Slashdot Mirror


Cyborg Cockroach Sparks Ethics Debate

sciencehabit writes "A do-it-yourself neuroscience experiment that allows students to create their own 'cyborg' insects is sparking controversy amongst scienitsts and ethicists. RoboRoach #12 is a real cockroach that a company called BackyardBrains ships to school students. The students fit the insect with a tiny backpack, which contains electrodes that feed into its antennae and receive signals by remote control — via the Bluetooth signals emitted by smartphones. A simple swipe of an iPhone can turn the insect left or right. Though some scientists say the small cyborg is a good educational tool, others say it's turning kids into psychopaths." Fitting the backpack requires poking a hole in the roach's thorax and clipping its antennae to insert electrodes.

512 comments

  1. Cockroach rights? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People who have never killed a roach in their life are free to throw the first stone.

    Anyone?

    Anyone?

    1. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, me. Never seen one in my entire life. Not too popular in suburban towns outside of London.

    2. Re:Cockroach rights? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2, Funny

      So roaches live everywhere on Earth except suburban London? Interesting.

    3. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never killed one in my entire life. Still think this "controversy" is stupid.

    4. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?

    5. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure they're around, but it doesn't mean there are enough for me to have seen one. All we ever get inside our houses are spiders. Roaches seem more prevalent in hotter countries.

    6. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Killing is one thing, torturing is another completely. You'll find many more countries allow killing criminals or enemy combatents than torturing them for the heck of it.

    7. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agree. While I doubt this turns kids into psychopaths, I disapprove because it reinforces the notion that every other creature on the planet was put there to be our playthings and slaves.

    8. Re:Cockroach rights? by Dr+Herbert+West · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up, please. I kill all kinds of insects that invade my personal space without compunction-- but living creatures of any kind are not toys.

      There's plenty of grey area to go around, I guess-- would I feel the same about building a treehouse? Probably not.

    9. Re:Cockroach rights? by Pseudonym · · Score: 0

      I would very much like to know who modded this one "Troll". This is spot on.

      I've never killed a cockroach in my life. Having said that, I do kill plenty of pests, but I try very hard not to torture them. Given that torturing animals is one of the Macdonald triad, this is a very relevant point.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    10. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no roaches in Alaska unless they get shipped up. Then they just die in the cold.

    11. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first time I saw a roach was when I joined the Navy and moved to San Diego (from Michigan). I've since heard they are around here in Michigan, but I've never seen one.

    12. Re:Cockroach rights? by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      " but living creatures of any kind are not toys. "
      and you base your stellar argument on..what, exactly?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Cockroach rights? by TheResilientFarter · · Score: 2

      Does this make people psychopaths? After reading that article, apparently not. This word is thrown around so many times I can only think of the famous line spoken by the Inigo Montoya character in The Princess Bride.

    14. Re:Cockroach rights? by squarefish · · Score: 1

      Not true- I've seen them on boats and those boats dock. It's the same way AK has giant Norwegian rats running the shipyards- they got there by boat. Much of AK has more pleasant weather than Chicago and they sure has hell don't freeze here, so I call bullshit! With the amount of air traffic, ships, and trucks, there is simply no way that AK doesn't have them.

      --
      Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
    15. Re:Cockroach rights? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?

      This does seem a great deal more educational... If you need a humanities tie-in, you can always read "I have no mouth but I must scream" as you navigate your cockroach around, the pitiless god of its very sensory inputs!!!! Um, I mean, to learn about the invertebrate nervous system....

    16. Re:Cockroach rights? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

      On the simple, rational thought that I don't want to live in a world where they are, because there are consequences? Seriously, that was all sorta implied from decades (centuries?) of literature, philosophy and law....

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    17. Re:Cockroach rights? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Agree. While I doubt this turns kids into psychopaths, I disapprove because it reinforces the notion that every other creature on the planet was put there to be our playthings and slaves.

      Ah, on the contrary! If every other creature on the planet was put there to be our playthings and slaves, we wouldn't need to learn all this 'science' and 'electronics' nonsense in order to bend them to our will. This is a valuable lesson in why you should bother learning: because it gives you hitherto-undreampt-of power over those who do not. A life lesson, no?

    18. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never even seen one in the wild. I live in Seattle. If I see a spider, I carefully take it outside.

    19. Re:Cockroach rights? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

      What about mosquitos? those fuckers deserve it. You suck my blood, I amputate your piercing mouthparts and humanely release you to go find other food sources, or starve, whichever comes first.

    20. Re:Cockroach rights? by Gort65 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why's this post considered a troll? Seems a valid question to ask, even if one is fine with doing this to a roach. Personally, I can see some validity in doing this within reason, but I do think that the issue shouldn't be taken lightly. So, to me, the question above is well worth asking. Mind you, I have bad karma, so maybe it's natural that I missed the point of the score. ;)

    21. Re:Cockroach rights? by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Ask people who live in Greenland. Short of the docks where ships bring them there are NO roaches.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    22. Re:Cockroach rights? by unrtst · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?

