Live data from Hacker News

Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

patternproject.substack.com

51–60 of 327 posts

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#51

For the technological context and result: https://www.folklore.org/Joining_Apple_Computer.html Still very sad that HyperCard got sidelined and that even its successor, Livecode abandoned the idea of being available to everyone --- though it looks as if folks are still working that: https://openxtalk.org/

This is off-topic, we are discussing drugs here.

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done it a few times. Unlike DMT, you don't have to vaporize it. It's active intranasally and well as buccally/sublingually. Effects-wise, it feels roughly identical to DMT but with a longer duration.

To me it feels like a completely different drug compared to nnDMT. 5-meo-DMT also feels very different depending on the roa from my experience (vaped vs IM)

Expand on roa effect difference?

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#53
post #43
post #3

Not a big fan of the ongoing productisation of transcendental, possibly brain-scrambling experiences. Keeping them somewhat less accessible tends to filter out people who don't do their homework to understand the substance and who consider it just another novel experience to try on a whim, which increases the risk of negative outcomes.

I disagree. Every time I've seen someone get a "bad trip", they're people who read a lot and worked themselves into a state of anxiety over the fact that something could go wrong. If they had just approached it like "ooh lets get high and have fun" rather than "I have to do X, Y, Z or else it's going to be horrible!", they would have probably been OK. Hallucinogens have way too much gatekeeping and mysticalization ar…

Whilst that might true as per your observations, I've also seen people do zero research, take a substance in the wrong place/frame of mind, and subsequently had a more turbulent experience than they were expecting

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#54
post #3

Not a big fan of the ongoing productisation of transcendental, possibly brain-scrambling experiences. Keeping them somewhat less accessible tends to filter out people who don't do their homework to understand the substance and who consider it just another novel experience to try on a whim, which increases the risk of negative outcomes.

The thing that bothers me the most are the companies out here trying to get psychedelics to a state where they own the tech and can try to make as much money as possible off of it. Not so much the part where it becomes more available with consistent quality for more users.

I was getting ads for MindMed's clinical trials of their LSD analogue a few months back and was considering signing up for it, as I'm totally down with more scientific research on these compounds. However, the idea that a corporation with a patent on an analogue that is lobbying to make it so their version is the one that is approved is kinda the worst. We already have LSD, it's cheap and it's amazing, yet here we are marching down the road of some patented version being the one that's approved for use. I get that these companies want to fund research, but this isn't the way.

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#55
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Every time I've seen someone get a "bad trip", they're people who read a lot and worked themselves into a state of anxiety over the fact that something could go wrong. If they had just approached it like "ooh lets get high and have fun" rather than "I have to do X, Y, Z or else it's going to be horrible!", they would have probably been OK. Hallucinogens have way too much gatekeeping and mysticalization ar…

Whilst that might true as per your observations, I've also seen people do zero research, take a substance in the wrong place/frame of mind, and subsequently had a more turbulent experience than they were expecting

Yes to both.

We often attract certain types of people, and have a wealth of experience with that type.

We probably all take this as obvious knowledge. But only when I uncomfortably enter a group of people unlike me -- and feel totally alienated not just by their norms and assumptions, but their misunderstandings of my own -- only then do I truly confront the implications in a visceral, non-academic sense :)

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#56
I feel like someone is trying really hard to push public perception of psychedelics towards "acceptable". I don't know who it benefits, but this is a really weird Overton window.

I wouldn't say a word if it weren't nth article about psychedelics that appears on HN frontpage. I was quiet the last n-1 times.

If you google psilocybin right now, you can see articles that state how it "slows ageing" and "cures depression". There probably is some truth to it, but only in very specific sense and specific circumstances. Most people will NOT benefit from taking the drug (as with any drug).

So it hurts my soul when I see words like "legalize" being thrown in this context. We know very very little about effect of such drugs. And the goal should not be to legalize, but rather to expand our knowledge on how it works, and create safe medicine that actually helps people.

Rant is over now. Thank you.

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#57
post #49
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are totally OK as long as healthcare is not socialized.

Does that line of reasoning extend to things like fast food and motorcycles in your eyes? Not trying to undermine your point, just genuinely curious.

> things like fast food and motorcycles in your eyes?

motorcycles...? in... my eyes?

What wizardry is this? First "computers in my brain", now this. I'll have the singularity that you're smoking pls :)

EDIT: was at first genuinely confused, and then tickled by my own misunderstanding

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#59
post #3

Not a big fan of the ongoing productisation of transcendental, possibly brain-scrambling experiences. Keeping them somewhat less accessible tends to filter out people who don't do their homework to understand the substance and who consider it just another novel experience to try on a whim, which increases the risk of negative outcomes.

The thing that bothers me the most are the companies out here trying to get psychedelics to a state where they own the tech and can try to make as much money as possible off of it. Not so much the part where it becomes more available with consistent quality for more users. I was getting ads for MindMed's clinical trials of their LSD analogue a few months back and was considering signing up for it, as I'm totally down…

Welcome to the USA. Psychedelics are just the tip of an iceberg here. There's shit like highly effective cough medicines or antidepressants available in other countries which show promise in saving lives but nope mired in patent stuff and corrupt regulation...

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/european-cough-medicine-...

Re: Bill Atkinson's psychedelic user interface

#60
post #56

I feel like someone is trying really hard to push public perception of psychedelics towards "acceptable". I don't know who it benefits, but this is a really weird Overton window. I wouldn't say a word if it weren't nth article about psychedelics that appears on HN frontpage. I was quiet the last n-1 times. If you google psilocybin right now, you can see articles that state how it "slows ageing" and "cures depression"…

> So it hurts my soul when I see words like "legalize" being thrown in this context. We know very very little about effect of such drugs.

That seems like exactly when we should legalize it. The default is legal, and without definite knowledge of serious harm, that should be the status.

The burden of proof should be on the people who want it to be legal, and by your comment, their case seems pretty weak.

Post reply on HN