# What does it take to network 30Million  minds implanted on your head?



## darknite_johanne (May 14, 2010)

Hey people,
   Need help on the following things:


  1) What does it take to connect the minds of 30million people like the internet? What mode of communication? Would it clot the airwaves? Alternative methods of connecting?


2) Ideas on killing and targeting a specific person anywhere on the globe?  Tracking methods?


Here’s the pitch of my idea. In the future, democracy has been given full power to the people because of the Hive Mind. If enough people wanted to kill the president of a country, and had voted to do so; the president would drop dead. The same with every other person in the world. Fear of the Collective masses had begun.


Technically speaking what does it take to do this?


----------



## Mike C (May 14, 2010)

Imagination.

Technically, it can't be done, so make something plausible up.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (May 14, 2010)

darknite_johanne said:


> Here’s the pitch of my idea. In the future, democracy has been given full power to the people because of the Hive Mind. If enough people wanted to kill the president of a country, and had voted to do so; the president would drop dead. The same with every other person in the world. Fear of the Collective masses had begun.


Interesting premise.  It could make a good utopian/dystopian novel.  Love the idea.



darknite_johanne said:


> 1) What does it take to connect the minds of 30million people like the internet? What mode of communication? Would it clot the airwaves? Alternative methods of connecting?
> 
> 
> 2) Ideas on killing and targeting a specific person anywhere on the globe?  Tracking methods?
> ...


Well The Matrix comes to mind.  Having everyone connected through a simulated reality.  That would certainly connect everyone's mind.


----------



## Sigg (May 14, 2010)

I had thought of something similar, the next-generation internet where the mind is directly interfaced with the network.

In technical terms I don't think there is anyone here (or anywhere) who can outline the details for you because it doesn't exist right now. But from a high level you'd need the same thing as any functional system, namely : Input, Output, Function.

Use your imagination though. For example, the tech to translate messages/commands from a persons mind into an input for the network could be analogous to existing technologies in computers (and in fact would probably evolve from there). In this case, you have the interface between the software (the brain) and the hardware (whatever implants or external devices are required) via drivers, the same way a PC works. It really isn't any different, assuming an efficient, reliable, systematic method for interpreting properties of the mind could be created in a useful way. It's all up to you.

The crutch of this is the "killing ppl through the internutz" business. I don't foresee an issue with the technology side, you can make something plausible up for that, but I think you'll have a difficult time explaining how people allowed a system to be set up like that. Coming up with a realistic reason for people to submit themselves to a system with absolutely no safety from external harm could be tricky. In my mind, the more realistic scenario would be, the tech is all there but there are safety systems built in (like anti-virus, firewalls are for PCs today) so you couldn't be physically harmed or have your mind corrupted by someone else on the mind-internet or whatever.

I think that whole sociological explanation will be far more important than the technology itself for the story because it sounds like the effects of that decision are core to the theme of the story.

Anyhow, good luck with your story.


----------



## darknite_johanne (May 15, 2010)

The idea started during election week in our country and reading an article on forbes about how the internet was giving democracy back to the masses. Elections are nasty stuff. So i get to thinking, why if all of us can vote at real time, and have him (the candidate) impeached, then there would be no problem.

And I took the idea further, what if we voted for the person to actually die?

As for the dangers of being killed without even knowing it. I think there would at least be millions of people voting that you should die. 

My ideas include the use of nanobots broadcasting signals to the infrastructure, and at the same time capable of injecting deadly poison to your bloodstream. Or maybe kinda like the apps and freeware on the internet. The Internet system or Hive Mind, existed for connecting people but this genious made a freeware on online voting where they could actually vote on killing a person. In this future everyone has nanobots. And this crazy guy believed that control should be given back to the people.

Failsafe devices included so they could never write anything on your brain.

Now as to what brought this system about is something to think upon. World war 3 has been used to death.

An idea for the MC starts out with this. He voted for the first time using that software in his brain. what he didn't know was that he's the person who tipped the scale. for example, 14M people voted that the president shouldn't die, while the other 14M voted that he should. He was lucky that he's the person who tipped the scale. he was the 14,000,001th person. And now the government's on him.

everything's at a brainstorming process right now, and I'm welcome to your comments and ideas.


