backtop

Print 60 comment(s) - last by johnsonx.. on Feb 28 at 10:51 PM
Chinese researchers became the first to control pigeons via remote control

Scientists from the Robot Engineering Technology Research Center at Shandong University of Science and Technology successfully used micro electrodes implanted in a pigeon's brain to make it fly left, right, up or down.  The scientists used implants to stimulate different sections of the pigeon brain according to signals that scientists sent via a computer, which forced the pigeon to comply with the operator’s instructions.    

Su Xuecheng, chief scientist on the project, said that his trials are the first experiment conducted like this in the world -- the scientists previously tried something similar with lab mice two years ago. Improvements in device design and technology is one of the leading reasons this trial worked.

The Chinese team did not specify exactly how the remote-control pigeon would be utilized in real-world applications.  Su has successfully carried out the same experiments on mice since 2005.

The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is also working on trying to control animals.  Earlier this year, DARPA announced a project to actively manipulate a shark's brain signal, allowing scientists to accurately control the shark's movements.  This technology would be used to help these 'stealth sharks' patrol the open seas.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Warld War lV
By serpy on 2/27/2007 5:55:33 AM , Rating: 4
Great !! The next World War will be fought using animals as a weapon.




RE: Warld War lV
By TSS on 2/27/2007 7:11:03 AM , Rating: 3
just 1 extra electrode and we have ourselves very cheap renewable chemical bombs.

but technically, its not a bad idea to use a pidgeon as a weapon. if you can make it dive or fly at full speed right into somebody's face with its beak, it would do some damage. besides that, ever seen the damage a bird can do to a car on the highway? and usuing the theory above, if you can infect a pidgeon, fly it to the enemy base and make it shit all over the place, it's not a bad way to disperse a chemical agent.

but thats all negative ways of looking at this, how about this: this beats the heck out of my RC-car.


RE: Warld War lV
By yacoub on 2/27/2007 7:56:23 AM , Rating: 5
RE: Warld War lV
By Quiksel on 2/27/2007 9:58:56 AM , Rating: 2
that pic needs a "PWNED" moniker photoshopped onto it. Great pic. :)


RE: Warld War lV
By Cybercat on 2/27/2007 9:12:56 AM , Rating: 2
Or, more likely spy missions.


RE: Warld War lV
By Scabies on 2/27/2007 9:59:09 AM , Rating: 4
You guys are thinking poop and your priceless paintjob, but what about when these birds are shot up with Ebola or a human-communicable strain of Avian Flu and then are remote controlled to ones enemy of choice? A dirty car is the least of your worries when you start vomiting your internal organs.


RE: Warld War lV
By Comdrpopnfresh on 2/27/2007 9:24:19 AM , Rating: 4
IV? When was III?


RE: Warld War lV
By TSS on 2/27/2007 10:35:50 AM , Rating: 5
after II.

....you didnt get the memo?


RE: Warld War lV
By glennpratt on 2/27/2007 10:37:01 AM , Rating: 2
Besides, Alber Einstein already told us: "World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."


RE: Warld War lV
By jskirwin on 2/27/2007 12:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
No one ever finishes his quote "... And remember: sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo." He then stuck out his tongue - an image captured forever by his biographer and turned into posters that hang in cubicles the world over.


RE: Warld War lV
By johnsonx on 2/27/2007 2:38:40 PM , Rating: 2
Some suggest that the Cold War, though it never became a global 'hot' war, was in fact World War III. Others suggest that the current 'war on terror' is actually World War III (the current war is more honestly described as a war against radical fundamentalist islam, which does make it a world war, but we're not allowed to say that). Then of course you've got those who subscribe to both theories, which makes the current conflict World War IV.


RE: Warld War lV
By encryptkeeper on 2/27/2007 2:48:09 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't anyone remember that Congress is the only power in the US that can declare war? Therefore, the fighting in the middle east is not a "War" it is a conflict (I'm trying to make sure people understand how history truly views 'war', not degrade what the troops are doing or what type of horrible conditions they are under). Take the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Since Congress never formally declared war, they were not War. History correctly refers to them as the Korean Conflict, or the Vietnam Conflict. Bush declared 'war' on terror, and that was nothing more than words. The president cannot make a formal declaration of war against anyone. But he has the power to send troops, and the power granted to him in 2002 is now haunting the US because Congress isn't able to simply take it from him. See what happens when checks and balances go out of sync?


