This reminds me of Sam Hughes' (@qntm) work. If you liked this, you might also like:
What’s expected of us (2005)
11–20 of 57 posts
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#12[deleted]
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#13One particular sentence in this story brought this short science-fiction story to mind: http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/blit.htm
Prominently featuring a 'recursive image' that causes fatal damage to the human brain when viewed.
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#14If the Predictor is just a light which monitors your mental state, then yes, this already exists, and with similar implications: https://www.wired.com/2008/04/mind-decision/
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#15Clicked the link, immediately annoyed by the cookie banner which covered the bottom HALF of the screen. I believe humanity went wrong somewhere.
You'll be surprised to know that this exists https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/ and even more surprised to find out why it exists.
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#16Clicked the link, immediately annoyed by the cookie banner which covered the bottom HALF of the screen. I believe humanity went wrong somewhere.
You'll be surprised to know that this exists https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/ and even more surprised to find out why it exists.
Brilliant, thank you! Sad to see there is no extension for Safari, however.
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#17Interesting. However, I disagree that if such a machine existed, people would lose motivation. They'd realize that the rational part of the brain is used just for rationalization and is not always actively engaged in real-time decision-making... but that's about it. They'd then beat the machine with little practice, regardless of how it is implemented.
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#18Interesting. However, I disagree that if such a machine existed, people would lose motivation. They'd realize that the rational part of the brain is used just for rationalization and is not always actively engaged in real-time decision-making... but that's about it. They'd then beat the machine with little practice, regardless of how it is implemented.
The machine in the story doesn't read minds.
>The heart of each Predictor is a circuit with a negative time delay — it sends a signal back in time.
If a Predictor was hooked up to a geiger counter instead of a button, the light would flash exactly one second before the counter would click. It would flash even before the decay occurred.
I don't see any way to beat that.
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#19One second is plenty of time to react by stopping your hand.
So what happens if I train myself to slowly move my hand towards the button and only stop when seeing the light?
Re: What’s expected of us (2005)
#20If the Predictor is just a light which monitors your mental state, then yes, this already exists, and with similar implications: https://www.wired.com/2008/04/mind-decision/
Your link is really cool!
But no, the machine in the story doesn't monitor the mental state of the person: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25120916