# Mind control chips - tinfoil hats wonâ€™t save you



## ADF (Mar 27, 2008)

Skip to 4m 22s.

Now Iâ€™m no tinfoil hat wearer, but anyone else disturbed by this â€˜happy chipâ€™? If they can influence one emotion it is only a matter of time before they can influence them all, it is only going to get easier and safer to issue these things over time.

They were first used in medical; and then they moved them to emotional treatment as seen in this video, but what is next? How about â€˜personality correctionâ€™ issued by the court? It of course wonâ€™t stop there, they will be issuing these things as long term fixes for all sorts of problems. Attention deficient disorder? Hell we just saw it used to treat depression.

Why not develop one we can stick into your head at birth? Hey you have a moral obligation to ensure your child lives happy, psychological condition free lives donâ€™t you? With the way thing are these days why take the risk of years on pills with all sorts of negative side effects? 

Hell we can have them jumping out of bed in excitement to go to their slave wage jobs, set different emotions for different times of the day!


----------



## Tycho (Mar 27, 2008)

So don't get one.  Simple, really.


----------



## ADF (Mar 27, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> So don't get one.  Simple, really.


And if you are not given that choice?

â€œpersonality correction issued by the courtâ€ 

â€œdevelop one we can stick into your head at birth, moral obligationâ€

They have no problem letting people get pumped with all sorts of drugs just so we can get to school/work another day, enough for them to appear in the countries water supply even after the purification process. 

Troublesome emotional teen? Get them â€˜fixedâ€™; itâ€™s not too far off from what they already do these days, it is just a matter of having it around long enough for people to become comfortable with it. A faster, cheaper and more efficient method of what we already do with drugs and psychiatry.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

You voted Ron Paul, didn't you?

Panicmonger much?

Involuntary implantation won't happen.  There are PLENTY of people who will see to that.


----------



## ADF (Mar 28, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> You voted Ron Paul, didn't you?
> 
> Panicmonger much?
> 
> Involuntary implantation won't happen.  There are PLENTY of people who will see to that.


I'm UK so no.

I think using a brain implant to treat psychological disorders is in itself crazy, who would have thought brain surgery would ever be used to treat depression? Who would have thought so many parents would be voluntarily putting their kids on pills; something that can really fuck up their emotional stability later in life, just for having emotional ups and downs like any human being is expected to have? There are those that need it, but as many that use them today?

These are stepping stones; something that will inevitably lead to the next extreme, but no one will care to notice because we have already become numb to concepts that would have scared the hell out of us a generation back. How did we look at cosmetic surgery a while back? It only takes a generation growing up with it to become the accepted norm.

It will start out small, probably sound reasonable. If you were a convict in jail and given the option to get a surgical implant that would suppress your aggressive tendencies; in exchange for reduced jail time because they deem you less of a risk, how many do you think would do it? They tried surgical tracking implants on inmates, guess where they are now? Being offered to concerned parents so they can track their children, only this isnâ€™t a possibility it is actually happening today.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

First off: I'm on pills.  If I thought that the microchip was a safe, reliable solution to replace the goddamn things, I'd probably spring for it.  Of course, I'd want to make sure that there was a killswitch built into it, and I'd want to be sure magnetic fields wouldn't toast it.  It isn't fun taking lots of fucking pills.

Second: Oh god, you're going to go all Clockwork Orange on me now?


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 28, 2008)

I'm one of those people who really NEEDS to be put on meds, but somehow, I just don't want to. I'd rather have my freak out episodes. I've seen good and bad results from people taking meds. I'd probably end up as a 'bad'.

It's everyone's own choice to do it or not. I saw a presentation today on a chip that automatically releases doses into your bloodstream, allowing forgetful people to not have to keep time or count for their pills. I think it's a good idea. I won't ever get one, but other people may very well benefit from it.

I think it'll be an issue requiring consent of the implantee. I wouldn't worry too much about that.


----------



## ADF (Mar 28, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> [snip]


You would get a permanent device surgically implanted into your brain to treat a temporary mental imbalance?

What has happened to our society that has made getting up the next day so god damn unbearable compared to before all these pills and gadgets were invented? It seems almost everyone is on some sort of subscription brain chemistry altering drug these days, yet somehow my musings of where this treatment could lead is considered â€˜out thereâ€™.