RE: Warld War lV
By GoatMonkey on 2/27/2007 3:02:37 PM , Rating: 2
This is World War V. You guys forgot the war on drugs.


RE: Warld War lV
By PrezWeezy on 2/27/2007 4:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the power was granted to him by the War Powers Act in 1973 which allowed the president to send troops 60 days before warning congress. The downside of which is by the time the 60 days are up we are already commited to it, and no congress would ever loose so much face as to pull the troops back. This effectively allows the President to declare "war" on a country without congressional approval. It was a good idea, but not very well thought out. Very true about the checks and balances being out of wack though.


RE: Warld War lV
By Ringold on 2/27/2007 11:04:23 PM , Rating: 3
Congress is unable to take it? Interesting; I'd wondered how liberals were justifying to themselves their politicians lack of stones in simply not using their congressional majority to simply defund the war.

Congress can stop anything it wants. It'd rather just whine. Don't suggest otherwise.

In on the topic of checks and balances.. the system is operating poorly, yes, but we agree coming from totally opposite perspectives I'd imagine.

Did Lincoln consult Congress before he called for 74,000 troops in 1861? Nope. Did Lincoln seek funding from Congress? Nope. Did he, or Congress, bother to create the proper Constitutional amendment that was necessary to legally enact a national income tax? Nope. In fact, did he ask permission for almost anything for the entire duration of the war? Nope. Congress was largely handed a set of rubber stamps and while they occasionally bristled, they allowed him to run the war effort. Lincoln sure as hell didn't get Congress and the states to ratify the constitutional amendments necessary for many of his actions; he essentially threw much of the bill of rights out the window for the duration of the war, and the Reconstruction era is scarcely any better from a legal perspective. Another oft-praised president, F.D. Roosevelt, took matters routinely in to his own unconstitutional hands when it best served his goals. Both of these presidents exercised what's come to be known as executive prerogative. As one historian notes, American is special not because we've avoided dictatorship but because when the crisis is over our shadow dictators allow the wheels of democracy to continue turning. In fact, it's rather amazing that we even held elections in 1884; elections during that level of war was unprecedented, and if I remember reading correctly, continental Europe was rather astounded we even bothered! And then, when the conflict is over.. well, they didn't yield their powers, they both died, but in both cases Congress slowly snipped the Executive branch's wings back to proper peace-time proportions. They'll do so again after the war on islamic fascism is over but starting the process now would be rather premature, no?

A war can't be run by committee -- especially not a committee of two houses for a total of 535 airbags, each more concerned with elections than national interests. Lincoln knew it, Roosevelt knew it, they both deceived and manipulated Congress and the public to do what they thought necessary to secure what is now, post-Civil War, an established eternal union. Constitutionally, perhaps things may be by the letter of the law out of sync, I agree. Historically, things are moving along just as they always have when the country is threatened but the public asleep at the wheel. The only thing odd about it is actually that Bush hasn't shut down the New York Times yet; I guarantee, Lincoln would've had no reservations...


RE: Warld War lV
By encryptkeeper on 2/27/2007 2:53:08 PM , Rating: 2
Want proof? World War I and II were all from countries making formal declarations of war against each other. History does not record troop battles as war, no matter how large unless the army's government makes a formal declaration of such. Why? Because where do you draw the line? In theory, soldiers from different countries who enter the same bar and fight each other over the same woman could be called war.


RE: Warld War lV
By johnsonx on 2/28/2007 10:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be absurd. Whether or not 'History' calls something a 'war' doesn't have anything at all to do with whether there was some sort of formal declaration of war by anyone. 'History' doesn't have to have formal rules to decide whether something is a war, 'History' knows a war when it sees one. Thus, while there was no formal war declaration in Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq/Kuwait, those conflicts will still always be known as the Korean War, Vietnam War, and The Gulf War. Essentially, a war is a War when we say it's a War.