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

Nanobots or AI are too much deus ex machina. They're theoretically capable of anything and make lazy plotting easy.
Instead of poison or bots, you just change the permissions of the software remotely. From "read only" to "write". It's best not to overcomplicate something like that. At least imo.
Stephenson's Snow Crash is recommended reading.


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

Very true.
Computer hacking is the same way.  Take a nerd, give him a terminal and he can do anything that needs to be done.



(Except get laid)


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

darknite_johanne said:


> The idea started during election week in our country and reading an article on forbes about how the internet was giving democracy back to the masses. Elections are nasty stuff. So i get to thinking, why if all of us can vote at real time, and have him (the candidate) impeached, then there would be no problem.
> 
> And I took the idea further, what if we voted for the person to actually die?
> 
> ...


 
Ok 2 suggestions :

1.) I'd stay away from using the name Hive Mind in the actual story
2.) the first realistic sounding explanation for the whole system to go into place that popped into my mind is "change". Show that the previous administration was so absolutely atrocious and oppressive that when a charismatic guy came around preaching about change and giving the power back to the people, everyone supported him. It's happened for real in history and has turned out pretty horribly on occasion.

I also agree with mod, in terms of the tech, the nanobots is a little too easy. If it were me writing it, I'd try to stick as closely to the analogy of software and computer systems that exist today as possible. You could even go so far as to describe the evolution of the technology. i.e. "When they first invented the tech, it was a big clunky apparatus so you had to go to special stores to use them, then they made the home edition which slipped right over your head, now they have wireless, no implants or gadgets needed."


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

Avoid "hive mind" but use "change"????

Interesting.

How about Borg?


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

Um what?  You have made an art of cherry picking and putting words into my mouth.


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

Okay,  "stay away from" Hive mind  and "realistic explanation" is change.  That better?

Is there something you don't understand? Or that I've misunderstood?


 Is there some reason you're feeling picked-on here?


----------



## Foxee (May 15, 2010)

Cellphones. Specifically Crackberries...and texting. Only half-kidding. If you force something on people they'll resist, if you give people something they might not see enough value in it to use it, but if you SELL people on something addictive they're yours.

Shhh...that's my evil plan.


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

Sorry then maybe I didn't explain. Those are 2 seperate suggestions. By stay away from "hive mind" I just meant the words "hive mind" not the concept. At least for me, it brings with it a lot of connotations that I don't think make sense in the frame of what he is proposing.

The change thing (the concept, not word) makes sense to me because it plays on basic, realistic, human nature which can be adapted from something that has happened in history (for example the rise of hitler)


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

Ah.   So Hitler comes to your mind from "change", not recent POTUS peeps?  
I figured you meant the words "hive mind", but assumed you were saying that they had been used, done to death, and had references that would dillute them.   And therefore that "change", having been a single-word campaign all over America, would be just as degraded.


Multiply the difficulties in just_ two _minds meshing in the aether by 15 million, and it starts looking unlikely.


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

I've been using this concept, more or less, in my fiction since 1979. Originally I called it Linked-In. Should have trademarked that one, but shit happens. My idea began with something like a cellphone and/or radio antenna, just a single wire, implanted behind an ear, and a little piece of hardware that could be worn as an earring, and mushroomed into people using their skins as circuit boards. Still do that, and there's some pooling of information, but workarounds have been developed.
Gotta stay away from the term Hive Mind. Make it a pool or something, friggin mindweb, clusterf*ck (John Shirley actually used that one). It's not at all a new idea in cyberpunk-oriented stuff. The difference you can make is in how you treat the idea.


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

lin said:


> Ah. So Hitler comes to your mind from "change", not recent POTUS peeps?
> I figured you meant the words "hive mind", but assumed you were saying that they had been used, done to death, and had references that would dillute them. And therefore that "change", having been a single-word campaign all over America, would be just as degraded.
> 
> 
> Multiply the difficulties in just_ two _minds meshing in the aether by 15 million, and it starts looking unlikely.



