PDA

View Full Version : How Is The Human Drone Project Acceptable?



BigDon
2015-Mar-04, 05:23 PM
They've advanced to the point of using remote head bands at ranges of more than a mile. I warned about them getting to this point and a few of you doubted it. The article read they are working to even reduce the size of THAT. Begs the question WHY, doesn't it?

A human in a master rig can act like a Larry Niven's Thrint in World of Ptavvs with a human in a slave rig.

Complete marionette and the researchers are all giddy like they are working on something wonderful instead of ushering in a new era of human misery unlike anything seen yet.

Since even a butthead like myself knows about it you know damn well the Russians and the Chinese are hip deep in it now that they know it can be done.

I'm not even Catholic and I'm wondering where the Vatican is during all this!

Swift
2015-Mar-04, 06:14 PM
BD,

Maybe I missed an earlier thread or something, but I have no clue as to what you are talking about? Could you link to some information or something?

Noclevername
2015-Mar-04, 07:00 PM
What is the "human drone project", and what article?

primummobile
2015-Mar-04, 07:21 PM
I think he's talking about something like this:

http://news.discovery.com/tech/gear-and-gadgets/man-uses-internet-telepathy-to-control-anothers-hand-141106.htm

BigDon
2015-Mar-04, 07:42 PM
This is the original article from two years ago.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/

Noclevername
2015-Mar-04, 07:46 PM
This is the original article from two years ago.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/

OK, from the article:


And it doesn’t give anyone the ability to control your actions against your will.
...
“I think some people will be unnerved by this because they will overestimate the technology,” Prat said. “There’s no possible way the technology that we have could be used on a person unknowingly or without their willing participation.”

The powers of the world already have effective and more reliable means of making people act on their behalf; money, force, and blackmail.

crescent
2015-Mar-04, 07:51 PM
This seems pretty limited, and the results might not be all they are cracked up to be. It seems like all of the signals they have sent are just binary on/off type stuff. If the recipient knows what he is supposed to do, he might be able so feel something from the head cap, and press the button because he knows that is what he is supposed to do.

BigDon
2015-Mar-04, 07:52 PM
No, you haven't read the advancements since then or I wouldn't risk sounding like a lunatic railing against fluoridation.

BigDon
2015-Mar-04, 08:00 PM
Will one of the moderators please fix my title?

Thank you.

PetersCreek
2015-Mar-04, 08:33 PM
Will one of the moderators please fix my title?

Done...and do me a favor, Don. Tone it down a little, will ya? The religious and geopolitical aspects are places we don't need to go.

John Mendenhall
2015-Mar-04, 10:59 PM
I think big D has a very good point. 50 years ago I could have given you several good reasons why individually carried radio devices could not be used by everybody at the same time. Now I am making this post using the selfsame type of device. Where will this technology be in 50 years that big D is referring to?

Hypmotoad
2015-Mar-05, 07:32 AM
I'm not certain this topic can be discussed at all without being, in the very least, political. You referenced foreign nations and Catholicism.

I could easily discuss it without being religious.

Are you talking about a Manchurian Candidate scenario using other methods?

malaidas
2015-Mar-05, 03:39 PM
The ethical implications certainly cannot be and I'll remain quiet on my personal feelings here, as they are a topic for another medium, however the science can be discussed and I don;t know much about this particular topic tbh, but currently it sounds very basic, however I guess all big steps start with small steps like this.

On the other side all scientific study comes with a varying range of risk, short term and long term and ethical issues of one kind or another, some of them more genuine concerns than others.

Noclevername
2015-Mar-05, 03:46 PM
No, you haven't read the advancements since then or I wouldn't risk sounding like a lunatic railing against fluoridation.

Could you give us some idea of those advancements so we'll know what to talk about?

DaveC426913
2015-Mar-07, 05:25 AM
Er. Are we obliged to actually read the article to have any idea what this is about?
Isn't that a violation of some forum rule?
Doesn't the argument have to be made in-thread?

primummobile
2015-Mar-07, 09:27 AM
Er. Are we obliged to actually read the article to have any idea what this is about?
Isn't that a violation of some forum rule?
Doesn't the argument have to be made in-thread?

No. This isn't ATM.

tusenfem
2015-Mar-07, 10:34 AM
As primummobile correctly states, that rule is only for ATM.
However, BigDon should at least give more information about what the "advancements" are in the last 2 years, like Noclevername asks for.