When I read things like this, I can't help but conclude that ultimately we will become one with our machines: "as far as the cells are concerned, they’re just normal cells that behave normally — but the electronic side actually acts as a sensor network, allowing a computer to interface directly with the cells."
If you think about it, that's actually a pretty easy conclusion to come to, even before stories like this. Every new technology we make is meant to enhance our abilities, and they're always getting smaller and easier to use. What's smaller and easier to use than to have it built right into your body as if it were just there naturally?
Falling in line with Doctorow's piece of fiction, the author of this article seems to be under the impression that once you integrate circuits with cells, you can treat biological systems as if they were software or hardware systems.
We may get to that point some day, but biology is complicated, and cells signal each other in so many interesting chemical ways that it's going to be a long time and a lot of work between us and being able to do anything resembling the sorts of I/O we do with computers.
So please, when you read articles like this, think sensor networks, not programmable biology.
[T]hese cyborg tissues could be used to create very accurate organs-on-a-chip — lab-grown human organs that are encased within computer chips and then used to test drugs or substance toxicity, without harming a single bunny or bonobo.
That's the real story here - making a better OoaC. Organ on a Chip leads to faster testing.
My bet is the goal of this research is to repair spinal cords. I'm sure much more will come from it but, I bet that is why it was undertaken. This is a perfect fit for spinal reconstruction.
17 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 58.5 ms ] threadCory Doctorow wrote 0wnz0red back in 2002 (http://www.salon.com/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/ ) which revolves around literally hacking biology (and is a great read).
Falling in line with Doctorow's piece of fiction, the author of this article seems to be under the impression that once you integrate circuits with cells, you can treat biological systems as if they were software or hardware systems.
We may get to that point some day, but biology is complicated, and cells signal each other in so many interesting chemical ways that it's going to be a long time and a lot of work between us and being able to do anything resembling the sorts of I/O we do with computers.
So please, when you read articles like this, think sensor networks, not programmable biology.
http://manybooks.net/titles/ruckerrother10rucker_ware_tetral...
http://www.amazon.com/Wetware-Computer-Every-Living-Cell/dp/...
Why do so much work if you don't have a dream?
That's the real story here - making a better OoaC. Organ on a Chip leads to faster testing.
If you can have cyborg flesh implants, I don't think you would bother with a smartphone.
---
[1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120458/