In comparison to the world being so bleak, people see a happy chip brain implant as a â€˜good ideaâ€™, my ramblings are mild.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Tycho The Itinerant said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First off: TEMPORARY?! Do yer homework, pal.  I have a lifetime of these bitter little fuckers to look forward to, barring a medical advance like the one you are going all Chicken-Little about.  Second: For some people, it can be "gotten over". For others, NO.  See, I have some faulty receptors in my brain, receptors linked to my mood and such.  Nothing short of a brilliant advance in medicine is going to permanently fix the goddamn things.

Congratulations.  You have established yourself as a know-nothing assmunch, right up there with Tom Cruise.  Get fucking educated about these sorts of things - you seem to be getting your information from tabloids, Scientology pamphlets and conspiracy theorists, and no one else.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 28, 2008)

This is true.

I've never been diagnosed with anything (due to the fact that I don't have health insurance, hah), but I have these cycles I run through. I become completely NOT myself. I'm a laid back guy, chipper, and jovial. Right?

Well.. I go through these swings where I can't sleep at night. I've heavily binged on alcohol and dabbled in drugs. And I'm actually just coming out of one of these swings. I slept again last night. It was so great after weeks of sleeping 2-4 hours a night. I've seen others who go through this sort of thing, and it can absolutely wreck your life. I don't want to victimize myself or blame all my faults on a condition, but I have periods where just keeping my job is very difficult to do.

Dealing with what I've been through, I can't in my right mind condemn medication. I have a friend who has a slew of mental issues, including schizophrenia. The medications he's been put on have helped. He functions much better as a person on the medication, and it is a life-long condition. He's prone to spacing out and forgetfulness though. The consistency of his doses, as a result, have suffered. He forgets things, so I know he'd benefit from something like this.

If I am bipolar, I believe it is usually a life-long condition as well. It first becomes evident through a wide range of ages, but usually sticks with people through their lives.

If I weren't so scared of medicine, I'd probably go get treated for it. Having lost jobs and gone into all kinds of reckless behaviors and mindsets that I wouldn't want to mention here (haha), I'd say it's definitely a serious thing. Try to be a little considerate on the issue.



			
				ADF said:
			
		

> What has happened to our society that has made getting up the next day so god damn unbearable compared to before all these pills and gadgets were invented?



Oh, just had to say.. life is very different from what it had been in the past. You have places to be at set times, ALL the time. You have to live on a precise schedule. One gadget invented is now referred to as an alarm clock. The way the world works now, everyone has to be on a set wavelength, otherwise you'll get run over and left behind. I think the high frequency of anxiety/stress/mood disorders that occur nowadays is a result of the lifestyle that people must live in the modern world.


----------



## ADF (Mar 28, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> Congratulations.  You have established yourself as a know-nothing assmunch, right up there with Tom Cruise.  Get fucking educated about these sorts of things - you seem to be getting your information from tabloids, Scientology pamphlets and conspiracy theorists, and no one else.


Oh how did people like you ever survive before mood stabilizers <_< if people can go from doing without to needing them â€˜for the rest of their bloody livesâ€™ something has gone horribly wrong in the last half century.

So now you are comparing me to cultists because I dared to question the pill popping culture? Why not try terrorist or Satanist while youâ€™re at it? It does the same job of attaching a negative label to an opinion to deter people from bringing up serious issues. 

Sure I can accept there will be those who need this stuff, but not the numbers that are going on today. I just did a Google and in one area as much as 40% of the adult population were popping happy pills; this is not normal and shouldn't be tolerated, if 'this many' people are so depressed they have to be put on a subscription they need to find out the root of the cause not drug it and forget about it.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Oh how did people like you ever survive before mood stabilizers <_< if people can go from doing without to needing them â€˜for the rest of their bloody livesâ€™ something has gone horribly wrong in the last half century.



Yeah, something did go wrong.  It's called awareness of mental health issues.  And everybody's different.  Some can eventually drop the pills, some can't.  By the way, before they discovered the medications people like me take today, they used electroshock, insulin shock and lobotomies to "treat" these problems.  Brutal, cruel, sometimes lethal.



			
				ADF said:
			
		

> So now you are comparing me to cultists because I dared to question the pill popping culture? Why not try terrorist or Satanist while youâ€™re at it? It does the same job of attaching a negative label to an opinion to deter people from bringing up serious issues.



I'm not comparing you to cultists so much as I am comparing you to fucking idiots out of touch with reality.  These aren't serious issues that you're bringing up, this is sensationalism and harum-scarum bullshit.  In your own special way YOU'VE been brainwashed into believing your own crap, by fellow idiots who help you reinforce your paranoias under the guise of "being informed". 