RE: Warld War lV
By animedude on 2/27/2007 11:27:59 AM , Rating: 2
I bet China can send few of these pigeons in to top US military facility and steal some coooool technologies. No one will know what hit them. Got owned by a pigeon :P.


Spy pigeons
By OhReaLlY on 2/27/2007 5:55:12 AM , Rating: 5
ORLY?




RE: Spy pigeons
By Le Québécois on 2/27/2007 7:33:45 AM , Rating: 5
YA RLY


RE: Spy pigeons
By Larso on 2/27/2007 8:44:56 AM , Rating: 5
NO WAI!!!


RE: Spy pigeons
By TSS on 2/27/2007 9:42:08 AM , Rating: 5
WAI!!!


RE: Spy pigeons
By kmiller1700 on 2/27/2007 1:47:08 PM , Rating: 1
SRSLY?


RE: Spy pigeons
By TSS on 2/27/2007 3:16:18 PM , Rating: 2
RLY!!!


RE: Spy pigeons
By Samus on 2/27/2007 8:48:24 PM , Rating: 2
LOLCOPTER


RE: Spy pigeons
By tuteja1986 on 2/27/2007 9:48:46 AM , Rating: 1
What they don't tell you that thousands of pigeon died to make this a success :(

Now the Chinese army have one way stealth tatical bio weapon pigeon bomber.

What can we use the pigeons for ? assassin Pigeon :)


Pigeon?
By eetnoyer on 2/27/2007 6:24:12 AM , Rating: 5
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't that a picture of a snowy owl?




RE: Pigeon?
By frobizzle on 2/27/2007 7:48:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't that a picture of a snowy owl?

Yeah, I was wondering about that myself. Perhaps it is all part of the plan...disguise the pigeon as an owl so it can infiltrate enemy lines!


RE: Pigeon?
By eetnoyer on 2/27/2007 8:02:09 AM , Rating: 3
Wait, nevermind. That's not a snowy owl. It took me a bit to recognize him, but I think that's actually a picture of Reche Caldwell in the Super Bowl.


RE: Pigeon?
By djtodd on 2/27/2007 8:43:34 AM , Rating: 4
Actually that's the ORLY owl, as they hinted to below.


RE: Pigeon?
By johnsonx on 2/27/2007 2:44:44 PM , Rating: 2
and why does it look so happy? Sure, today it's pigeons... Tomorrow they may be slapping that mind control cap on Owls for night operations.


RE: Pigeon?
By Missing Ghost on 2/28/2007 4:50:48 PM , Rating: 2
You must be new at teh intarwebs.


China, meet PETA...
By devolutionist on 2/27/2007 7:54:06 AM , Rating: 5
Peta, meet China.

Let's keep it clean and come out fighting when you hear the bell ring.

Ready?

DING DING




RE: China, meet PETA...
By PWNettle on 2/27/2007 6:56:47 PM , Rating: 3
I can imagine people from PETA reading something like this and spontaneously combusting. Of course, it's not like China has any respect for human rights, so buggering animals probably doesn't cause anyone over there to blink.


storm troopers
By dome1234 on 2/27/2007 5:58:26 AM , Rating: 2
should we do this?

Experiments such as this certainly help in learning more about our brain, which in turn may result in treatment for patients.

But beyond that, should we be doing "mind control" on animals? I'm interested to know if the stimulus activates the movement mimicking the natural physiology or the stimulus encourages the subject to move due to pain i.e whipping a horse.

Maybe one day we'd see storm troopers escorting a darth umm president.




RE: storm troopers
By derwin on 2/27/2007 12:43:32 PM , Rating: 3
I really doubt we are hijacking the animal's consiousness. Instead, we are interfacing directly with their brains. An electric signal created by a small micro-implant, traviling from the motor cortex to the wings or tail or whatever would seem to the animal (or any living being) exactly as if they had produced it themselves.

