Rats Play DOOM

This is the new YouTube, though not much on the account

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/mq2yfy23j7s

I think there is probably an anthropocentric flaw in the rat display.

Human eyes are side-by-side and forward, with a big binocular overlap and a clear vanishing point. A forward-facing curved screen fits that geometry well.

Rats' eyes, by contrast, are lateral. They have a much wider field of view, a tiny binocular zone, and use motion and contrast more than neat perspective lines. A single human-style "cinema screen" isn't laid out for a rat's optics or brain.

Perhaps if the scenes were rendered with a much wider, 250° FOV, it would help the rat understand what it was seeing better.

Or even rendered with two virtual cameras offset and angled apart, then stitch their outputs into one extra-wide view wrapped onto the curved display. That would approximate the rat’s much wider horizontal field of view and reduce the mismatch between where its eyes are actually looking and where the important visual information appears.

There are other differences in perception of color and motion, but fixing the FOV would be an immediate and relatively easy software fix.

In the year 2032, the rodrone wars broke out. What started as innocent video game experiments, had taken a dark turn. After the rats had perfected playing the classic Doom games in 2026, they were easily trained on more complex simulations. In 2028 the first rodent controlled surveillance drones were tested. The year after weaponised. And the first real deployments in warfare in 2030. They easily outperformed OpenAIs latest battle systems. Home robots were soon after remote controlled by rats, known as Rodots. Rodent intelligence escalated quickly as lab selections bred only the smartest specimens. It was only a matter of time before the takeover. Now rodots were building steadily more capable drones and bots. Long before humans could foresee the need for a defense against the rats, the rodrone attack on all humankind, was a fact...

I'm opposed to this project because it involves using animals in medical experiments, which I believe is never ethically justifiable. It goes against basic moral and ethical principles regarding animal treatment. If the project were designed to allow animals to choose whether or not to participate, it would be more acceptable. Some scientists have already explored such approaches. By not giving animals a choice, you're limiting their freedom and potentially exposing them to physical or psychological harm through your simulation. As someone who advocates for animal rights, I'd prefer to see alternative methods that don't involve animals or allow them to participate voluntarily

I agree with you, but I would add that even so, it is still far better than 99.99% of scientific animal experiments, in which animals are usually subjected to severe suffering (for example, through the injection of human tumors) and are almost always killed at the end, as their tissues have to be examined.