			
				ADF said:
			
		

> Sure I can accept there will be those who need this stuff, but not the numbers that are going on today. I just did a Google and in one area as much as 40% of the adult population were popping happy pills; this is not normal and shouldn't be tolerated, if 'this many' people are so depressed they have to be put on a subscription they need to find out the root of the cause not drug it and forget about it.



Some people are too quick to jump at the idea of a "fix my mind" pill.  Some are lazy, and rather than address issues in their life that can account for their mental state, opt to pop some "fix me" pills.  It's not wholly unlike, say, someone who needs to clean their bathtub, but rather than get out the brush and cleansing powder, opting to buy a new bathtub instead.  Some docs don't bother to tell them that, because there is money to be made, and if it doesn't hurt anything, they figure why not? Pills DO get over-prescribed, due to fools who don't know shit-from-Shinola about psychiatry and mental health and are convinced that they need/want a pill, and somewhat unscrupulous doctors (not necessarily psychiatrists even, a general practitioner can prescribe these medications) who are willing to oblige, because there is money to be made with these pills.

Me, I've been through many types of medication and many therapy sessions with psychologists and therapists.  For now, I've found a relatively effective mixture of therapy and drugs that keep me on as even a keel as possible.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 28, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant's position in a nut-shell: Yeah, okay so it is kinda true that the pharmaceutical companies have helped to facilitate this pill-popping culture of ours, and btw I just sorta acknowledged that the industry in tandem with the government has a sordid history of "treating" people against their will, but ya know what? FUCK YOU and your personal freedom to not have your body and mind tampered with by court order, I have to take pills and the need to rectify my inconvenience outweighs whatever concerns you might have about how the new technology will be used and abused against people who don't need it.


----------



## ADF (Mar 28, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> I'm not comparing you to cultists so much as I am comparing you to fucking idiots out of touch with reality.  These aren't serious issues that you're bringing up, this is sensationalism and harum-scarum bullshit.  In your own special way YOU'VE been brainwashed into believing your own crap, by fellow idiots who help you reinforce your paranoias under the guise of "being informed".


Ah yes that must be the answer, Iâ€™ve been brain washed! Probably thanks to the lack of mind protecting brand name pharmaceutical drugs in my system. 

You have discovered their sinister plan :roll:

The Scientology illuminate has used propaganda to convince me a large and increasing percentage of the population needing antidepressants is a bad thing, so they canâ€¦ doâ€¦ whatever. Honestly while you are flinging insults recall this thread is in response to the video in the first post, no one is whispering ideas into my ear. 

I admit the things said in the first post are out there; but that is why there is a tinfoil hat joke, the commercial sales pitch at the end, it is supposed to be over the top. Do you honestly think I donâ€™t believe civil rights organisations wouldnâ€™t stop these things before they are even patented? Unless they make pacemaker batteries, big companies are not going to get behind this because unlike mood stabilisers the customers donâ€™t keep coming back. But I do see a brain chip that controls emotion getting abused one day, in what form? We'll have to wait and see.

But to hell with all that conspiracy stuff, put that aside. Now itâ€™s about antidepressants and how society has somehow made it a social norm, well to be more specific not society but the pharmaceutical bastards that are trying to turn them into the next multivitamin. Seeing how you yourself have admitted in your last paragraph that antidepressants are being over prescribed to make money, what is there to argue about? We agree. You may qualify for them but that doesnâ€™t mean the number of people on them today isnâ€™t ridicules.


----------



## Surgat (Mar 28, 2008)

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/slipslop.html 

A court can only demand treatment for the criminally insane. Everyone else is considered competent, *can legally refuse medical treatment*, and gets _punishment_ instead of treatment. One is a done as a warning to others, isn't meant to help the criminal (in fact it usually makes them worse), and ends at a set date. The other isn't done as a warning to others, is meant to help the criminal, and ends whenever a psychologist says it does.  

People who think that crime is always the result of a mental illness are an extreme minority.



			
				Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Tycho The Itinerant's position in a nut-shell: Yeah, okay so it is kinda true that the pharmaceutical companies have helped to facilitate this pill-popping culture of ours, and btw I just sorta acknowledged that the industry in tandem with the government has a sordid history of "treating" people against their will, but ya know what? FUCK YOU and your personal freedom to not have your body and mind tampered with by court order, I have to take pills and the need to rectify my inconvenience outweighs whatever concerns you might have about how the new technology will be used and abused against people who don't need it.



Whereas yours and ADF's posts can be summed up as "fuck your mental health, the [insert conspiracy here] is out to get me and will have found away around my tinfoil hat based on [insert slippery slope reasoning here]!"