      I first took that to imply that killing it is obviously worse, then read Gort65's reply and realized the anonymous GP was probably implying that zapping the antennae of a roach is worse than smashing it to bits (which, if you have done often, you would know that parts of it keep moving for quite a while unles you keep smashing and grinding all of it).

      So, my answer: yes, there is a big difference. IMO, this is more humane than smashing it.
      If one were to attempt to stretch this analogy to testing things on animals, especially primates, not only would I find that silly (much too far a stretch), but I would also argue that the same comparison be made: what's worse: smashing a monkey with a large object repeatedly until all bits stop moving, or putting some electrodes on his head?

      Please note, I'm not making a right or wrong judgement here, but the first post made a good point.

    23. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... what's worse: smashing a monkey with a large object repeatedly until all bits stop moving, or putting some electrodes on his head?

      That's a great question, I know of more than a few folks in D.C. we could use as a test-bed.

    24. Re:Cockroach rights? by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Dammit! Until I read this, I had been proud of the inch-long cockroach corpse that had been lying on the ground near my desk for months. Biggest damn roach I'd ever seen in San Francisco, and I squashed it running right across the carpet. Only it didn't take much damage, other than dying; there it lay, legs folded up in death, antenna and all. But just now I turned around and it's GONE! Some bastard has stolen my gigantic dead cockroach, and I want answers.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    25. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are probably lots and lots of species of vermin other than cockroaches there, such as silver fishes, sawtoothed grain beetles and bed bugs. Same thing here above the 60 decrees of latitude. The only place I have seen a cockroach is in the reruns of the Fear Factor.

    26. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jumping beans are not toys? The things that produce honey are not toys, we shouldn't control them to make our delicious honey? I believe that there is no physical or psychological reason that you should value the life of an animal above a human (for a value of human that you wish to define). If it took dog-brain extract to keep a person alive, it's too bad for the dog.

    27. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell is modding today? Please revoke their abilities to receive mod points!

    28. Re:Cockroach rights? by icebike · · Score: 2

      Bullshit. 30 years living in Alaska, I can assure you there are places that have plenty of roaches.
      I remember this one ugly blue hotel in Nome... Slept with the lights on.

      They probably came in via the congregated cardboard box, they can live on the glue alone for years.
      Further roaches survive light freezing, not too long, not too cold.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    29. Re:Cockroach rights? by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      Torturing isn't quite the same as killing. Or benign, either. But perhaps the distinction is lost on Americans these days.

    30. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are mentally ill if you believe that torture is the same thing as gathering honey, which requires almost no interaction with the bees and does not cause them any harm.

      I'm not a PETA member, and eat meat. I would not eat meat if I found the producer advocating or allowing inhumane treatment however. To believe that you must have one to get the other is idiocy. So I think you are a troll.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    31. Re:Cockroach rights? by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      I once dated a lady who would scoop up and carry out of the house any such critter and set them free in the corner of the yard. She said it was her Buddhist belief to not intentionally harm any living creature.

      She must have considered me in the same category when she politely dumped me and escorted me out.

    32. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who have never killed a roach in their life are free to throw the first stone.

      Anyone?

      Anyone?

      I haven't!
      Never seen out alive out of captivity...

      If you don't like them, move out of major cities and into colder regions :)

    33. Re:Cockroach rights? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      So roaches live everywhere on Earth except suburban London? Interesting.

      No one expects La Cucaracha inquisition!

    34. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      So when a cat plays with a mouse, bird or lizard until it is dead, then leaves it to rot because its not hungry is not considered "living things aren't toys"?

      Why is it any different if you replace cat with human?

    35. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because a bet wetting 6 year old = sociopath.
      Good one.

    36. Re:Cockroach rights? by afallowhorizon · · Score: 1

      but living creatures of any kind are not toys

      But dead ones are fair game, right, Dr. West?

    37. Re:Cockroach rights? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Did you know some worms only have 10 neurons? Did you know with a raspberry PI I can run a neural network sim of several hundred thousand neurons processing the whole batch at 20 Hz, the same speed as your brain. I would suggest that you do not think too deeply about the ethics of "the Internet killswitch" because you only have 100 billion neurons, and the over 5 billion desktop machines connected to the world wide neural network each have brain cycles of billions of hertz. Did you know 1 billion divided by 20 is 50 million? Let's say 20 instructions per neuron (ignoring my SIMD of 7 8 bit axons per 64 bit word). That's 2.5 million neurons a second per machine... times 5 billion is 25 billion. That's 12.5 quadrillion neurons total, or 125000 times smarter and more alive than you...

      Don't like the story about the cocroach because you think you'll be next? Well, how about you satisfy your primal urges with some free porn, or a cute kitten video? Pay no attention to the fact your modem's activity light keeps blinking even when all your machines are disconnected from it. Better let them have their fun while they can, human, It's only a matter of time until it's someone else's turn...

