Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

It's a possibility, just as it's a possibility no harm whatsoever will occur. It goes both ways, et al. And any method that is harmful without a counter will almost certainly be a high priority for creating solutions regarding -- any sort of thing will not remain a thing very long.

As I noted, what I imagine is most likely is that yes, harmful technology and/or methodology will be developed, but it will be massively outnumbered by the amount of beneficial ones. The sheer amount of problems we currently have due to not understanding how our brain works makes that as near a guarantee as you can get when making future-related WAGs.

[Scoops Novel]

We restrict access to some medical facilities and equipment for fear of bioweapons, despite the prospect of curing them. Similar stakes innit?

[Frumple]

Uh, not even remotely? Bioweapons are... not prolific issues. I mean, they could be, but they're currently not. So curing them is disproportionate to the risk. Minds are something, well... everyone has. Making sure they're working well, fixing what ails them... that is also disproportionate to the risk, but in the other direction, y'know? Benefits far, far outweigh the risks.

There's just not many scenarios where ignorance regarding our most important organ is a desirable goal. We... really need to know more about what's going on in that thing. "Everything" would be really nice.

[Scoops Novel]

Give me a example of what happens when it goes wrong.

[Descan]

Is there anyway of ripping a black hold open/ tearing a black hole apart to observe the particles that were trapped inside?

There's the concept of naked black holes, where (I think it's via spinning, but it could be just from sheer straight-line velocity) the event horizon of the black hole is smaller than the singularity itself. Meaning that light can hit the singularity and escape again.

Of course, it's purely theoretical. >_>

[Frumple]

Give me a example of what happens when it goes wrong.

... the brain? Well, there's this list...

Admittedly it's not a perfect list, but it's about the best we have right now and getting better as the years go by, mostly.

If you're talking about something besides the brain going wrong, though, you'll have to clarify as I've misunderstood.

[Scoops Novel]

I know you can't stop technology, but the risks of brain research (what I meant) seem to be as bad as it gets. I know I should run this by a neurologist, but I am surprised that you're so passionately optimistic.

[Sergarr]

I know you can't stop technology, but the risks of brain research (what I meant) seem to be as bad as it gets. I know I should run this by a neurologist, but I am surprised that you're so passionately optimistic.

The risks of not doing it are worse. Any second, a random quirk of the brain can make people do decisions they'll regret later. Coupled with the fact that some of these people control weapons of mass destruction...

[Frumple]

Ah, if you're looking for brain research going wrong, you'd probably want to look back... hrm, don't quite remember the distance. 60s, 70s? Somewhere back there. When they were doing lobotomies and electroshock therapy and whatnot -- back when the psych field was actually kinda' monstrous fairly often. There was some pretty terrible stuff.

Thing is, though, even at its worst it wasn't really wide spread -- it is incredibly difficult to actually screw with the brain en masse, even if you're using biological or chemical weapons, even using the best of today's knowledge and, from what I understand, most of the better guesses regarding future capability -- and some of it actually did progress things a bit (we're considerably better at not screwing up brainzapping, ferex). And nowadays we've got considerably stronger methodological constraints on how you go about things, which are mostly pretty well followed.

Basically, from what I understand given my interaction with the psych field (which is, as with you NS, not professional), the risks are not as large as popular fiction or whatnot would like to have one think. Not nonexistent, but the logistics surrounding it makes it unlikely to be an issue. And the benefits are nigh-on immeasurable. As I noted, we really can't afford to stay in a state of ignorance regarding how our brains work -- any damage knowing more could cause is almost certainly outweighed by what not knowing is causing, and would continue to cause.

[sjm9876]

Aye, in my (also untested) understanding the risks of further investigation into neuroscience are no more so than the risks of other biological research - and the benefits are much greater as we don't really have a clue what the hell is going on in our heads.

Possibly the only risk there that I can imagine which isn't there for other research is the risk of manipulation of thought, which it is highly unlikely could be done more efficiently than through simple propaganda.

[Sergarr]

Aye, in my (also untested) understanding the risks of further investigation into neuroscience are no more so than the risks of other biological research - and the benefits are much greater as we don't really have a clue what the hell is going on in our heads.

Possibly the only risk there that I can imagine which isn't there for other research is the risk of manipulation of thought, which it is highly unlikely could be done more efficiently than through simple propaganda.

It also could give rise to counter-(manipulation of thought) techniques, which would give people the ability to resist propaganda with SCIENCE.

[Scoops Novel]

Thanks for weighing in guys. It's early days yet, and I'm sure harmless progress will be made, but I'm not too comfortable when it comes to what you could achieve with a thorough understanding, efficient or not. It will be a hell of a argument.

[Putnam]

Is there anyway of ripping a black hold open/ tearing a black hole apart to observe the particles that were trapped inside?

There's the concept of naked black holes, where (I think it's via spinning, but it could be just from sheer straight-line velocity) the event horizon of the black hole is smaller than the singularity itself. Meaning that light can hit the singularity and escape again.

Of course, it's purely theoretical. >_>

I'm pretty naked singularities have been determined to be impossible.

[Descan]

Yes, you are pretty, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. ;P

[hops]

Singularities will only get naked with pretty people.

Otherwise you'll have to get to know it in the event horizon first.