerous mix - you know that. 8O

[Peter Foot]

Like his predeccessor Peter Cochrane, Ian Pearson has probably one of the most fun jobs around - looking into the far future beyond what is even feasable to prototype today and making up future inventions (and from experience we should all know that the future is never how we predicted it - where is my flying car and tinfoil clothing...).

People have been ever sceptical of letting computer devices into their lives, but it is happening day by day and we no longer even think twice about using mobile phones and PDAs, not to mention all of the "smart" systems which go unnoticed in household appliances and cars for example. It seems only logical therefore that our use of computers and hence dependence upon computer technology will increase with time.

However having computer devices actually implanted into the skin seems just a little far-fetched and worrying to most people currently. :robot:

Its a minefield of both technical and ethical questions which we have yet to scrape the surface of as we are still some way away from anything which can be prototyped. When you read some of the scenarios for the technology it comes across very much as a product looking for a requirement not the other way around.
Having a TV printed onto the back of the hand might be quite appealing for TV addicts
Anyone who is so hooked on television they have to carry it round on their hand 24/7 needs some therapy, which may or may not be cheaper than a skin based computer, we'll have to wait and see. :wink:

I can see many good uses for computer technology that may be practical for improving the lives of the ill or disabled for example. But just for the sake of having an MP3 player in your arm or something - WHY. Why not just attach yourself to a large computer and spend all day in a vat of pink goo, Keano Reeves swears by it apparently... 0X

[PlayAgain?]

No trouble intended. Personally (as a career coward), my first concern is that it would hurt! :cry:

[Eitel]

"Hey, you got a tattoo of your mom on your arm"

"No dude, I'm teleconferencing with her"

:roll:

[Jason Dunn]

Well, FWIW, I'd be the first to sign up for something like this. We're surrounded by technology that is all so utterly STUPID - we need something to act as a nexus point, so it might as well be a human being. :way to go:

[CoreyJF]

Can you say cancer!

[Jhokur2k]

Part of the problem with stupid technology is the stupid people who design *and buy, I might add* said tech. I can't forsee anything I could want stuck on my arm... now, if this was used in the medical field, where it could be used in practical ways, such as measurements or testing (temporary thermometer?), then I could see it working. To "tattoo" a watch on my arm.. no.

[Jason Dunn]

Can you say cancer!

Not necessarily. It's possible for technology to exist in conjunction with us without damage occurring. Heart implants, plastics being used to replace arteries, etc. It's all a question of how easily we adapt to it...

[Gerard]

Anyone read 'Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom' by Cory Doctorow (http://www.craphound.com/down)? Cool read for a first novel, and free, and full of the kind of tech these folks are aiming at.

[Jacob]

I don't think I want to consider surgery when it comes to upgrading my cell phone.

[Peter Foot]

Can you say cancer!

Not necessarily. It's possible for technology to exist in conjunction with us without damage occurring. Heart implants, plastics being used to replace arteries, etc. It's all a question of how easily we adapt to it...

And of course how well the technology is adapted for us! - who is in control here humans or machines? Whenever we have any kind of computer technology introduced into the human body it needs to come from a medical background, not some techno-geek intent on screwing an atx motherboard into someones chest cavity. :twisted:

There are plenty of ways that the technology we have now could be improved to better serve our needs, without requiring a scapel. If we can't get different software apps and hardware devices to talk to each other, what hope have we of interfacing with the human body.

[Bearjaw]

I don't think I want to consider surgery when it comes to upgrading my cell phone.

"cell" phone get it! Haha thats funny stuff. like skin cell. to funny!

[Cortex]

well....
small printable circuits does not equate to biocircuitry so the article is pretty far fetched -- not that such technology wouldn't be useful. there are two large obsticles to inserting circuits into skin.

1. the immune response and build up of proteins alters the electrical characteristics of the circuit -- hence most implantable devices are housed in casings that protect them from this.

2. a main function of skin is to act as an immunological barrier and circuitry that has to exit the skin increases the risk of infection.

for the religious, conspiracy, and the more paranoid delusional people in the audience, we currently implant tremendous amounts of hardware in people right now -- wires, pins, screws, cages, artificial joints, breasts, penile implants, and stents -- plus more sophisticated electronic devices such as pacemakers, defibrillators, vagal nerve stimulators, medication pumps (insulin, baclofen), auditory transducers and even rare cortical stimulators.

for some reason there has always been some religious fear about altering our bodies and im not sure where that comes from. even initial heart transplants where opposed by some on religious grounds. i think people should ask why they oppose such things and if they would still oppose it if they needed the intervention to live.

in the next 2-3 years cortical interfaces will enter initial clinical trials and i think the future truely does involve integrating cortical function with devices that can be controlled by our thoughts. sci-fi always typically portrays such situations as evil or hideous (the matrix for instance) but i think that boring star trek episode with the guy who rolls around as a head attached to a box is more appropriate in the short term, and robo-cop awaits in the not so distance future....

