Neuralink Blindsight Device

[Maia]

I think it does bear a relationship, but that relationship isn't necessarily obvious to someone seeing for the first time.

I mean, someone who's seen for their whole life can feel a shape they've never felt before, and could probably have a good guess on what that shape looks like.

But someone who has never seen has never excercised those mental muscles to understand how those things relate to each other. What's odd is, to a sighted person, it seems like it should be obvious, even to someone who's only just begun seeing, but regardless of how it seems to us, it's just not the case. And that raises some interesting questions I think.

I suppose the nearest equivalent for me is recognising something by echolocation, and by touch.

Just out of curiosity do you feel 'sorry' for those who have been 'echolocation disable' since birth and/or do you 'look for' things/qualities in others to make up for 'their lack of this ability'?

Can I tell if a tree is a tree, a chair a chair, and so on, using one or the other? Obviously, yes.

And, so if you, 'magically', were just ABLE TO SEE do you think that you would be able to tell 'a tree' is 'a tree', and if yes, then do you also think you would be able to distinguish ('that shape' of) 'a tree' from (the shape of) 'a chair', just by 'sight' alone?

I try not to feel sorry for people who can't echolocate, as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

No, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between things just by sight alone, without practice.

[Gary Childress]

as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

I apologize. I don't know if my comments came off as me feeling "sorry" for you or not. Conversation is probably not my strong suit. I was more admiring the way you conduct yourself on the forum and that you conduct yourself well in spite of perhaps not being as privileged in some ways as some of us are. That seems admirable to me. I find your posts much more rational and thoughtful than my own posts for sure. I think it shows that we can still nurture the humanity in us in spite of what may seem like setbacks or obstacles that others don't have. (And maybe me viewing it as a setback or obstacle is incorrect.)

However, I understand the desire not to be felt "sorry" for. That is also an admirable trait. It was not the intention of my post, however, as I say, I struggle with conversation sometimes.

To put a little more context to my post, I had just been on the ChatGPT website prior, asking ChatGPT how I could help make the world a better place and be a better person in my online presence and "practicing kindness" came up as one of the ways I could improve my online presence. So when I saw your post, I was trying to form a kind response. But kindness takes some practice for me. (I'm usually very negative.)

[Age]

I suppose the nearest equivalent for me is recognising something by echolocation, and by touch.

Just out of curiosity do you feel 'sorry' for those who have been 'echolocation disable' since birth and/or do you 'look for' things/qualities in others to make up for 'their lack of this ability'?

Can I tell if a tree is a tree, a chair a chair, and so on, using one or the other? Obviously, yes.

And, so if you, 'magically', were just ABLE TO SEE do you think that you would be able to tell 'a tree' is 'a tree', and if yes, then do you also think you would be able to distinguish ('that shape' of) 'a tree' from (the shape of) 'a chair', just by 'sight' alone?

I try not to feel sorry for people who can't echolocate, as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

Thank you for clarifying how lucky and privileged you have been in Life, and thank you for clarifying the absolute absurdity to 'feeling sorry' for those who are just born 'the way' that they are.

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

No, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between things just by sight alone, without practice.

Thank you for clarifying.

Do you really think that the 'mental map of shapes', which you have already formed, would not help you to distinguish, nor help you to tell the difference, between things, just by sight alone?

And, how long or how much actual practice do you envision you would need before you could, for example, tell the difference between the two things 'chair' and 'tree'?

[Wizard22]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

[accelafine]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

Not all of them. But yes, some babies do seem to be particularly 'angry' with their predicament. I've found they are the ones who tend to have early milestones like crawling and walking.

[Gary Childress]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

Not all of them. But yes, some babies do seem to be particularly 'angry' with their predicament. I've found they are the ones who tend to have early milestones like crawling and walking.

One of my favorite quotes on progress and being unreasonable (possibly because I can be unreasonable sometimes):

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw

[Age]

as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

I apologize. I don't know if my comments came off as me feeling "sorry" for you or not.

Well considering that the ACTUAL WORDS that you SAID and WROTE, TO "maia", were, 'I'm sorry to hear that you have been blind since birth', how do you think THOSE WORDS would have 'come off', EXACTLY?

Conversation is probably not my strong suit.

I see you 'conversing' 'perfectly fine' "gary childress". It is just a shame that 'the words', and 'the language', that was getting USED, (taught AND learned) in the days when this is being written, was just SO OLD, OUTDATED, and INHERENTLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.

