Scientists race to make ‘living’ computers powered by human cells

It may have its roots in science fiction, but a small number of researchers are making real progress by trying to create computers from living cells.

Welcome to the strange world of biocomputers.

Among those leading this path is a group of scientists from Switzerland with whom I went to meet.

They hope that one day we could see data centers full of “live” servers that replicate aspects of artificial intelligence (AI) learning—and could harness some of the energy of current methods.

This is the vision of Dr. Fred Jordan, co-founder of the FinalSpark lab I visited.

We are all accustomed to the idea of ​​the hardware and software of the computers we now use.

A somewhat surprising term that Dr. Jordan and others in the field use to describe what they create is “wet software.”

Simply put, it involves creating neurons that grow into clusters called organelles, which in turn can be attached to electrodes—at which point the process of trying to use them as mini-computers can begin.

Dr Jordan admits that for many people the concept of biocomputers is probably a little strange.

“In science fiction, people have been living with these ideas for quite a long time,” he said.

“When you start saying, 'I'm going to use a neuron like a little machine,' it's a different way of looking at our own brains, and it makes you question who we are.”

For FinalSpark, the process starts with stem cells derived from human skin cells, which they purchase from a clinic in Japan. Actual donors are anonymous.

But, perhaps surprisingly, they have no shortage of offerings.

“We get a lot of people reaching out to us,” he said.

“But we only select stem cells from official suppliers because the quality of the cells is critical.”

In the lab, FinalSpark cell biologist Dr. Flora Brozzi handed me a dish containing several small white balls.

Each little sphere is essentially a tiny, lab-grown mini-brain, made up of living stem cells that have been cultured and turned into clusters of neurons and supporting cells—called “organoids.”

They are not nearly as complex as the human brain, but they are made of the same building blocks.

After going through a process that can take several months, the organoids are ready to be attached to an electrode and are then asked to respond to simple keyboard commands.

It is a means of sending and receiving electrical signals, and the results are recorded on a regular computer connected to the system.

It's a simple test: you press a button that sends an electrical signal through the electrodes, and if it works (it doesn't always), you might see a small jump in activity on the screen in response.

The display shows a moving graph, a bit like an EEG.

I press a key several times in a row and the reactions suddenly stop. Then a short, characteristic burst of energy appears on the graph.

When I asked what happened, Dr. Jordan said there was still a lot they didn't understand about what the organoids did and why. Perhaps I annoyed them.

The electrical stimulation is an important first step toward the team's larger goal of triggering the training of the biocomputer's neurons so they can eventually adapt to perform tasks.

“For AI, it’s always the same,” he said.

“You give some input, you want some output to be used.

“For example, you give an image of a cat and you want the output to indicate whether it is a cat,” he explained.

Keeping a regular computer running is easy—it only needs a power source—but what happens to biocomputers?

This is a question to which scientists do not yet have an answer.

“Organoids don’t have blood vessels,” said Simon Schultz, professor of neurotechnology and director of the Center for Neurotechnology at Imperial College London.

“The human brain has blood vessels that run through it at different levels and provide the nutrients it needs to function well.

“We don’t yet know how to make them correctly. So that’s the biggest ongoing challenge.”

However, one thing is certain. When we talk about the death of a “wet software” computer, this is literally true.

FinalSpark has made some progress over the past four years: its organoids can now live for up to four months.

But there are some creepy discoveries related to their possible demise.

They sometimes experience a surge in organelle activity before they die, similar to the increases in heart rate and brain activity that have been seen in some people at the end of life.

“There were several events where we saw a very rapid increase in activity only in the last minutes or tens of seconds. [of life]” said Dr. Jordan.

“I think we've recorded about 1,000 or 2,000 of these deaths in the last five years.”

“It's sad because we'll have to stop the experiment, figure out why it died, and then repeat it,” he said.

Professor Schultz agrees with this unsentimental approach.

“We shouldn't be afraid of them, they're just computers made from a different substrate and different material,” he said.

FinalSpark are not the only scientists working in the field of biocomputing.

In 2022, the Australian firm Cortical Labs announced that it had succeeded in making artificial neurons play the early computer game Pong.

In the US, researchers at Johns Hopkins University are also creating “mini-brains” to study how they process information – but in the context of developing drugs for neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's disease and autism.

The hope is that AI will soon be able to speed up this kind of work.

But for now, Dr. Lena Smirnova, who leads the research at Johns Hopkins University, believes that wetware is scientifically interesting, but at an early stage.

And she said it was unlikely to replace the base material currently used for computer chips.

“Biocomputing should complement, not replace, silicon-based artificial intelligence, as well as contribute to disease modeling and reduce the use of animals,” she said.

Professor Schultz agrees: “I think they won't be able to compete with silicon in many areas, but we will find our niche,” he suggested.

However, even as the technology moves closer to real-world applications, Dr. Jordan remains fascinated by its science-fiction origins.

“I’ve always been a science fiction fan,” he said.

“When you have a sci-fi movie or book, I always felt a little sad because my life was not like in the book. Now I feel like I’m in a book and writing a book.”

Additional reporting by Francesca Hashemi