The real ethics of this should be whether it is moral or ethical to control an animal with out it even knowing it is being controlled. The question, answered repetedly in history: "yeah..."
Look at any work animal we have ever used (horses, donkeys, or even better, food animals, pigs, chicken, cows). I would rather be under someones control and not know about it than be under forceful control against my will. I guess.


RE: storm troopers
By Scabies on 2/27/2007 1:01:59 PM , Rating: 2
you dont categorize the horse as a food animal? man you need to get out more


By majormajormajormajor on 2/27/2007 6:22:59 AM , Rating: 3

"In the second world war, before electronics became cheap and miniature, the psychologist BF Skinner did some research on pigeon-guided missiles. The pigeon was to sit in a tiny cockpit, having previously been trained to peck keys in such a way as to keep a designated target in the centre of a screen. In the missile, the target would be for real."

See:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4...




By eetnoyer on 2/27/2007 8:35:06 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see the pigeon after the rigors of a missile launch. It probably wouldn't be alive, much less capable of steering the thing. Simulations on a perch are one thing, but the fact that money was actually spent on this research amazes me. How many pigeon-guided missiles were actually launched?

Of course, when I was training to be a Multiple Launch Rocket Systems crewmember in the Army, they were asking for volunteers to fill a specialty within the MOS: in-flight rocket repair. Shockingly enough, they got several people to fall for it. Later experience taught me that there are idiots at all levels of the command structure in the military....


By Fritzr on 2/27/2007 9:47:05 PM , Rating: 2
The stress of launch for the pigeon brained missile was very mild. These were the original smart bomb.

They were just basic aircraft carried bombs with pigeon control gear added. They used similar gear in Afghanistan and Iraq with computers replacing the pigeon.


pessimist?
By Dodg3r on 2/27/2007 7:30:02 AM , Rating: 2
I would like to think that all this research into brain control would lead to some great medical achievement, such as repairing some sort of brain damage (as in a stroke or something). But why is it that I get the feeling that we'll see more military use out of this? I know you guys are kind of joking about this, but only "kind of". I guess we're all aware that the dubious art of killing is more profitable than the art of living... :/




RE: pessimist?
By yacoub on 2/27/2007 7:57:56 AM , Rating: 2
I think it's the oft-repeated reality that technology developed for war leads to great advancement in every-day tech as well.


RE: pessimist?
By Rekonn on 2/27/2007 2:59:50 PM , Rating: 2
Umm, the art of living is very profitable. The drug/healthcare industry is doing quite well last I checked.


human control ?
By armagedon on 2/27/2007 8:28:13 AM , Rating: 3
What's the big deal. Remote control exist for male humans for hundreds of years ! It's called a "wife".




RE: human control ?
By woohoo on 2/27/2007 9:19:19 AM , Rating: 3
But this new technology, we can shut her nagging with a simple "off" button or put her in "suspend" mode. I can only imagine.


Interesting
By shaw on 2/27/2007 9:37:11 AM , Rating: 3
I'm still waiting for us to lasers on shark's heads, but I suppose playing FreeSpace 2 with birds will do.




RE: Interesting
By Mitch101 on 2/27/2007 11:51:28 AM , Rating: 2
We dont even have the Mutated Sea Bass yet much less laser beams on sharks because every animal deserves a hot meal.


By stepone on 2/27/2007 6:08:37 AM , Rating: 3
Do these researchers never learn? Any attempt to control\modify animals results in human sized tasty treats for the animal in question!

Imagine a nice sunny peaceful calm Sunday without a cloud in site. You decide to wash your car and after an hour of hard work your beauty looks brand new again... then suddenly 200 mecha pidgeons come screeching out of the sun and dive bomb your car turning it a distasteful "cream" colour. It's the ultimate in terrorism!!!




Awesome
By ahkey on 2/27/2007 6:38:30 AM , Rating: 3
Now we can re-enact Worms2 in real life! We've got everything but the holy hand grenade and the concrete donkey..




By crystal clear on 2/27/2007 9:38:14 AM , Rating: 3
On first reading this appears as/like propoganda material coming from a SOURCE well known for such things.