I was more admiring the way you conduct yourself on the forum and that you conduct yourself well in spite of perhaps not being as privileged in some ways as some of us are.

Yes 'we' could CLEARLY SEE what you were ADMIRING. What just FEELS COMPLETELY Wrong, well to some of 'us' anyway, is COMPARING 'the way' one conducts "them" 'self' WITH a missing physical sense.

I, for One, am COMPLETELY UNSURE how just not having a physical sense would IMPACT one's ABILITY to ' conduct "them" 'self' '.

you are OBVIOUSLY NOT PRIVILEGED in 'the way' as some of 'us' are, in that you are MISSING a 'physical sense', but what, EXACTLY, has 'this' got to do with 'the way' that you CONDUCT "yourself", or not?

That seems admirable to me.

Would you, REALLY, WANT others to 'admire' you, FOR you just 'being you', ONLY?

I find your posts much more rational and thoughtful than my own posts for sure. I think it shows that we can still nurture the humanity in us in spite of what may seem like setbacks or obstacles that others don't have.

Do you see that the physical DISABILITY that you were born with as A 'setback' OR 'obstacle'?

If yes, then HOW and WHY, EXACTLY?

But, if no, then WHY NOT?

(And maybe me viewing it as a setback or obstacle is incorrect.)

YES IT IS, and VERY MUCH SO.

However, I understand the desire not to be felt "sorry" for. That is also an admirable trait.

"gary childress" do you, REALLY, WANT others to feel SORRY, FOR you?

'We' can ALL see that you come, here, WANTING some sort of 'sympathy'. But, in the DEEPEST PART OF 'you', OR, at the VERY HEART OF the REAL Self, do you, REALLY, WANT others FEELING SORRY, FOR 'you'?

It was not the intention of my post, however, as I say, I struggle with conversation sometimes.

It IS, and WAS, ABSOLUTELY CLEAR that you HAD and HAVE NO ILL INTENTION, AT ALL. But, UNFORTUNATELY, you are just USING 'the words' IN 'the way' that you have 'grown up' WITH and have 'lived' WITH, but which some of are VERY, VERY Wrong.

By the way "gary childress" you NEVER come across as having an 'ill-willed attitude' towards absolutely ANY one. Now, 'this attitude', of yours, IS one that would be BEST 'admired' BY absolutely EVERY one'.

BUT, just NOT wanting to be felt 'sorry for' is certainly NOT an 'attitude' that one would want to be admired for.

If absolutely ANY one WANTS TO BE 'felt sorry for', then 'that one' NEEDS to take a GOOD HARD LOOK AT "them" 'self', and what IS HAPPENING around 'them'.

To put a little more context to my post, I had just been on the ChatGPT website prior, asking ChatGPT how I could help make the world a better place and be a better person in my online presence and "practicing kindness" came up as one of the ways I could improve my online presence.

WHY just 'practice' 'BEING KIND'? WHY NOT JUST BE 'KIND', ALWAYS?

So when I saw your post, I was trying to form a kind response. But kindness takes some practice for me. (I'm usually very negative.)

you were CERTAINLY NOT trying to be UNKIND, and have NEVER come across as being an 'unkind person' to me, EVER. But what IS NEEDED IS JUST EMPATHY. Which is, more or less, just you FINDING OUT ABOUT 'them', FIRST, and then by JUST 'doing onto them, as you would done onto you', but ONLY AFTER 'putting "yourself" in their shoes', FIRST, as some might say, here.

That is; you may well have 'grown up' WANTING 'sympathy' and others 'FEELING SORRY FOR you'. However, others may NOT WANT 'that' AT ALL, and the BEST WAY to KNOW, FOR SURE, what others REALLY WANT is to SEEK OUT and OBTAIN ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, BEFOREHAND.

[Age]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

To you, do 'they' NOT HAVE 'parents' TO 'look after' AND 'care for' 'them'?

If yes, then 'they' just ACCEPT what 'they' HAVE, while 'they', ALSO, KNOW HOW TO USE what 'they' HAVE. And, this can be DONE by 'crying', or 'bawling their eyes OUT', as you say and call 'it'.

Now, and OBVIOUSLY, ALL of you human beings NEED 'things', (which, by the way, are the EXACT SAME FOUR things, for ALL of you human beings), and you human beings WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET WHAT you NEED, in Life. For example, like, CRYING, BECAUSE even though ALL young children ACCEPT, LIVE BY, and WITH whatever they HAVE, 'they' ALSO OBVIOUSLY NEED TO GET what 'they' NEED TO LIVE.