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Tycho The Itinerant's position in a nut-shell: Yeah, okay so it is kinda true that the pharmaceutical companies have helped to facilitate this pill-popping culture of ours,



Well, fuck, if you're a person who makes blueberry pie, are you gonna encourage the consumption of your blueberry pies? Of course.  This is business, not just advancement in the mental health field.



			
				Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> and btw I just sorta acknowledged that the industry in tandem with the government has a sordid history of "treating" people against their will,



First off: that's why we have a Patient's Bill of Rights and patient advocate groups.  Second:  Mental health care was a privately run system.  Only the well-to-do could afford treatments.  The average Joe with a disorder ended up locked away in a sanitarium to rot, or out on the street, or living in their relatives' attics.  Treatments were ordered by and paid for by relatives of the patient, more often than not.  Also: Where did I make ANY mention of forced treatment by the government?



			
				Wolf-Bonehead said:
			
		

> but ya know what? FUCK YOU and your personal freedom to not have your body and mind tampered with by court order, I have to take pills and the need to rectify my inconvenience outweighs whatever concerns you might have about how the new technology will be used and abused against people who don't need it.



Why the fuck should I be denied a convenience because of his panicmongering? And where the fucking hell did I say that he wasn't entitled to his personal freedom, and that if he didn't want a chip he didn't have to get one?



			
				I said:
			
		

> So don't get one. Simple, really.



Nope, didn't say it there, rather the opposite.

NOBODY IS GOING TO FUCKING FORCE YOU TO GET A CHIP IN YOUR HEAD.  GET OVER IT, CONSPIRACY LOVERS.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 28, 2008)

I don't think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to be gravely concerned about how a new technology will be abused, and how those in power will stop at nothing to find whatever loopholes they can to get away with curtailing peoples' rights "for the greater good", whether that's against terrorism now or mental health in the future when the effects of being raised in a culture of fear start to show. You simply have to look at history, look at what's going on in the present, see the parallels and see how over time they change the language, methodology and process to achieve the same overall results but in a way that's more readily accepted by a public that's ashamed of its past. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I just simply believe the same bullshit that's been going on throughout history is mostly still going on, with little more than the window dressing having changed. Kinda like how I used to believe racism was dead, then had a reality check and realized it never really went anywhere, it just got more subtle and more politically correct.

I know you'd just love to be able to lump me in with Paul Revere, since that way you wouldn't have to think as much when you want to attack me, but the difference is he mistrusts government and thinks the answer lies in a guy who basically thinks business should usurp government, whereas I have little faith in either and basically see them as one in the same - which means I probably can't even be described as a Libertarian anymore. Guys like Paul Revere seem to gain most of their "knowledge" if you can even call it that from YouTube videos and low-budget "documentaries" that actually try to offer a solution. I, on the other hand, don't watch other peoples shit, I *live* the shit, I see it all around me, I absorb it like a sponge, and this is the conclusion I come to and I don't honestly have much of an idea yet as to the solution except for people to take their lives _back_ from government _and_ business, which is pretty vague.

So I don't implicate any one person, group or institution in who I think is resonsible, I think the entire mess of civilization is a clusterfuck, including the victims who lack the wherewithall to do anything about it, and I tend to doubt there's any particular snake you could decapitate to fix everything. So sorry, but conspiracy theorist doesn't stick. Care to try Liberal? Communist? Oh hell, just cuz I'm in such a generous mood lately, I'll point out that I'm a Rastafarian. You oughtta have fun blaming all my fucked up points of view on that one.



			
				Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> This is just business, not advancement in the mental health field



Fixed for truth, and that's the problem (waits for the charges of typical communist soviet canuckistadian view on health which can never be taken seriously cuz, pfff, just look at him man, he's a fuckin' _Canadian_, and they're _socialists_)


----------



## Tycho (Mar 28, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Care to try Liberal? Communist? Oh hell, just cuz I'm in such a generous mood lately, I'll point out that I'm a Rastafarian. You oughtta have fun blaming all my fucked up points of view on that one.



What the fuck...? Why the hell would I give two shits whether you affiliate yourself with the labels of liberal, communist, Rastafarian, or ANYTHING else like that?


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 28, 2008)

I wasn't addressing you, I was talking to Surgat who was trying to give me and ADF the Paul Revere treatment by chalking up our opinions to a vague label of "conspiracy theorist". So for my part, I refuted that and then offered some more specific labels to try on for size so I can shoot those down too.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 28, 2008)

I doubt this would ever be implanted at birth. Although, as heavily dosed up as kids are, at least in the US, I wouldn't be surprised to see this as an option for parents to pick up for their kiddos. They already have implantable chips that automatically release medication into one's bloodstream.