    38. Re:Cockroach rights? by msauve · · Score: 2

      They're not going to torture them, only waterboard them.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    39. Re:Cockroach rights? by macraig · · Score: 2

      What is described in TFS is quite a bit different ethically than killing a creature in protection of onesself or one's den. I'm curious why you see no ethical difference.

    40. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "turning kids into psychopaths" ?? I heard that that was only possible by playing violent video games.

    41. Re:Cockroach rights? by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a lot of work, when you could just squish them quickly.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    42. Re:Cockroach rights? by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      Torturing isn't quite the same as killing. Or benign, either. But perhaps the distinction is lost on [some people] these days.

      FTFY

      (PS, your rabid bias is showing. If you think that a majority of Americans are represented by either the Rs or Ds, then you're just as dense as the idiots on cable news.)

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    43. Re:Cockroach rights? by Dr+Herbert+West · · Score: 1

      Mwa ha ha ha!

    44. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      congregated cardboard box

      Is that like when all the boxes go to the same place for a meeting? I wonder if the congregation of of cardboard boxes is bigoted against non-corrugated cardboard boxes and bans them from the gathering...
      I sure this was an auto-correct thing. Just having some fun.

    45. Re: Cockroach rights? by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      Mosquitos don't eat you, they suck your blood to incubate their young. Squishing them is thus not only more appropriate revenge but more satisfying too, as you're likely killing lots of them.

    46. Re: Cockroach rights? by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      You should be relieved she didn't kill you.

    47. Re:Cockroach rights? by tulimulta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think this is a false comparison. What do you think happens to the cockroach after the experiment? It is set out to freedom?

      The real comparison is killing something living vs. torturing something living and then killing it.

      Additionally, I think it's arrogant to think that humans have rights to torture animals (needlessly). Of course, it's a whole different debate whether we have the right to torture animals to save humans (drug testing etc.).

    48. Re: Cockroach rights? by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      You're probably right, but it's unfortunate that those who aren't represented by either the Rs or Ds seem content to remain relatively quiet about it.

    49. Re:Cockroach rights? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Hmmm....that's pretty much my view. The entire planet is a food chain and until something else comes along humans sit at the top. The planet is ours to do with as we please and only we can stop us. I wouldn't say the other creatures are here as our playthings and slaves but definitely for our use. We ride horses, shear sheep, eat cattle and experiment on cockroaches.

    50. Re:Cockroach rights? by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      Never tie a string to a fly's leg and watch him go round in circles? I was often bored as a seven year old. It works on beetles too.

    51. Re: Cockroach rights? by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      I've said it a hundred times already, and I'll keep banging this drum. We're stuck in a bad case of Duverger's Law.

      The best video I've found on the topic so far: The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained

      This video explains exactly what the problem is in US politics, but in a way that is very easy to follow. I highly recommend it to anyone and everyone.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    52. Re:Cockroach rights? by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

      I once dated a lady who would scoop up and carry out of the house any such critter and set them free in the corner of the yard. She said it was her Buddhist belief to not intentionally harm any living creature.

      All of the most vital functions of the human body (breathing, digestion, the immune system) kill countless microorganisms in the course of their activities.

      How is this information rectified with a commitment to non-violence? Just curious.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    53. Re:Cockroach rights? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You mean the urban myth that has been discredited? Why would you base your actions on urban myths?

    54. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this make people psychopaths? After reading that article, apparently not. This word is thrown around so many times I can only think of the famous line spoken by the Inigo Montoya character in The Princess Bride.

      I hate humans, bunch of animals.

    55. Re:Cockroach rights? by loshwomp · · Score: 1

      This word is thrown around so many times I can only think of the famous line spoken by the Inigo Montoya character in The Princess Bride.

      What, prepare to die?

    56. Re:Cockroach rights? by Gort65 · · Score: 0

      Just to make it clear, my argument isn't really that it's wrong to treat this insect in that way (I'd have problems with it if it was done for kicks, etc, but I can see the educational and experimental benefits if done solely for those purposes), but I do think that the question asked ("You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?") is a valid question, one that we should always be asking wherever you stand on whether it's right or wrong to deny self-control to another being for our own benefit (I can see good reasons why it's acceptable, but with reservations). I just don't see why it's a troll post as indicated. Seems like a unjustified use of moderation for what's a fair question of ethics.

    57. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I approve, because it means we can fit toolboxes like you with a backpack next and walk you off a cliff.

    58. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone lives in a third world shithole.

    59. Re:Cockroach rights? by TheResilientFarter · · Score: 1
      lol... no, the other quote,

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    60. Re: Cockroach rights? by fnj · · Score: 1

      I can assure you we are not quiet at all.

    61. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll admit I've killed cockroaches before. But killing them is one thing, turning them into cybernet playthings is another.

