[mb2000inc]

fromTheSprawl, on 23 September 2011 - 03:57 AM, said:

mb2000inc, on 22 September 2011 - 09:00 PM, said:

Sadly, what's next? If we can extract this information from a brain - what's to stop us from putting something in there?

Perhaps you haven't watched Inception?

Anyway there was a point in my life that most of my dreams were lucid. This stuff shouldn't be used though that would be like invasion of privacy or something.

Oh, I saw it... But there's also "this". (<== another one of my creations) I've been fascinated with dreams for as long as I can remember. But the idea behind this makes me cringe. I don't want people in my head. There's enough of me in there that I can't fit any others - or machines for that matter.... just sayin'.

[Nykc]

It would be cool to see what animals are seeing/dreaming. I don't want other's in my mind, I have a twisted imagination.

(Think B9, No2Pencil, 3 Midgets and a Gabehabe wrestling in a steamy pile of oatmeal.)

[Raynes]

It's sad that our first response to amazing scientific innovation is "but what about the morality of it?".

[Slice]

Sad? Maybe. But necessary.

If someone perfected cloning and made a perfect copy of you, without your permission, would you be pissed? Or would you congratulate them on their leap forward in scientific innovation?

No matter what kind of innovation it is, there is always going to be morality issues. The fact that this is something on the verge of mind reading (which could, and would, be abused) is what makes it so scary.

I'll go get my tin hat now..

[Raynes]

I'd congratulate them and then kill my clone, of course. Then I'd run into my blue police box and save some other distant world.

[DimitriV]

You know, I'd hate people seeing all of my fictitious girl "buddies" that I dream about - LOL

[AmbientTech]

And there goes the divorce rate right through the roof.

[Craig328]

Raynes, on 24 September 2011 - 04:13 AM, said:

It's sad that our first response to amazing scientific innovation is "but what about the morality of it?".

What makes you sad about it?

Science without guiding morality is merely a machine that doesn't discriminate between mankind and any other raw material it is pointed at. For instance, the only difference between hybridizing roses, animal husbandry and eugenics is the subject of the breeding efforts.

I think it's entirely proper to have a moral concern where the privacy of your thoughts is concerned.

[WolfCoder]

Bah, what use does pesky morals have with SCIENCE!11!! Why, we could have already taken over the WORLD if it weren't for ethics!

This post has been edited by WolfCoder: 26 September 2011 - 07:32 AM

[Raynes]

Craig328, on 26 September 2011 - 02:06 PM, said:

Raynes, on 24 September 2011 - 04:13 AM, said:

It's sad that our first response to amazing scientific innovation is "but what about the morality of it?".

What makes you sad about it?

Science without guiding morality is merely a machine that doesn't discriminate between mankind and any other raw material it is pointed at. For instance, the only difference between hybridizing roses, animal husbandry and eugenics is the subject of the breeding efforts.

I think it's entirely proper to have a moral concern where the privacy of your thoughts is concerned.

You've missed my point entirely.

My point is, we don't say "Well, that's the coolest thing ever. Look how far we've come! But, we really can't use this because it would be an insane invasion of privacy.". No, instead we say "OMGWTF, MY BRAIN, NO, YOU CAN'T TAKE MY THOUGHTS, OMG OH NO!!!1!1!!". I'm not saying morality shouldn't be a concern. I'm saying that it is silly for it to be the only concern.

If a man were to see a cell phone a thousand years ago, what do you think would be his response? "Wait, couldn't that technology be used to eavesdrop on people from a distance!?!?!"

[AdamSpeight2008]

I think he would say Burn the Hieratic! or Kill the Witch

Quote

No, instead we say "OMGWTF, MY BRAIN, NO, YOU CAN'T TAKE MY THOUGHTS, OMG OH NO!!!1!1!!". I'm not saying morality shouldn't be a concern. I'm saying that it is silly for it to be the only concern.

Raynes But it should be our first concern, how can and how could this technology be abused?
We now live in an age, where technology is prevalent, pervasive and intrusive. If no one care about the potential consequence of their actions, I think the World would be a more aggressive and unsafe. We're our innate primeval instincts dominate, so can basically survive.

Try getting on an International Flight without encountering some form technology.
CCTV, Computers, X-Ray machine, Body Scanner.

Or imagine the driving on roads where there was no commonly though agreement, like which side. It be anarchy.

Why don't we tattoo an unique QR-Code to the back of every new born infant, and inject RDIF tags so we can track them through out there life. Or just a tattoo on the arm?

[Raynes]

It should be *a* concern, but not the only concern. Be amazed that we have the technology and think about how far we've come, and *then* deal with the problems associated with its use.

[Python_4_President]

Sergio Tapia, on 23 September 2011 - 07:16 AM, said:

Example:



And from a cat:

While thoroughly terrifying in concept, the potential gains to be had are worth it to me.

Consider this... "Oh, I just had a fantastic idea for <thing>, let me show you on my tablet PC.."

Now, let me show you some other alternatives...

let's take a look under the hood.... we're not sure how everything works, but here is the general behavior you can expect...

IE, when explaining something to someone, you can dump the image data to a screen the end user can see, to better illustrate most anything...

[Choscura]

I have enough trouble making sense of my own memory to be skeptical of the effectiveness someone else would have in reading it. As a best case scenario, you could look through the memory that has been recorded soon after an event and stored digitally, but it's still going to be a memory- an abstraction- it will not be the genuine article, and that will mean it is inherently inaccurate.

Ideas are a separate matter. Enough of the ideas I have are abstract to the point of being ludicrous if you try to explain them in any language. Sharing ideas would be useful.

[Shane Hudson]

There are quite a few fantasy books where members of a council are able to read people's minds. Even those books show the problems with it. It is great for scientific reasons, but past that... it is terrifying.

EDIT: It would be interesting to see how that would work without knowing what they want to construct.

This post has been edited by Shane Hudson: 02 October 2011 - 06:59 AM