But referring to them as mind control chips just takes it too far for me. It does sound particularly tinfoil hat-ish.


----------



## Surgat (Mar 29, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> I don't think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to be gravely concerned about how a new technology will be abused, and how those in power will stop at nothing to find whatever loopholes they can to get away with curtailing peoples' rights "for the greater good", whether that's against terrorism now or mental health in the future when the effects of being raised in a culture of fear start to show. You simply have to look at history, look at what's going on in the present, see the parallels and see how over time they change the language, methodology and process to achieve the same overall results but in a way that's more readily accepted by a public that's ashamed of its past. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I just simply believe the same bullshit that's been going on throughout history is mostly still going on, with little more than the window dressing having changed. Kinda like how I used to believe racism was dead, then had a reality check and realized it never really went anywhere, it just got more subtle and more politically correct.
> 
> I know you'd just love to be able to lump me in with Paul Revere, since that way you wouldn't have to think as much when you want to attack me, but the difference is he mistrusts government and thinks the answer lies in a guy who basically thinks business should usurp government, whereas I have little faith in either and basically see them as one in the same - which means I probably can't even be described as a Libertarian anymore. Guys like Paul Revere seem to gain most of their "knowledge" if you can even call it that from YouTube videos and low-budget "documentaries" that actually try to offer a solution. I, on the other hand, don't watch other peoples shit, I *live* the shit, I see it all around me, I absorb it like a sponge, and this is the conclusion I come to and I don't honestly have much of an idea yet as to the solution except for people to take their lives _back_ from government _and_ business, which is pretty vague.
> 
> So I don't implicate any one person, group or institution in who I think is resonsible, I think the entire mess of civilization is a clusterfuck, including the victims who lack the wherewithall to do anything about it, and I tend to doubt there's any particular snake you could decapitate to fix everything. So sorry, but conspiracy theorist doesn't stick. Care to try Liberal? Communist? Oh hell, just cuz I'm in such a generous mood lately, I'll point out that I'm a Rastafarian. You oughtta have fun blaming all my fucked up points of view on that one.



Whatever your exact views are, there's no need for luddism. 

There are guards in place against forced medical treatment: patient's bill of rights, legal right to refuse medical treatment, the fact that punishment isn't considered the same thing as treatment in law, etc. And there is no indication that this technology is going to be used against people via courts. Courts don't order people to be on anti-depression medicine (unless maybe they're a danger to themselves or others, I'm not sure) or anything. As long as it expires, or can be turned off or removed, it isn't much different from anti-depressants in pill form.  

In addition, if you could somehow stop the technology from being produced or marketed, you could probably have put regulations and restrictions on it to prevent misuse while still allowing it as an option for people with clinical depression. 

If big business or whatever group of malefactors in society eliminates things like the patient's bill of rights, or makes the idea that criminality is the result of mental illness prominent in law, in spite of civil rights and patient's rights groups, we're fucked anyways.  

Even if it got that bad, most crime probably wouldn't be treated by anti-depression brain chips.


----------



## ADF (Mar 29, 2008)

Grimfang said:
			
		

> But referring to them as mind control chips just takes it too far for me. It does sound particularly tinfoil hat-ish.


What else can you call a chip surgically implanted into your body that has direct control over your emotional state? Is that not mind control? Watch the video I posted during the tweaking process; they have direct control over whether she is happy or depressed at any given moment.

Tin foil hat sounding or not, it is in essence what they are doing.

@Surgat

Ever heard of Kendra's Law or involuntary outpatient commitment? The court can legally force you to take medication if they deem it necessary, regardless of your objections. Give medical technology a couple of years and I can see these brain implants being issued in court to treat not just severe depression, but people who have anger problems or other antisocial emotional problems. The best part is they cannot be removed by the person, they cannot simply stop taking the court issued pills. 

Of course with the number of ASBOs being given out in the UK that will be a quarter of the population :lol:


----------



## Surgat (Mar 29, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Ever heard of Kendra's Law or involuntary outpatient commitment? The court can legally force you to take medication if they deem it necessary, regardless of your objections.



You're forgetting the part where you have to be a danger to yourself or others for that to happen.  

http://www.omh.state.ny.us/omhweb/Kendra_web/Ksummary.htm


			
				Kendra's Law's writers said:
			
		

> # s suffering from a mental illness; and
> # Is unlikely to survive safely in the community without supervision, based on a clinical determination; and
> # Has a history of lack of compliance with treatment for mental illness that has:
> 
> ...