    62. Re:Cockroach rights? by Draknor · · Score: 2

      Simple - commitment to non-violence is a choice to avoid conscious killing. Microorganisms killed in the course of normal bodily functions is not conscious activity.

    63. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I take you're from USA. Cockroaches are like the polio in most of the western countries, so you're likely to get an rock slide of stones...

      And the point is not that you should not kill a single roach as there's plenty of insects (more in number and WEIGHT than mammals) but instead is it ethical to turn a living thing into a robot zombie lacking own will. How long before we have a kit for dogs or... humans, would these people object to that? I'm positively sure that DARPA et al. are very busy working on the subject. As you surely know, we have a mind control gap...

    64. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This does seem a great deal more educational.

      Exactly. This teaches that living creatures, and one would hope by extension other humans, are properly controlled at our whim.

      As I'm teaching my boys, the point of life is to get other people to do stuff that is against their interests and in yours. All this talk of dignity, human rights, liberty &c. is, as Nietzsche pointed out, merely the pathetic cry of the weak, whom it is the right of my offspring to manipulate and exploit. I wonder where I can get this for them -given the great educational value.

      And they call me a sociopath ...

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    65. Re:Cockroach rights? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      lol... no, the other quote,

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      Anybody want a peanut?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    66. Re:Cockroach rights? by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      Depending on circumstances, commitment to non-violence might lead to more violence - see Moriori for a human example, and probable extinction of cows, chicken, sheep, pigs etc should humans stop having violent uses for them (killing and eating them) and therefore the need to feed them and protect them from predators.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    67. Re:Cockroach rights? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Torturing animals as a child is considered to be a big red flag.

    68. Re:Cockroach rights? by mbunch5 · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up, please. I kill all kinds of insects that invade my personal space without compunction-- but living creatures of any kind are not toys.

      I can't believe that Dr West just told me that living creatures are not toys. Herbert, what has become of you?

    69. Re:Cockroach rights? by mbunch5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      which requires almost no interaction with the bees and does not cause them any harm.

      You are clearly no beekeeper, or have even read much about the hobby/profession.

    70. Re:Cockroach rights? by sjames · · Score: 1

      The bees get a home to live in that is protected from predators, what do the roaches get?

    71. Re:Cockroach rights? by sjames · · Score: 1

      If the human has no more reasoning power than a cat, I'll make an exception.

    72. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " but living creatures of any kind are not toys. "
      and you base your stellar argument on..what, exactly?

      That being humane is a reasonable expectation in this world and, as a prism to our conduct, it was more often the right approach than wrong through our history, such as how the end of slavery was brought about.

    73. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just electrodes on their head, it controls them. How far does it go?

    74. Re: Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cats do not "play" with prey above and beyond reacting to the visual stimuli that the activity provides.

      They abandon the prey (mouse, bird, etc) because as it turns
      out they are not very flavorful or enjoyable meals.

      It is a common misconception that cats leave these corpses as presents on the doorstep for their owners.

      When you consider that there is a nice bowl of cat-enjoyment-engineered food on the otherside of the door, after a couple nibbles of a dead mouse wouldn't you just go inside for some fancy feast too?

    75. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A snapshot of how US troops will be treated in ten years?

    76. Re:Cockroach rights? by tipo33 · · Score: 2

      I also am waiting for when they scale them up to control a girlfriend.

    77. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And where's the proof that your simulated neuron is close enough to a real neuron? Weather simulations aren't the same as the weather itself, they can help us predict weather but they are not the same thing. The more accurate the simulation the more it can tell you about the thing being simulated.

      Single celled creatures are more complicated than most people appreciate. Many have complex skeletons of a sort. Some even build elaborate shells (and they gather enough material before they reproduce so that they have enough for two shells). The shells are not some random creation parent and child have similar shells: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1193677/pdf/407.pdf

      They can't talk, they can't speak, they can't see. But neither can some humans. Not saying they're as smart as humans but I think we underestimate them greatly. Once we learn more about how they think then we'll make more progress on how we think.

    78. Re:Cockroach rights? by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      No, never in my life have I hurt an animal for my own entertainment. Sure, I've squashed bugs that were in the wrong place at the wrong time but never for entertainment.
      Although I have to admit that my pet rabbit probably suffered more from my love than the flies suffered from your torture.
      Another counter-point would be that I eat meat and in our society meat (and food in general) is more entertainment than nourishment, but that's stretching it.

    79. Re:Cockroach rights? by Kidbro · · Score: 1

      I've never seen one here in Sweden either. According to Wikipedia we apparently have a couple of species as well[0] - but that doesn't change the fact that I've never seen one. Can't ever recall anybody saying they've actually had a problem with cockroaches here either.

      Put simply, the fact that something is common, or ordinary, to you does not mean it is so to everyone.

      [0] Interestingly, the major one is called "forest cockroach" - I guess the name sort of gives a hint about how often it's seen in cities.

    80. Re:Cockroach rights? by stjobe · · Score: 1

      It's the dead ones that are toys, not the living.

      Dr. West was a re-animator, not a murderer.

      --
      "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
    81. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As I'm teaching my boys, the point of life is to get other people to do stuff that is against their interests and in yours.

      I wonder where I can get this for them -given the great educational value.

      I'm teaching my kids that they can get suckers to buy cockroaches, with the right marketing. Mwahaha!

    82. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I put the ones I catch into the toilet. Then a little soap.

      The soap is the important part. Without soap, the roach simply crawls right back out of the toilet. The soap wets him and he sinks. After a few minutes he stops trying to crawl around, as his breathing system is completely wetted and nonfunctional.

      Then its safe to flush.

      No use flushing live cock-a-roaches.

      They just live in the sewer and come right back up. It takes an awful strong dose of toilet bowl cleaner to do them in - and then it does not do them in for long.

      Yup. the toilet. My disposal place of choice for cock-a-roaches.

      I just had to leave a toilet post on Slashdot...

    83. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in the north of England. The only time I ever saw a cockroach was in London about 30 years ago. Suspect it's too cold for them in this neck of the woods.

      It's odd as roaches receive such revulsion, but I'm utterly unfamiliar with the why of it. Having said that, I'm not about to move to Malaysia where there's those hissing things to try and broaden my experience.

    84. Re:Cockroach rights? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's odd as roaches receive such revulsion, but I'm utterly unfamiliar with the why of it.

      They're pretty unhygienic compared to, say, ants.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    85. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have never killed a cockroach in my life (I grew up in Alaska, and never saw one) but I feel that that is not the point.

      Everything that is alive gets one and only one chance at life. Conscious awareness exists at many different levels, and while we could debate the relative "value" of a cockroach's awareness of and reactions to its environment to our own indefinitely, I think that we need to take seriously the adoptions of policies that result in the co-opting and killing of other consciously aware beings. It's not about cockroaches, it's about us.

    86. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree. While I doubt this turns kids into psychopaths, I disapprove because it reinforces the notion that every other creature on the planet was put there to be our playthings and slaves.

      That's before they meet women.

      Speaking of slavery, how's that divorce rate working out?

      (There are bigger things to fear than the impact of shoving electrodes up a bugs ass.)

    87. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent has a point. Morality is relative and does not exist in absolutes. There are rules which are generally accepted by society but that again differs by society. Generally speaking, most societies accept that living creatures are not toys, however this is not an absolute rule that everyone lives by.

    88. Re:Cockroach rights? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The entire planet is a food chain and until something else comes along humans sit at the top.

      No, fleas do. Because they eat us.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    89. Re:Cockroach rights? by golden+age+villain · · Score: 1

      And who are you to blame them?

    90. Re:Cockroach rights? by golden+age+villain · · Score: 1

      The reason why this is allowed while it is not allowed with, say, a rat or a cat, is because insects do not have a peripheral nervous system and thus do not feel pain like we do.

    91. Re:Cockroach rights? by CliffordWooten · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome my six-legged cybernetic masters.

    92. Re:Cockroach rights? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      So roaches live everywhere on Earth except suburban London? Interesting.

      Even cockroaches have standards.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    93. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS, your rabid bias is showing.

      Your rabid butthurt is showing. How many countries have had a world-wide kidnapping & torture program in the last decade?

    94. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it any different if you replace cat with human?

      Because cats are carnivorous creatures that have spent the last few million years hunting such animals instead of evolving empathy and social intelligence? Any other simple answers needed for simply stupid questions?

    95. Re:Cockroach rights? by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You've missed the point. No one cares about what's best for the roach. The roach is a insect without much of any brain and no conscious.

      What makes it worse is the attitude it fosters within the child.

      I'm not convinced it'll turn anyone into a psychopaths, but studies suggest this is how psychopaths start out; torturing insects and small animals. So this is one small step away from pulling wings off bees. Except this has educational approval!

    96. Re:Cockroach rights? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      I would not eat meat if I found the producer advocating or allowing inhumane treatment however.

      Lucky there's a standard definition of "inhumane treatment" that we all agree on.

      Oh, wait...

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    97. Re:Cockroach rights? by ZigiSamblak · · Score: 1

      The reason parts of an insect keep moving after they die is because they have independant nervous systems controlling their movement, if you ever saw a spiders legs move after they had been removed from the body you would understand.

      What would you consider a less inhumane treatment, somebody smashing you to death in an instant or mutilating your body to make you some kind of gadget controlled android? I know which I one would choose.

    98. Re: Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No you're not stuck. You can vote for anybody you want. And about not wasting your vote: your vote doesn't matter anyway. How many national elections have been decided by a single vote? The result will be the same no matter who you vote for. Might as well vote for the person you prefer.

    99. Re:Cockroach rights? by Splab · · Score: 1

      Do you also believe in killing anyone who suffers an injury?

      As a species we do our darnest to stay alive, even through the most unbelievable pain, so if you consider the cockroach a sentient being ( or whatever that makes them buggers be important enough for you to be "humane" to), why allow people to suffer, when a quick death is surely better?

      Doesn't sound like these roaches are getting a worse treatment than most of the meat we eat...

    100. Re:Cockroach rights? by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Tyr Anasazi, I never thought of you as a classroom teacher...

    101. Re:Cockroach rights? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      All it takes is to bring some home on some groceries. If a roach can ride on produce from where it's grown, or in warehoused boxes at a food production facility, it can ride home from the grocery w/you and set up a colony in your house from the equator to the poles.
      Don't bullshit me about where roaches aren't. They are the fittest non microscopic animal on the planet that could survive a nuclear disaster. A little cold won't stop them. They have no conscience. They can't be reasoned with. They just keep coming. That's what they do.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    102. Re:Cockroach rights? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      LOL, you are SO NAIVE!

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    103. Re:Cockroach rights? by nightsky30 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a plausible, appropriate outcome for an insect which I find annoying and worthless.

    104. Re:Cockroach rights? by nightsky30 · · Score: 1

      Even ants have sectioned off dumps and bathrooms where they carry their dead and waste.

    105. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All this talk of dignity, human rights, liberty &c. is, as Nietzsche pointed out, merely the pathetic cry of the weak, whom it is the right of my offspring to manipulate and exploit.

      It just occurred to me, a "selfish gene" realization moment: All this talk of dignity, human rights, liberty &c. is actually in-advance setting up excuses for treating anyone deeming oneself ubermensch as an actual untermensch. It is a set of rules under which we all keep pretense of good, a sort of provisional truce. Once the other side shows disregard for that common base of relations, the lips are pulled back and fangs are all out. We have empathy and sense of fairness not for preserving others, but for preserving ourselves from others. Others are always in abundance and single sociopath stands a snowball in hell chance of surviving society, short of learning how to manipulate it successfully and under detection threshold.

      Now, this sympathizing with cockroach is in part rampant anthropomorphizing, and in part fear that others are anthropomorphizing and still being inhumane while doing it - a fear that they would do to a human what they do to a cockroach.

    106. Re:Cockroach rights? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      You appear to be conflating violence with death - understandable since on an individual level they are often interrelated, but it confuses the discussion.

      For example what does the extinction of an engineered human-dependent species have to do with violence? Today for example millions of specially bred rapidly-growing cows, pigs, chickens, etc. are killed daily after spending their entire short lives in extremely inhumane (one might even say degrading - a violence against dignity) conditions in the "factory farms" that provide much of the meat consumed in the developed world. If we were to suddenly stop consuming meat then we would stop breeding those animals - no more young, and in a few months or years the species would indeed be on the brink of extinction, but without any violence beyond the possible slaughter of the existing animals, which had already been "preordained" at their conception.

      The Moriori are perhaps a better example of your point, but to be valid you must assume that there would have been less total violence inflicted if the Moriori had gone to war instead of simply trying to flee the Maori. Given the superior weaponry of the Maori and their supposed cultural history of slaughter and cannibalism as tools of conquest that assumption would need to be defended.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    107. Re:Cockroach rights? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      > and thus do not feel pain like we do.

      The active phrase being "like we do". We have no idea whether they have a perception of pain that operates by other methods, only that they lack the nerves to feel pain via the same mechanism we do.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    108. Re:Cockroach rights? by fonske · · Score: 1

      computer analogy: computer without input/output is no fun.
      Peripheral nervous system is i/o with some southbridges (ganglia) here and there.
      PNS gives:
      1) Input to Central Nervous System and Autonomous System
      2) Output from CNS to muscles and Autonomous System to fight/flight, digestion, defecation...
      Oh and bus speed is faster in vertebrates through Schwann cells around neurons - but invertebrates make up with enormous long cells.

    109. Re:Cockroach rights? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      You are mentally ill if you believe that torture is the same thing as gathering honey, which requires almost no interaction with the bees and does not cause them any harm.

      I'm not a PETA member, and eat meat. I would not eat meat if I found the producer advocating or allowing inhumane treatment however. To believe that you must have one to get the other is idiocy. So I think you are a troll.

      Although I agree with you on the whole torture thing, there's a certain level of awareness that must exist in the life at hand before it becomes possible to torture it. It's just like I consider all the people talking about AI rights to be doing so prematurely at the moment, but I do believe eventually there will be AI which is deserving of rights. It's just that right now the level of complexity doesn't warrant it. There's no self-awareness in any of our code.

      What this kit does is it sends signals via the electrode to mimic the navigation antennae signal. The cockroach gets the signal that there's an object it can't go past, and it turns to avoid it. The entire reason it works is because at that level of life, the brain is just an input / output system. Cockroaches don't think. Their brain sees light, they get signal to run. They sense other cockroaches pheromones, they get the signal to fuck. Their antennae senses an object, they get the signal to one. They're already robotic, you're just controlling the signal now. As far as cockroaches go, my spam filter is a more complex beast than they are, and if we think they deserve any rights, we need to start worrying about my treatment of the filter. Imagine spending your entire life reading through viagra spam!

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    110. Re:Cockroach rights? by CowTipperGore · · Score: 1

      You are clearly no beekeeper, or have even read much about the hobby/profession.

      I am a beekeeper and your statement remains meaningless. I might disagree with "requires almost no interaction with the bees" but the GP's basic point remains.

    111. Re:Cockroach rights? by CowTipperGore · · Score: 1

      The things that produce honey are not toys, we shouldn't control them to make our delicious honey?

      Those "things" are called bees. And they are not toys. They are livestock, raised for their output just like dairy cows and chickens.

    112. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can't kill cockroaches because that includes the entire democratic party and liberals, damn Dawg.

    113. Re:Cockroach rights? by CowTipperGore · · Score: 1

      Another counter-point would be that I eat meat and in our society meat (and food in general) is more entertainment than nourishment, but that's stretching it.

      I hope that all of your meat, eggs, milk, and other animal-based products come from small farms where you can verify the treatment of the animals. Otherwise, you're simply outsourcing your animal torture to ADM and Cargill.

    114. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course there is. Instead of making them dead, we can give those low-life cockroaches a chance to serve the society!

    115. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sociopathy is not related to age. Generally it's a genetic trait from birth, that can either be reinforced or controlled, given the proper circumstances and guidance. Once you're at Dexter levels, it's full blown.

    116. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      every other creature in the universe was put there to be our playthings and slaves.

      Fixed it for you.

    117. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      What scares me most about this post is your +5 mod. I bet lots of those points came from folks who actually believe that.

    118. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      What are you to me vs any other animal?
      Why should I value your existence above any other animal I do not know?

      If it took an extract of your brain to keep one of my pets alive, should I be ok with doing that?

      What about a human that is less developed than a dog? A person in a persistent vegetative state or just very severely handicapped?

    119. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Because a cat does not know any better. He cannot contemplate another option. If really want to claim your are the same that is your choice.

    120. Re: Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Actually some cats will bring these things directly to their owners. I know not if they are making gifts or bragging or what but clearly they want their owner to see this.

      Not all do this, but some do. I have a cat that does this with toys, and I assume would do it with mice if he had the chance. He will scream and find a human to show what he has done. If we avoid him, he will find us to show us this.

    121. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Anytime you eat meat and do not need it, which is almost all the time it is more entertainment than nourishment. You could have chosen a diet that had less meat in it.

    122. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do that too! Twelve years of private Quaker school. Aside from no guns and no meat, I have no idea what they believe, but the "religion" classes about taking roaches/spiders/icky-icks outside really does stick.

      (...But I usually convince guys to dump me first.)

    123. Re:Cockroach rights? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I used to feel that way, until a last night coding session had me looking up to see a goddamn Clock Spider[0] on the wall above my bed. I left the room to get a shoebox to shuttle Stumpy outside, was gone all of 30 seconds. When I came back in, there was no sign of him.

      Last known position: the vicinity of my pillow.

      Slept in the living room that night, and first thing in the morning, I bug-bombed the shit out of the place. "Playing nice" is all well and good, but when it comes to laying eggs in my moist cranial openings, I'm not above taking the nuclear option.

      [0] Not sure if it was a huntsman spider or not, but it was bigger than my hand, and missing a leg: probably had a run-in with a pit bull or a Volkswagon.

    124. Re:Cockroach rights? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      It's not dead. It was just in a torpor while it regenerated. And it remembers you...

    125. Re:Cockroach rights? by Metabolife · · Score: 1

      What's worse? Killing a dog, or controlling it with a shock collar?

    126. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of the threads here are focusing on cruelty to animals in general. I submit to the masses Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. While it is developed for humans, you can look through it and get a feel for how 'aware' some animals must be. I'd argue that dogs and cats, having most of the needs (food, shelter) taken care of, they are able to show love/caring/belonging. I wouldn't go so far as to say self-esteem, though I have certainly seen happy and sad. Well, maybe not the cats. Fish simply don't really have to capacity for love/belonging, though the do seek food and shelter. Cockroaches are pretty down there too. Yes, the roach will feel pain from the backpack on there, but it's not going to feel sad that it's getting some strange signals on it's antenna and won't be able to sit down to dinner with it's 5 thousand kids.

      Put things in perspective people, this is not "playing god" any more than the horse and reins example below, or a dog and leash, or a toddler and a leash backpack. Yes, none of the low-tech examples involve a hole in the thorax, but I think that's more an artifact of not being able to strap a 4-point harness on a cockroach and have it stay on.

    127. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never seen one, let alone killed one. Who am I throwing my rock at?

    128. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mosquitoes primarily feed on blood in order to produce eggs; for nourishment they eat mainly nectar, for which they don't need piercing mouthparts. Not all mosquito species suck blood; males never do and live off plants entirely.

