h a l f b a k e r y
Viva los semi-panaderos!
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
Stable neural stimulation electrodes that don't corrode have been a reality for some time now, and "pleasure centers" in the brain have been known since the 1950's. The ability to detect when someone is engaged in particular categories of thought based on brain activity could be used to identify when
someone was, say, engaged in mathematics and reward them. Such a device would enable users to master difficult skills. Similar sensors coud be used to identify when the user is in the right exercize zone - proper heartrate, correct oxygenation, ideal blood glycogen, and reward them for it. This would overcome all procrastination at going to the gym to work out or at studying calculus. We could be much better people than we are otherwise able to be.
[link]
|
| |
How about a system that detects when people blithely simplify the very complex and interesting field of neurochemistry into a solved problem and are posting halfbakery ideas about it that go from functional MRI to "better people" in fewer than 200 words, and emits a mild electric shock to the poster? |
|
| |
But seriously. If you can just stick an electrode up your brain and kick the bliss-machine into overdrive (and I agree that you can, technically),
why on earth would you bother being "better people"? I'd just try to keep myself fed and otherwise listen to Pink Floyd a lot. |
|
| |
Okay, how about a detector that observes when someone blithely states that by stimulating just one reward system in a human brain, that all other rewards, such as those deriving from mastry of new skills, are meaningless, and simply administers an overdose of heroin? Simple mindless euphoria isn't the be-all, end-all reward that wirehead wannabes imagine it to be. Humans have more than one reward system. |
|
| |
There's nothing all that complex about my proposal. Detecting physical and mental states is getting increasingly commonplace, without using functional MRI. I think even you would agree that observing physical states corresponding to ideal exercize would be fairly simple and is already commonplace. Simply augmenting this with a reward system that helps the user decide to come back to the gym tomorrow would make all the difference between an obese sofa-spud and a well-toned athletic body. |
|
| |
I know absolutely nothing of the topic, so I'm staying out of it. |
|
| |
On the other hand, I would like to get a non-harmful heroin shot frequently while listening to Pink Floyd. Bun. |
|
| |
Gregor-e's ironic statement does express my belief pretty well - being able to directly manipulate the reward center in the brain _would_ make other rewards meaningless. (And, for drug addicts, it frequently does). You start out with good intentions, then you press the button, then you very quickly look for a way of pressing the button some more. Man, that's a beautiful button.
But feel free to disagree with me; we'll probably find out how this stuff works during our lifetimes. |
|
| |
Turns out that most humans don't end up like the mindless wireheads of Niven's SF. From (who would have guessed it) wireheading.com: |
|
| |
"In the case of humans, our reward-pathways are (slightly) more anatomically diffuse than the average rodent. At least with present-day electrode-placement techniques, intra-cranial self-stimulation (ICSS) as practised by laboratory humans doesn't lead to uncontrolled hedonistic excess and death. Only depressed or deeply malaise-ridden human subjects compulsively self-stimulate when wired." |
|
| |