What 'this one' has MISSED, and which I OBVIOUSLY NEVER made CLEAR ENOUGH, ALL young children do NOT WHINGE NOR WHINE ABOUT what 'they' HAVE. Like, for example, only one or NO legs. They just LIVE WITH whatever they have.

Now, your CLAIM that young children ALWAYS WANT MORE, is OBVIOUSLY False AND Wrong. However, what is just AS OBVIOUS is that you adults APPEAR TO ALWAYS WANT MORE.

Another VERY Wrong and BAD trait of you adult human beings is 'LOOKING AT' or 'SEEING' young children in A NEGATIVE WAY/S like you JUST DID, here.

Young children ONLY WANT MORE OF what they ACTUALLY NEED, in Life, SOLELY.

[Age]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

Not all of them. But yes, some babies do seem to be particularly 'angry' with their predicament. I've found they are the ones who tend to have early milestones like crawling and walking.

The ONLY 'predicament' that they COULD BE and/or WOULD BE so-called 'particularly angry' WITH would be 'the way' adults are MISBEHAVING around them or 'the way' 'the environment' IS, which has, again, by CAUSED BY adult human beings, ONLY.

[Wizard22]

To you, do 'they' NOT HAVE 'parents' TO 'look after' AND 'care for' 'them'?

If yes, then 'they' just ACCEPT what 'they' HAVE, while 'they', ALSO, KNOW HOW TO USE what 'they' HAVE. And, this can be DONE by 'crying', or 'bawling their eyes OUT', as you say and call 'it'.

Now, and OBVIOUSLY, ALL of you human beings NEED 'things', (which, by the way, are the EXACT SAME FOUR things, for ALL of you human beings), and you human beings WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET WHAT you NEED, in Life. For example, like, CRYING, BECAUSE even though ALL young children ACCEPT, LIVE BY, and WITH whatever they HAVE, 'they' ALSO OBVIOUSLY NEED TO GET what 'they' NEED TO LIVE.

What 'this one' has MISSED, and which I OBVIOUSLY NEVER made CLEAR ENOUGH, ALL young children do NOT WHINGE NOR WHINE ABOUT what 'they' HAVE. Like, for example, only one or NO legs. They just LIVE WITH whatever they have.

Now, your CLAIM that young children ALWAYS WANT MORE, is OBVIOUSLY False AND Wrong. However, what is just AS OBVIOUS is that you adults APPEAR TO ALWAYS WANT MORE.

Another VERY Wrong and BAD trait of you adult human beings is 'LOOKING AT' or 'SEEING' young children in A NEGATIVE WAY/S like you JUST DID, here.

Young children ONLY WANT MORE OF what they ACTUALLY NEED, in Life, SOLELY.

You're such a Robot, AgeGPT...

[Maia]

as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

I apologize. I don't know if my comments came off as me feeling "sorry" for you or not. Conversation is probably not my strong suit. I was more admiring the way you conduct yourself on the forum and that you conduct yourself well in spite of perhaps not being as privileged in some ways as some of us are. That seems admirable to me. I find your posts much more rational and thoughtful than my own posts for sure. I think it shows that we can still nurture the humanity in us in spite of what may seem like setbacks or obstacles that others don't have. (And maybe me viewing it as a setback or obstacle is incorrect.)

However, I understand the desire not to be felt "sorry" for. That is also an admirable trait. It was not the intention of my post, however, as I say, I struggle with conversation sometimes.

To put a little more context to my post, I had just been on the ChatGPT website prior, asking ChatGPT how I could help make the world a better place and be a better person in my online presence and "practicing kindness" came up as one of the ways I could improve my online presence. So when I saw your post, I was trying to form a kind response. But kindness takes some practice for me. (I'm usually very negative.)

There's honestly nothing to apologise for, and I wasn't offended in any way.

[Maia]

Just out of curiosity do you feel 'sorry' for those who have been 'echolocation disable' since birth and/or do you 'look for' things/qualities in others to make up for 'their lack of this ability'?


And, so if you, 'magically', were just ABLE TO SEE do you think that you would be able to tell 'a tree' is 'a tree', and if yes, then do you also think you would be able to distinguish ('that shape' of) 'a tree' from (the shape of) 'a chair', just by 'sight' alone?

I try not to feel sorry for people who can't echolocate, as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

Thank you for clarifying how lucky and privileged you have been in Life, and thank you for clarifying the absolute absurdity to 'feeling sorry' for those who are just born 'the way' that they are.

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

No, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between things just by sight alone, without practice.

Thank you for clarifying.

Do you really think that the 'mental map of shapes', which you have already formed, would not help you to distinguish, nor help you to tell the difference, between things, just by sight alone?

And, how long or how much actual practice do you envision you would need before you could, for example, tell the difference between the two things 'chair' and 'tree'?

Well, according to that report, it took some people as much as a year to be able to distinguish things by sight alone, and that feels perfectly reasonable to me. The mental map I have in my mind is not a visual one.

[Age]

To you, do 'they' NOT HAVE 'parents' TO 'look after' AND 'care for' 'them'?

If yes, then 'they' just ACCEPT what 'they' HAVE, while 'they', ALSO, KNOW HOW TO USE what 'they' HAVE. And, this can be DONE by 'crying', or 'bawling their eyes OUT', as you say and call 'it'.

Now, and OBVIOUSLY, ALL of you human beings NEED 'things', (which, by the way, are the EXACT SAME FOUR things, for ALL of you human beings), and you human beings WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET WHAT you NEED, in Life. For example, like, CRYING, BECAUSE even though ALL young children ACCEPT, LIVE BY, and WITH whatever they HAVE, 'they' ALSO OBVIOUSLY NEED TO GET what 'they' NEED TO LIVE.

What 'this one' has MISSED, and which I OBVIOUSLY NEVER made CLEAR ENOUGH, ALL young children do NOT WHINGE NOR WHINE ABOUT what 'they' HAVE. Like, for example, only one or NO legs. They just LIVE WITH whatever they have.

Now, your CLAIM that young children ALWAYS WANT MORE, is OBVIOUSLY False AND Wrong. However, what is just AS OBVIOUS is that you adults APPEAR TO ALWAYS WANT MORE.

Another VERY Wrong and BAD trait of you adult human beings is 'LOOKING AT' or 'SEEING' young children in A NEGATIVE WAY/S like you JUST DID, here.

Young children ONLY WANT MORE OF what they ACTUALLY NEED, in Life, SOLELY.

You're such a Robot, AgeGPT...

ONCE MORE, here is ANOTHER example of when a human being BELIEVES some thing to be true, and then they are NOT ABLE TO 'look' AND 'see' ANY thing DIFFERENT.

AND, let 'us' NOT FORGET that you have NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO COUNTER NOR REFUTE what I have SAID and POINTED OUT and SHOWN, here.

you, however, have been ABLE TO JUST SAY and CLAIM Truly RIDICULOUS 'things', like you just HAVE, here, ONCE AGAIN.

[Maia]

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

This is completely false.

All young children, infants specifically, cry and bawl their eyes out because they do NOT accept what they have. They always want more.

I was a real terror for that sort of thing, when I was little.

Thankfully, I grew out of it.

[Age]

I try not to feel sorry for people who can't echolocate, as no one with any sort of disability wants to be felt sorry for. Having said that, I don't always succeed in not feeling sorry for people, for whatever reason, and I'm fully aware of how lucky and privileged I've been in life.

Thank you for clarifying how lucky and privileged you have been in Life, and thank you for clarifying the absolute absurdity to 'feeling sorry' for those who are just born 'the way' that they are.

ALL young children just ACCEPT and LIVE BY and WITH whatever they HAVE.

No, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between things just by sight alone, without practice.

Thank you for clarifying.

Do you really think that the 'mental map of shapes', which you have already formed, would not help you to distinguish, nor help you to tell the difference, between things, just by sight alone?

And, how long or how much actual practice do you envision you would need before you could, for example, tell the difference between the two things 'chair' and 'tree'?

Well, according to that report, it took some people as much as a year to be able to distinguish things by sight alone, and that feels perfectly reasonable to me.

Okay, but, OBVIOUSLY, what is just 'according to a report' is NOT necessarily True, Right, Accurate, NOR Correct, at all nor even partly.

Now, MAYBE the 'sight' was NOT the BEST, from the OUTSET, and it took A year to be ABLE TO SEE, properly, in order to distinguish things by sight, alone.

However, I would be VERY SURPRISED if an adult who has been 'blind', from birth, and who was 'magically' gains 'sight' is ABLE TO 'see', as good as the majority of adults can see, that it would take more than the one HEARING on the first time, 'That is A tree, and, that is A chair', and then it would take any time AFTER 'that moment' to distinguish between, or tell the difference, between the two.

The mental map I have in my mind is not a visual one.

Okay thank you for clarifying.

Are you able to begin to explain what the 'mental map of shapes', which you have, is like?