			
				ADF said:
			
		

> Give medical technology a couple of years and I can see these brain implants being issued in court to treat not just severe depression, but people who have anger issues or other antisocial emotional problems.



You're making a slippery slope fallacy again. 

Even if this gets to be a problem, forced implantation of brain chips would be just a symptom, and the situation could be just as problematic with or without brain chips. It would make more sense to oppose developments like Kendra's Law directly than the production of specific tools it uses.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 29, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> What else can you call a chip surgically implanted into your body that has direct control over your emotional state? Is that not mind control? Watch the video I posted during the tweaking process; they have direct control over whether she is happy or depressed at any given moment.



It is a bit surprising to see her quick mood changes, but the fact that these electrode implants can take you from one extreme to another on the emotional spectrum shows that it may be useful. It proves that increased activity in one portion of the brain can directly affect one's mood, personality, ambitions, etc. If the nature of someone's brain activity were imbalanced, I don't see why correcting it through some sort of medication or surgical procedure would be wrong in itself.

However.... Ideologically, I feel no desire to embrace newer technologies and sciences. I guess I lean towards naturalism, if that is the correct word that I'm looking for.

I always have to ask this question: Is brain activity the stimuli or a symptom of our own thoughts and actions?

But this is my brain off topic. As far as court orders go in this area, I really don't know. It's a scary thought of a reality, but I couldn't see something like this occurring unless someone had a serious issue that they were refusing to treat themselves, and maybe resisted previous court rulings that were less severe - such as therapy or medication.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 29, 2008)

Surgat said:
			
		

> Whatever your exact views are, there's no need for luddism.



How the fuck does thinking "okay, given enough time they'll probably find a way to abuse this technology, or at least try to" make me a luddite when virtually every technology ever created _has_ been misused by someone, somewhere for wrongdoing? Why isn't it obvious to you yet that it's the *abuse* part of that I'm worried about more than the *technology* part?  



			
				Surgat said:
			
		

> If big business or whatever group of malefactors in society eliminates things like the patient's bill of rights, or makes the idea that criminality is the result of mental illness prominent in law, in spite of civil rights and patient's rights groups, we're fucked anyways.



*That* is what I'm worried about more than anything. The only real threat from technology is potentially making it harder to resist what you know is wrong.  



			
				Surgat said:
			
		

> Even if it got that bad, most crime probably wouldn't be treated by anti-depression brain chips.



Oh, okay, so everyone can stop being concerned about what kind of mess we might be dumping on our kids, because they'll just have to deal with a dystopia and not a chip in their brain.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 29, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Oh, okay, so everyone can stop being concerned about what kind of mess we might be dumping on our kids, because they'll just have to deal with a dystopia and not a chip in their brain.



He shoots down your "CHIP=EBIL" argument and you decide to jump the rails and go down another road that has little to do with the original subject? It almost sounded like you were making an argument FOR the chip there, with your "dystopia" remark.


----------



## Surgat (Mar 29, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Surgat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You seem to be opposing a technology because of a potential for abuse that either doesn't appear to be a real possibility in the current political climate, or would be a part of a much bigger problem in some _hypothetical_ future. That's Luddism. Luddism doesn't have to be opposing new technology just because it's new technology.   

This brain chip doesn't have any more serious potential for abuse than any other technology. 

Or are you not actually opposing it? Maybe I've misunderstood. 



			
				Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Surgat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're missing the point, and putting words into my mouth. 

Like I said to you and ADF, opposing developments which would make these technologies susceptible to abuse makes more sense than opposing the technologies themselves. Opposing just the brain chip would make things harder for people with clinical depression, giant corporations would still have other things to abuse and cause just as many problems, you'd have wasted effort that could have gone to trying to control those elements in society, and if those sorts of people gained enough power, they'd be able to develop and abuse those and many other technologies anyways. So focusing on and opposing something like brain chips is a waste of time.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Mar 29, 2008)

Fuck this. I'm done with you people. You don't understand a God damned thing I say and I've got better things to do with my time than explain the simple difference between opposing technology and opposing the abuse of technology and why I don't just take for granted that legal safeguards won't somehow be curtailed or abandoned altogether the minute it's convenient.

You trust the system, I don't, it's as simple as that, now bugger off.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 29, 2008)

Wolf-Bone said:
			
		

> Fuck this. I'm done with you people. You don't understand a God damned thing I say and I've got better things to do with my time than explain the simple difference between opposing technology and opposing the abuse of technology and why I don't just take for granted that legal safeguards won't somehow be curtailed or abandoned altogether the minute it's convenient.
> 
> You trust the system, I don't, it's as simple as that, now bugger off.



