Intel researchers in Pittsburgh told journalists today that brain implants are harnessing human brain waves to surf the Internet, manipulate documents, and much more. And just as we told you two years ago, the lucky recipients of these implants will be willing volunteers, not government-controlled guinea pigs. Some of us are now researching cheap flights to Pittsburgh.

Indeed, mobility, transparency, and accessibility are all the terms of the hour; and their advocates are popular laureates. The forefront of the user interface has revolved around concepts such as intuition, organics, and biology.

Gesture technology is removing one barrier that lies between human-to-machine communication; think about that the next time you twirl your iPhone around like an Etch-A-Sketch. Isn't removing the need for physical contact the next rational step? Chien tells us that, although there are many challenges yet to solve, the day of brain-controlled computing isn't so far off.

Dean Pomerleau works for Intel on matters of cognitive neuroscience, machine learning, computer vision, robotics, man-machine interfaces, brain processing of semantic information, and various brain-scanning technologies, such as fMRI, MEG, EEG and ECoG. He and his cohorts are solving the mechanisms of brain waves.

While there's no doubt the use cases are fascinating, Pomerleau also brushes off user concerns about implants, saying, "Eventually people may be willing to be more committed... to brain implants. Imagine being able to surf the Web with the power of your thoughts."

This is the precise line of thinking that Kirkpatrick debates so heatedly - perhaps as much now as he did in his editorial almost two years ago.

Have concerns around user privacy abated since then? Hardly, with Facebook and location-based-tech developers struggling to maintain balance for their users and constant struggles and inquisitions over corporate storage of user data. Has the issue of information overload lessened? If it had, would so many startups be staking their claim on the issue of firehose filtration? And is mobile tech obsolete enough to require even more portable access to the apps we love and - dare I say it? - need?

Are end users ready for brain implants? You tell us.

The report, entitled 'Getting Real Work Done In Virtual Worlds', states that Virtual worlds like Second Life, There.com, and "more business-focused offerings" are on the verge of becoming valuable work tools.

"Information and knowledge management professionals should begin to investigate and experiment with virtual worlds. Use them to try to replicate the experience of working physically alongside others; allow people to work with and share digital 3-D models of physical or theoretical objects; and make remote training and counseling more realistic by incorporating nonverbal communication into same-time, different-place interactions."

The report goes into great depth on this trend, but the best way to illustrate it is to see what some forward-looking organizations are doing. There's some great stories of the 3-D Web being used for healthcare, training and simulation. But here's one about using Virtual Worlds in a corporate context, specifically Sun, Vivox and Intel:

"On any given day, 50% of Sun Microsystems’ workforce works remotely from home, the road, or a customer site. The company is constructing a virtual campus building called MPK20 using Sun’s Darkstar game server infrastructure and Project Wonderland 3-D tool for building virtual worlds. While the project is still underway — only the small team at Sun that is building the system is using it for meetings right now — Sun plans to create a virtual world where all employees can gather, meet, and collaborate. In other examples, Vivox, a technology company that provides integrated voice and communication services for virtual worlds, including Second Life, tells us that its employees meet in Second Life at some point during every business day. Early adopters at Intel use Qwaq Forums to improve their teamwork. And, understandably, most of Linden Lab’s internal meetings also take place in Second Life."

Hmmm, perhaps the ReadWriteWeb team could do this too! We're far flung all over the globe (well I am anyway).

It's clear though that there's much work to be done before the mainstream enters the 3-D Web. Forrester points out that many people, especially "those in their 30s or older", view virtual worlds as "frivolous games or places where deviant personalities exhibit their alter egos." I don't know about the deviant bit, but certainly most people over 30 aren't comfortable using virtual worlds. Forrester also states that set-up and actually using Virtual World software is difficult. So there are a lot of hurdles yet to clear: attitudes of users towards virtual worlds, the technology (e.g. integration with other workplace software), bandwidth, ease of use, and more.

Forrester encourages organizations to experiment with virtual worlds, but using guidelines and policies to control this -- which is much the same advice that Forrester gives for any 'web 2.0' tool. But also Forrester notes that you don't have to go full-bore and use Second Life and 3-D avatars. A "more modest or targeted application", such as Qwaq’s virtual world technology or Unisfair’s virtual conference technology, may be a better introduction to "getting real work done in virtual worlds."