[rfischer]

Just imagine, now you might be calling Symantec or McAfee when you have a stomach virus. :mrgreen:

[CoreyJF]

Can you say cancer!

Not necessarily. It's possible for technology to exist in conjunction with us without damage occurring. Heart implants, plastics being used to replace arteries, etc. It's all a question of how easily we adapt to it...

Actually there is still a risk with medical implants, it just happens to be better then immediately dying. When ever you put anything into or under the skin you take a chance of rejection or cancer. To save your life I can see it. To be even more connected, not worth it

[Cortex]

coryjf

the risk of cancer is minimal...

there is a subtype of cancers that can occur in the region of a scar (typically adenocarcinomas of the lung or fibroblastic tumors of the skin) but the biggest risks of implanted devices is infection.

rejection is typically an immune response to foreign tissues and not implanted devices. people dont require immunosuppression after a pacemaker for instance, but typically do for an organ transplant.

[Kaber]

I'm with the robots. When can I upload myself into the Matrix?

[Kaber]

deja vu - something in the matrix just changed

[Jason Dunn]

for some reason there has always been some religious fear about altering our bodies and im not sure where that comes from.

The Bible, Book of Revelations, see: "Mark of the Beast". It's a bit complex to explain here, but it's long been theorized that the "mark" will be related to economic/political freedoms. If you don't accept the mark, you can't buy things, sell things, etc. But part of accepting the mark will be denying your faith...which would explain why it makes us Christians a bit jumpy. :wink:

If you're curious, pick up the "Left Behind" series - it's fiction, not spiritual fact, but it's a very interesting read and interpretation of the events described in Revelations.

[brent_anderson]

I don't think I want to consider surgery when it comes to upgrading my cell phone.

The heck with that, what about the hard reset!

Brent

[scrinch]

Our skin cells die and are sloughed off every so often. I think it is every few weeks or so. Since this is the case, we will be replacing our cells and phones monthly, rather than annually. :wink:

[Elad Yakobowicz]

Our skin cells die and are sloughed off every so often. I think it is every few weeks or so. Since this is the case, we will be replacing our cells and phones monthly, rather than annually. :wink:

Every day even, as far as I recall. I think that before people strongly consider participating in something like this, should it ever become available, that we should all have another good read of George Orwell's 1984. :lol:

Here are a few ideas which may be a bit more practical regarding use of such technology -

- How about specially designed wireless stickers? You could buy a specific scanner with which you scan the unique frequency of each sticker and bam - never lose your car keys, cell phones, or even your cars ever again.
- Solar technology is always good. If they can find a way to utilize such technology and attach it to the top of cars or laptops, or anything it would be neat and efficient.

Just my two cents.

[lurch]

for some reason there has always been some religious fear about altering our bodies and im not sure where that comes from.
The Bible, Book of Revelations, see: "Mark of the Beast". It's a bit complex to explain here, but it's long been theorized that the "mark" will be related to economic/political freedoms.
While this is true what Revelation says, I don't think that's why people were opposed to things like pacemakers, for example. For "religious" people, they view their bodies not as their own, but as belonging to God (this is something that is common in many religions, not just Christianity), thus they hesitate to "modify" their bodies (introduce something non-natural) because it can sometimes be difficult to determine where the line is between "letting go and letting God", and using knowledge He has given to better our quality of life, or even our length of life. Seems that most of the time people have leaned towards letting go and letting God, hence the "fear about altering our bodies".

[Eitel]

Wow, I can't believe nobody has said it yet.

'We are the Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile" :D :D

[Steven Cedrone]

Slap that sticker on my forehead that reads: "Intel Inside"... :wink:

Steve

[shekondar]

Our skin cells die and are sloughed off every so often. I think it is every few weeks or so. Since this is the case, we will be replacing our cells and phones monthly, rather than annually. :wink:

Only the outer layer. If you put it deep enough, it will be permanent - that's why tattoos are permanent...

[Roosterman]

Some one brought up 1984. That would be my biggest fear, some government/corportion using it in some way to track activities. Not that I am paranoid or anything. :lol: And even if I am paranoid doesn't mean that I'm wrong :? .