Because we stand up to and shoot down your arguments, we "don't understand"? Whatever.

It's one thing to say you don't trust the system, it's another to try to make someone else feel like a fool because they don't share your distrust.


----------



## Ceceil Felias (Mar 29, 2008)

This thread amuses and delights me in new and exciting ways. :3 Particularly because the conspiracy-theorists-in-denial are getting bounced around and trying to salvage themselves in some seriously ugly ways.


----------



## ADF (Mar 29, 2008)

Because laws work donâ€™t they? 

Laws against drug use put a stop to all drug consumption and trafficking, human rights stopped prisoners of war getting beaten and humiliated in American and British camps, child abuse laws removed a need for a NSPCC, human experimentation laws totally stopped Hitler from using Jews as lab rats.

If people honestly think this sort of technology will never get abused, because human rights says so, Iâ€™m not the one who is delusional. You donâ€™t hear about crap like our government experimenting on our own troops till years after it had been done, which in itself sounds like a conspiracy until you pick up a history book.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 29, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Because laws work donâ€™t they?
> 
> Laws against drug use put a stop to all drug consumption and trafficking, human rights stopped prisoners of war getting beaten and humiliated in American and British camps, child abuse laws removed a need for a NSPCC, human experimentation laws totally stopped Hitler from using Jews as lab rats.
> 
> If people honestly think this sort of technology will never get abused, because human rights says so, Iâ€™m not the one who is delusional. You donâ€™t hear about crap like our government experimenting on our own troops till years after it had been done, which in itself sounds like a conspiracy until you pick up a history book.



Such is, always has been, and always will be the way of life. Rules are made to be followed, but are inevitably broken.


----------



## Ceceil Felias (Mar 29, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Because laws work donâ€™t they?
> 
> Laws against drug use put a stop to all drug consumption and trafficking, human rights stopped prisoners of war getting beaten and humiliated in American and British camps, child abuse laws removed a need for a NSPCC, human experimentation laws totally stopped Hitler from using Jews as lab rats.
> 
> If people honestly think this sort of technology will never get abused, because human rights says so, Iâ€™m not the one who is delusional. You donâ€™t hear about crap like our government experimenting on our own troops till years after it had been done, which in itself sounds like a conspiracy until you pick up a history book.


If this ignorance and abuse of law makes you so distrusting of the technology in the article, why don't you go and do something to get something to change? Just whining about it to furries won't make the evil mind control chip go away.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 30, 2008)

I can't post an image macro... but I can post a link.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj296/TychoTheItinerant/LOLBrain.png


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 30, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> I can't post an image macro... but I can post a link.
> 
> http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj296/TychoTheItinerant/LOLBrain.png



hehehehehe.. made me giggle :]


----------



## darkdoomer (Mar 31, 2008)

still i bet you're watching TV. which is actually the best mind control device known to the man.


i like irony.


----------



## Tycho (Mar 31, 2008)

edited out a completely unrelated post


----------



## gruz (Apr 21, 2008)

there are many reasons not to accept these chips but the reason i would support them is the possibility of an orgasm button


----------



## Oni (Apr 21, 2008)

Absolutely amazing.

I know that I will never need that amazing technological and medical creation. 

Absolutely amazing.




http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/92

We do not know how our memories are stored and encoded. That is a good thing for now I think.


----------



## Oni (Apr 21, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Skip to 4m 22s.
> 
> Now Iâ€™m no tinfoil hat wearer, but anyone else disturbed by this â€˜happy chipâ€™? If they can influence one emotion it is only a matter of time before they can influence them all, it is only going to get easier and safer to issue these things over time.
> 
> ...


ADF,

When we are "happy" our thoughts can be made differently. If you were absolutely happy with working a minimum wage job, living in a terrible neighborhood, and being unintelligent, you may not make attempts at bettering yourself because of your contentment and "felt" happyness which would be caused by an implant which controls your sensed "happyness emotion".

I am more fond to humans becoming cyborgs with technology than robots becoming more human.