On second reading this appears as/like some faked research material/report.(rember the guy who faked his research report)

Reminds me of a comment I put on D.T. sometime ago-

Quote-
IIts WAR
By crystal clear on 1/2/07, Rating: 2
By crystal clear on 1/2/2007 12:35:49 AM , Rating: 2

Atleast in one area the Chinese & Tiwanese are competing like mad-PIGS????-yes its war between the two -

"Whos PIGS Glows better & brighter in the dark"

Come on Piggy -you better glow or you are gone case.
Read about this & more below-

"Taiwan breeds green-glowing pigs "

Scientists in Taiwan say they have bred three pigs that "glow in the dark".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4605...

"Chinese fire up glow-in-the-dark pig"

The glowing Chinese pig - apparently designed to "boost stem cell research" - is unlikely to impress the Taiwanese team which earlier this year managed to produce a full-fat fluorescent pig with green internal organs and a green-tinged skin. ®

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/29/fluorescen...

Wow -"fluorescent pig with green internal organs and a green-tinged skin. "

And-Torch light bright piggys

In daylight, the researchers say the pigs' eyes, teeth and trotters look green. Their skin has a greenish tinge.

In the dark, shine a blue light on them and they glow torch-light bright.




What good will it do?
By Psychless on 2/27/2007 5:46:52 PM , Rating: 1
So now we have a bird that can be controlled by a remote control! Yes, just what I needed now I can fulfill my dream of forcing pigeons to act against their will! <- sarcasm

Please, when I looked at this I thought of no good intentions for this. From using them as weapons to adapting the devices to control humans . (The latter being much less possible but imagine that...)

Even better yet maybe they should make a device that can be attached to either elephants or dolphins that can set everything on fire in a ten mile radius. That would greatly help the slash and burn farmers in the Amazon.

Sometimes those kind of scientists need to think whether what they are doing is useful or not, or even ethical for that matter.

My 2, probably 4 by now, cents.




RE: What good will it do?
By zsouthboy on 2/28/2007 12:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
It's just subsitute electrical signals.

Keep your "ethics" out of my science.

May you get brain damage one day and refuse treatment that came about because of research like this.


ORLY?
By Crazyeyeskillah on 2/28/2007 2:15:40 AM , Rating: 3
ORLY?




Drone?
By GTaudiophile on 2/27/2007 6:57:50 AM , Rating: 2
This whole pigeon thing sounds like a cheap Chinese answer to our multi-million-dollar "Predator" drones!

Go China!




Defense...
By Araemo on 2/27/2007 8:15:47 AM , Rating: 2
While the chinese are researching pigeons to fly them into the jet turbines of our new air superiority fighters, DARPA is designing sharks with frikkin laser beams on their heads to control the oceans for us. Given the the sea is hard to explore and patrol, it would be sensible for DARPA to be building underwater bases and labs. And to effectively patrol them, they need shark guards with frikkin laser beams!

All hail our new shark overlords!




Just Wait!!
By Rollomite on 2/27/2007 11:09:12 AM , Rating: 2
When the Beastmaster catches wind of this plan, shit is gonna hit the fan. Look out China.

Rollo




Commodore 64/128
By ElJefe69 on 2/27/2007 3:23:00 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone, besides me and my friend Ed, have the game:

Potty Pigeon?

was a hot commodore game. I think it was from europe. This is exactly what the game was about.




old news....
By Souka on 2/27/2007 3:23:28 PM , Rating: 2
I've been controlling pigeons for years.

I use my trusty crossman BB gun to activate their "off" button... works like a charm.

>:)




Stop That Pigeon
By Xerstead on 2/27/2007 7:33:44 PM , Rating: 2
To counter this threat the Allies have invested in some old aircraft and have 'The Vulture Squadron' on stand-by. Commanded by Dick Dastardly and his dog Muttley, they are under strict orders to Stop that Pigeon...
http://www.hotink.com/wacky/dastrdly/




Worms anyone
By Samus on 2/27/2007 8:47:43 PM , Rating: 2
Flying Pigeon Granade!!!




"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki