Both Neuralink's brain-computer interface (BCI) chip and Apple's Vision Pro headset have technologists peeking into their crystal balls, wondering if either could become a viable mechanism for operating the computer of the future.
"The debate between headsets and implants as the computer of the future is fascinating, with significant developments on both fronts," Matthew Price, Founder and Editor at Maccidents, told TechTimes in an interview.
But considering both technologies' current states and potential, Price believes headsets are more likely to become the computer of the future, at least for the general populace. That's because they offer advanced interaction without the ethical and health implications of a brain surgery one would need to undergo to get an implant.
"Implants, while promising for specific medical applications and deeper integration with technology, face significant barriers in widespread acceptance due to the invasiveness and the high stakes of surgical complications," said Price.
Implants aren't for everyone
Vaclav Vincalek, virtual CTO and founder of 555vCTO, agrees. "Implants are so invasive, it's hard to imagine the majority of the population opting to undergo what is essentially brain surgery in order to have a computer, for what, remote work?" Vincalek told TechTimes in an interview.
He believes implanting a chip in a complex organ like the brain raises ethical, privacy, and safety concerns. The idea of directly interfacing with the brain doesn't sit right with him since it raises too many questions about consent, security, and the potential for misuse or even abuse of the technology.
"If the chip is malfunctioning, you can't just take it into your local Best Buy to diagnose the issue. You will need a highly qualified surgeon," said Vincalek.
While we won't be queuing up to get computer-controlling implants anytime soon, Price believes BCIs like Neuralink could one day enable people with quadriplegia to control devices with thoughts, aiming to restore functions like vision and motor skills.
"This technology, while primarily focused on medical applications, hints at broader uses, including seamless interaction with digital worlds without physical inputs," said Price.
The case for headsets
For the moment, Price believes headsets, exemplified by projects like Neurable, offer a more accessible and non-invasive approach to integrating our thoughts with virtual environments, bypassing traditional sensory inputs like sight and sound.
This resonates with Vincalek, too. "I would lean more towards headset rather than implant, simply for logistics reasons. A headset can be mass-produced. They are immediate. And most importantly, they are far less invasive than a surgically implanted chip," said Vincalek.
Pointing to the fact that headsets already let users immerse themselves in digital environments, Vincalek thinks using them for computing or work by overlaying digital information onto the real world is the logical next step.
And, of course, if a component in the headset (or the headset itself) fails, it can be repaired or replaced far more easily than an implant.
It's all in your head
Steven Athwal, Managing Director at The Big Phone Store, isn't too gung-ho about either. He thinks any emerging technology needs to solve a problem for the user to be worth consumers investing in it. Pointing to the success of the iPhone, he says it was groundbreaking because it eliminated many frustrations people already had with their mobile phones.
"The jump from phones to VR is a lot less intuitive. In many ways, a product like the Apple Vision Pro is far more inconvenient than the tech we currently use," Athwal told TimesTimes in an interview. He thinks the current-gen headsets like the Vision Pro are too bulky, quick to run out of charge, more challenging to use than a phone, and expensive.
"If VR headsets are something that will one day replace our familiar devices, the technology will need to be far more advanced than anything that currently exists," believes Athwal.
He feels the same way about the Neuralink. The rewards must significantly outweigh the risks for someone to undergo the expensive surgery of getting an implant.
"If the only benefit is to do something you could already do with your thumbs (or voice if you need to be hands-free), then it isn't solving those real-world problems that make it worth investing in," said Athwal.
VR headsets will eventually be helpful in specific workplace applications, training simulations, learning, design, and entertainment. Similarly, he sees Neuralink carving a niche for itself in medicine and possibly even some military applications as well.
"But if you ask me what will be our go-to device 100 years from now, I'd put money on something that looks similar to the smartphone - something that we can touch, hold, feel, and fidget with. Something that's simple to write code for and that gets the job done," said Athwal.
About the author: Mayank Sharma is a technology writer with two decades of experience in breaking down complex technology and getting behind the news to help his readers get to grips with the latest buzzwords and industry milestones. He has had bylines on NewsForge, Linux.com, IBM developerWorks, Linux User & Developer magazine, Linux Voice magazine, Linux Magazine, and HackSpace magazine. In addition to Tech Times, his current roster of publications include TechRadar Pro, and Linux Format magazine. Follow him at https://twitter.com/geekybodhi