Ah yeah the connotation is all in how it's presented.  The change itself is just a change in circumstances, to exact that change it doesn't necessarily have to be a new administration versus an old one.  For example, in the case of Germany, after they lost WWI they were forced to pay France among other countries all kinds of money and goods, which completely destroyed the German economy.  Because of that, they were so poor and miserable that it paved the way for a charismatic guy, promising to put food on the table and to restore Germany to it's former standing in the world.

It's all in the implementation of the idea, but it is good to be aware of these things.  If he didn't want to reference the current US administration then maybe he'd stay away from my original idea of hopeful new administration promises change from bad old administration or whatever.


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

Maybe styrofoam cups and silly string would work too?
Sigg, you do notice that darknite isn't in the good old US of A?


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

moderan said:


> Maybe styrofoam cups and silly string would work too?
> Sigg, you do notice that darknite isn't in the good old US of A?



Yes I do


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

Thought so.
Smoke signals?


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

I recall a time when millions of minds were melded together by smoke.


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

I don't remember the sixties


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 15, 2010)

They say if you do you didn't do it right.



My feeling be those who remember just didn't do enough.


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

That's what they say...though most folks just weren't alive at the time. I was just a kid but the contact high was tremendous


----------



## Sigg (May 15, 2010)

I'm pretty sure my dad was one of the few people who didn't smoke pot, ever. haha


----------



## moderan (May 15, 2010)

Between, say, 1967-1973, you didn't have to. It's like they say about the Communist Party-you don't find party. Party finds you


----------



## darknite_johanne (May 17, 2010)

people wanting change is a universal idea, and I appreciate your comments Sigg. I won't call it Hive-Mind then, sounds unoriginal too.

I'll take your comments about nanomachines to mind.

 I want the setting to be of mix ethnicity though. any ideas?


----------



## moderan (May 17, 2010)

Not too many places in the world don't have some kind of a mix. You could theoretically put your story anywhere.


----------



## Sigg (May 17, 2010)

darknite_johanne said:


> people wanting change is a universal idea, and I appreciate your comments Sigg. I won't call it Hive-Mind then, sounds unoriginal too.
> 
> I'll take your comments about nanomachines to mind.
> 
> I want the setting to be of mix ethnicity though. any ideas?



Do you want the mixed ethnicities to be a point of conflict in the story?  It would certainly make for an interesting sociopolitical dynamic... For example, it all truly becomes a numbers game at that point.  The politician would pander to the largest group of people possible so that they don't get murdered via internet.  That could spark violent conflicts between the various socioeconomic groups as well.  So basically, like it is in real life, only the severity knob is turned all the way up since the stakes are so high.


----------



## darknite_johanne (May 17, 2010)

Sigg said:


> Do you want the mixed ethnicities to be a point of conflict in the story?  It would certainly make for an interesting sociopolitical dynamic... For example, it all truly becomes a numbers game at that point.  The politician would pander to the largest group of people possible so that they don't get murdered via internet.  That could spark violent conflicts between the various socioeconomic groups as well.  So basically, like it is in real life, only the severity knob is turned all the way up since the stakes are so high.


 
That is one amazing idea! I've never thought of it that way. but I like it already. It would really be interesting to see how the politicians would try to please everybody. haha


----------



## columbo1977 (Jul 14, 2010)

Does it have to be Tech?? what about some sort of Telepathy linking them all?


----------



## darknite_johanne (Jul 16, 2010)

columbo1977 said:


> Does it have to be Tech?? what about some sort of Telepathy linking them all?


how would it happen? evolution? I wanted it to be a bit futuristic. but any ideas are welcome


----------



## columbo1977 (Jul 16, 2010)

darknite_johanne said:


> how would it happen? evolution? I wanted it to be a bit futuristic. but any ideas are welcome


 
Either evolution or some sort of computer chip installed in each person when they are born that activates parts of the brain that we dont use (if you want to go for the Tech version)

What does averyone else think?


----------



## Linton Robinson (Jul 16, 2010)

Verizon?


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Jul 16, 2010)

lin said:


> Verizon?



No, definitely AT&T.  Or Kricket if you're cheap.


----------

