# Would an invasive spinal cord brain computer interface allow healthy individuals communicate with computers faster than typing?

Suppose that our understanding of biology and bio electronic interface technology reaches a point that it is possible to make a spinal cord implant that:

• forwards spinal cord signals exactly as they come
• also duplicates them and sends them to a computer (wirelessly)

In other words: like the UNIX tee util!

Also suppose that we have reached full understanding of the meaning of all spinal cord signals.

If that were possible, would it allow humans to interact with computers faster than typing physically with your hands?

Or would the communication bandwidth be essentially unchanged, since the signals are still going through the spinal cord at the end of the day?

Possibly the device would also have a mode that selectively suppresses e.g. finger movements from being sent to muscles, and only redirects them to the computer instead, to avoid all mechanical inertia.

I'm betting that the answer is yes, since typing a letter requires several muscle movements, and with the implant we could just map each letter to a single muscle. But I wonder how much faster it would allow us to go.

• How do I operate my limbs etc. and communicate at the same time ? How do I prevent my communication signals from turning into random signals to my limbs that contort my body ? How do I prevent signals to move my muscles, etc. from becoming random gibberish send to people or devices ? And to encode in binary for basic comm needs 6 to 7 bits, not one. – StephenG May 12 '18 at 9:54
• The only tee I know is related to golf. UNIX is not exactly mainstream, do you mind explaining better? – L.Dutch May 12 '18 at 10:02
• Unix Tee : It just means you get two copies of the signal, passing one copy through where it was going anyway and feeding the other copy to somewhere else you want it. – StephenG May 12 '18 at 10:14
• I think that answer to this will alway be, yes if you can make it work in the first place. The conversion of nervous signals to digital would be complicated not to mention the translation and interpretation of the commands sent by the user, so the only question is how fast is the signal convertor and translator. And that is something fictional, so it can be as fast as you want it to be. But I don't think it would be easier to use. – Nuloen The Seeker May 12 '18 at 10:24
• @StephenG "How do I operate my limbs" > I think those are all part of perfect engineering / bio understanding hypothesis. – Ciro Santilli 新疆改造中心996ICU六四事件 May 12 '18 at 10:29

Therefore I say that definitely a nervous interface would be faster than a keyboard in exchanging communication with a computer: transmitting a Print "Hello World" via neural interface would be quicker than coordinating the muscles to move the fingers on the keyboard to type the same message.