If something can make your body better without adverse effects, it is already there. You are not smarter than 3.5 billions of life evolution, period.
[deleted]
Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
31–40 of 123 posts
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can be killed by a 9V battery? How? Not from the charge I hope (not sarcastic).
There's a link to the darwinawards site on the subreddit. Apparently it was a Navy service member that stuck the electrodes into his fingers and the current traveled through the bloodstream across his heart. Sounds like an urban legend, but if you read the back and forth on it, it's rather interesting.
It is theoretically possible to do that. Blood is wonderfully conductive with all the electrolytes.
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reads like a form of faith. I don't share it. Is there literally no potential for artificial selection to outpace natural selection? I know this thinking can be dangerous and contains serious ethical problems, but the factual side of your statement I just can't agree with. Not without more to convince me.
> Is there literally no potential for artificial selection to outpace natural selection? Of course there's potential and loopholes but the basic observation (dubbed 'Algernon's law' by some; I've written an entire essay on the topic: http://www.gwern.net/Drug%20heuristics ) seems sound for tDCS: it's such a trivial intervention that it shouldn't work, which suggests there must be some catch. The catch may well be tri…
Or, the catch could be such that, with such enhancements, everyone realizes the meaninglessness of existence and kills themselves in a fit of existential rage.
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#34I may run into a lot of experts (from multiple fields) here on HN with strong opinions to the contrary, but here are my two cents. If I could double my cognitive ability for 5 years, then die from an unknown complication with this type of therapy, I would do it without blinking an eye.
it would be deeply ironic if, with your doubled cognitive ability, you realised that that was a bad bargain.
Haha, yes it would. But likely my ability would at least enable me to convince others of this discovery!
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#35> Mr. Siever treats himself for chronic depression, reporting equally striking results.
I wish they wouldn't report such anecdota so strongly. Siever is unlikely to have conducted controlled double-blind studies on himself, so he can't know it's the tCDS doing anything or not.
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#36I am convinced that at some point some smart sod will figure out how to create a 'high' by using something along the lines of this. Put on a headband, flick the switch, and blam! high as a kite. Turn the switch off, and back to being sober. When that happens, the world will change in a very unpredictable way. Billions, perhaps trillions of dollars that are part of the drug trade will suddenly have no where to go. All…
"Billions, perhaps trillions of dollars that are part of the drug trade "
Serious question. If the friction is removed (illegality is friction) and this process is legal and available what will prevent people from deteriorating into 24/7 pleasure seekers (much like some people get addicted and spend their life in crack houses?)
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reads like a form of faith. I don't share it. Is there literally no potential for artificial selection to outpace natural selection? I know this thinking can be dangerous and contains serious ethical problems, but the factual side of your statement I just can't agree with. Not without more to convince me.
> Is there literally no potential for artificial selection to outpace natural selection? Of course there's potential and loopholes but the basic observation (dubbed 'Algernon's law' by some; I've written an entire essay on the topic: http://www.gwern.net/Drug%20heuristics ) seems sound for tDCS: it's such a trivial intervention that it shouldn't work, which suggests there must be some catch. The catch may well be tri…
I don't completely follow this line of reasoning. Something like "a minor enhancement like this would have been selected for by now, so it not being selected means it has a drawback?"
I'm no evolutionary biologist, but it seems like the increased intelligence (or more accurately, cognitive performance) may not have had all that practical a benefit until just recently in our history anyway.
I accept that the verdict is still out on tDCS, but am clamoring to reach that verdict.
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#38I'm actually a PhD student studying this exact technology in Germany. I can say without a doubt that this type of stimulation has proven potential in enhancing cognitive functions (if proper protocol and safety aspects are respected). This is a really exciting field which I think will really explode in the next few years once the montage and paradigms are optimized (which is exactly what I'm working on!)
[deleted]
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is there literally no potential for artificial selection to outpace natural selection? Of course there's potential and loopholes but the basic observation (dubbed 'Algernon's law' by some; I've written an entire essay on the topic: http://www.gwern.net/Drug%20heuristics ) seems sound for tDCS: it's such a trivial intervention that it shouldn't work, which suggests there must be some catch. The catch may well be tri…
I don't completely follow this line of reasoning. Something like "a minor enhancement like this would have been selected for by now, so it not being selected means it has a drawback?" I'm no evolutionary biologist, but it seems like the increased intelligence (or more accurately, cognitive performance) may not have had all that practical a benefit until just recently in our history anyway. I accept that the verdict i…
[deleted]
Re: Do It Yourself Brain Stimulation has Scientists Worried
#40I am convinced that at some point some smart sod will figure out how to create a 'high' by using something along the lines of this. Put on a headband, flick the switch, and blam! high as a kite. Turn the switch off, and back to being sober. When that happens, the world will change in a very unpredictable way. Billions, perhaps trillions of dollars that are part of the drug trade will suddenly have no where to go. All…
"Billions, perhaps trillions of dollars that are part of the drug trade " Serious question. If the friction is removed (illegality is friction) and this process is legal and available what will prevent people from deteriorating into 24/7 pleasure seekers (much like some people get addicted and spend their life in crack houses?)
It's an excellent question, I don't think its possible to predict the outcome. In places where heroin is both easily available (low friction) and there is little social stigma attached to it, you get folks wasting away in opium dens, but not everyone who could be in those dens, are.
No doubt a lot will depend on how functional folks can be while 'high'. I have known people who were essentially 'pill heads' or addicted to oxycodone such that they were constantly under the influence but they were still able to do the job assigned to them. (I make no judgement as to whether their performance was improved or hampered by their drug use). Perhaps folks could dial it up or dial it down depending on their need.
But what scares policy maker types is that you have an unpredictable effect if something comes into existence. They will try hard to prevent its creation because of the possibility of bad outcomes even in the presence of the possibility of good outcomes (perhaps you'd have lower workplace rage events if people could dial in a mild soporific state).