----------



## Ceceil Felias (Apr 21, 2008)

DELICIOUS THREAD REVIVAL

YOU MUST FLOG IT LIKE A DEAD HORSE


----------



## Oni (Apr 21, 2008)

I wish that I lived in a more advanced age in which I could transfer my memories, thought patterns, and self into a electronic machine, so I can preserve my active self.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Apr 21, 2008)

I've got it. The solution to about 99% of our problems. We shouldn't be working on chips, they _are_ the problem, or rather, the _result_, but the problem is Britain *itself*. We need to figure out a way to let _them_ travel down the inevitable path to oligarchical collectivism / idiocracy, because I think they're beyond hope at this point, somehow without it influencing us. I got into an argument with my dad the other day because he said "some cultures just can't be democratized", and I thought he was being stupid, because he was talking about all those fragile democracies in Africa. He doesn't realize that for all their problems, _they_ have *hope* of true democracy, because _they_ were never successfully tamed over countless centuries the way Europeans were, especially the Brits.

I say *let them* have their tracking chips. Let *us* salvage the democratic revolution they've been betraying since Oliver Cromwell.


----------



## Tycho (Apr 21, 2008)

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/necromancer.htm

WHY THE FUCK DID THIS THREAD GET RESURRECTED?

*casts Turn Undead* Back to the grave from whence you arose, vile thing!




			
				Gruz said:
			
		

> there are many reasons not to accept these chips but the reason i would support them is the possibility of an orgasm button



They already have an "orgasm button".  It's being made for women I think, taps into the lower spinal cord and simulates a raging orgasm at the user's command.


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 22, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> They already have an "orgasm button".  It's being made for women I think, taps into the lower spinal cord and simulates a raging orgasm at the user's command.



WHOOA! Make for dudes, dude! Oh, I would NEVER drag my feet through work again. I'd never bitch to anyone again. I'd just be smilin aaaaaaaallllllll daaaaaaaay looooooooooong
;D


----------



## indrora (Apr 22, 2008)

my god. has ADF gone off the deep end though?

here's a question you should REALLY be asking:
if you were on the brink of death (not caused by human, but sickness) and the ONLY way to survive was to get snockered on weed, would you?
but oh wait you're fucked because the government doesnt want you doing weed... pity.

Really, it should be up to the person getting it to make a decision, or somebody who is trusted to be able to make a decision. if they cant make a decision, they should be shot on sight. god Fucking Damnit. how hard is this?

Also, any technology implanted should have NO forms of blanket control, only CERTAIN forms of control and all must be under CONSENT. that means that the government cant take over your brain because then it'd be illegal.... HMMKAAY?


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 22, 2008)

indrora said:
			
		

> that means that the government cant take over your brain because then it'd be illegal.... HMMKAAY?



Teh govament has its ways around illegalities..

A couple ideas:
1. If there is no documentation of a claim, then it never happened.
2. Abuse the new notion of supreme Executive Authority--belief in having the right to override the laws of the universe.
3. Look the other way and don't respond to any claims or questions.

But when the issue of survivability comes up, and the balance hangs over pot, I say pot. Even if it isn't all about survivability. I still say just the the man his damn joint.


----------



## ADF (Apr 22, 2008)

Drama must be dry if people are reviving dead threads for entertainment.



			
				indrora said:
			
		

> here's a question you should REALLY be asking:
> if you were on the brink of death (not caused by human, but sickness) and the ONLY way to survive was to get snockered on weed, would you?
> but oh wait you're fucked because the government doesnt want you doing weed... pity.


I donâ€™t see the relation to the topic, how does my stance on emotion influencing implants relate to adhering to the governments decisions on the legality of weed?



			
				indrora said:
			
		

> Really, it should be up to the person getting it to make a decision, or somebody who is trusted to be able to make a decision. if they cant make a decision, they should be shot on sight. god Fucking Damnit. how hard is this?
> 
> Also, any technology implanted should have NO forms of blanket control, only CERTAIN forms of control and all must be under CONSENT. that means that the government cant take over your brain because then it'd be illegal.... HMMKAAY?


The government creates the lawsâ€¦

If for instance the government decides it wants my blood, thumbnail print, retinal scan and other biometrics collected to be put in a massive ID card database I donâ€™t get a say in the matter. I also donâ€™t get a say in the matter if the government decides it wants to make us the most CCTV watched population on the planet, with the average Britain getting recorded on over 300 cameras a day. My parents also didnâ€™t get a say when I may have been one of the unlucky sods that was injected with an experimental vaccination as a baby; which is arguably responsible for my Asperger's syndrome, an ongoing case for the courts to decide.

Should, only certain, under consentâ€¦ many things *should* be a certain way but are not, the world doesn't operate on the way things 'should' be. Crap happens and you do not always get a say in the matter, big brother control freak governments are not reserved to the history books.


----------