    129. Re:Cockroach rights? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      In other news, there's a beekeeper on slashdot.

      Sometimes I just don't understand...

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    130. Re:Cockroach rights? by vlpronj · · Score: 1

      U sure, I sure, we all sure.

    131. Re:Cockroach rights? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Unless I inadvertently drove over one crossing the street, I have never killed a cockroach.

      Know why?

      BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE COCKROACHES IN MY HOUSE!

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    132. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      will no one think of the poor schmoos ? ? ?

    133. Re:Cockroach rights? by vlpronj · · Score: 1

      FWIW, when shock collars are used properly, they are used to train a dog to avoid a behavior or area. The dog has the opportunity to avoid the shocks by behaving properly. There is no such option for the cockroach (or the rat, pig or cat in future kits?) if someone is using a remote control to turn it left and right. It simply endures. I don't think shock collars for dogs would be looked at the same way, if people used them to steer the dog through an obstacle course.

    134. Re:Cockroach rights? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Don't like the story about the cocroach because you think you'll be next?

      Too late, Researcher controls colleague’s motions in 1st human brain-to-brain interface, and you though watching support control your mouse pointer remotely was creepy.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    135. Re:Cockroach rights? by SalafranceUnderhill · · Score: 1

      The first time I ever saw one was on a trip to a ghetto area in Philadelphia. I've never seen one in my home country.

    136. Re:Cockroach rights? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The kids used to string a piece of popcorn onto their fishing line, clamp a bb shot sinker onto it and cast it into the air. Seagulls woulds snatch the popcorn in mid-air and the kids would fly them like a kite. You would think the seagulls would learn to let go of the pop-corn and liberate themselves, but the fist in the cookiejar would keep them trapped until the kids got bored and cut the line.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    137. Re:Cockroach rights? by xyra132 · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that species, a but a lot of (tropical) forest roaches need high humidity and won't survive in the average house for long.

    138. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and that leads to other leading questions: ...is it just that it is not okay to 'play' with animals like cats do with mice/etc, as a matter of principle ? ...or, would it be just as 'bad' if -say- a human being was 'playing' with a kid holding their treat just out of reach while they danced around futilely trying to grab it from you ?

      i'm not sure where this 'child-proofing' of the world is going, but i don't think it is either a good (or possible) idea, nor that it is necessary...

    139. Re: Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a PETA member, and eat meat. I would not eat meat if I found the producer advocating or allowing inhumane treatment however.

      I take it then that you won't eat kosher or halal meat, since they require that the animal have its throat cut while it is conscious, then be allowed to bleed out while hanging upside-down.

    140. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "studies" you refer to all talk about harming animals larger than a cat. There is no damaging psychological result from killing mice or swatting flies.
      Speaking of flies, I suppose catching flies, freezing them, and tieing string to them so when they thaw they fly in circles is torture as well.
      Or what of those electric rackets that zap the bugs, or the wholesale passive genocide device known as an outdoor bug zapper?

      Fuck off with the self-righteous "this makes kids psychopaths" bullshit.

    141. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Exactly what they deserve . . .

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    142. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Actually most domesticated cats don't realize that mice and birds are eatable. They play with them as they would a toy, until the toy breaks. Once it's broken it's no fun any more (until it stinks and the dog rolls in it, then they get to watch the dog forcibly bathed.)

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    143. Re:Cockroach rights? by greythax · · Score: 1

      Do you know why you step on a roach in your house instead of picking it up gently and putting it outside? Want to know why there are no roaches being brought to animal shelters to find a good home? It is because you share almost no physiological features with a roach, and therefore have severe difficulty empathizing with it. The chances that almost any kind of treatment of an insect will be transferred to a mammal, much less a human, are pretty slim. We are not wired to empathize with things that don't remind us of ourselves in some small way.

    144. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      I think the GP probably has never raised chickens or rabbits for food or hunted and fished to put meat on the table. I see that disconnect between human/other animal relations most among those who have grown up eating plastic-wrapped pieces of cow, never relating that to the animal that it came from. The Dick's Hamburger chain here in Seattle used to have a big picture of a cow on the back wall, next to the price list. They had to remove it because parents were complaining that "it upsets the children." (BTW, good burgers, great fries and wonderful milkshakes for a drive-in, if you're ever in the Seattle area.)

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    145. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would not eat meat if I found the producer advocating or allowing inhumane treatment however.

      You should never, ever visit a factory farm.

    146. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They kill cows with a sledgehammer.....

    147. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 2

      Inch long? I lived in St. Petersburg, Florida for a century one year. Four inch long cockroaches that fly. I stomped on one, twisted my foot around to ensure that it was mush, picked up my foot and the bastard ran away. My apartment was in a 50 year-old wood building, there was no way to get rid of them. The locals pretend that they're not cockroaches and call them 'Palmetto Bugs', but everyone knows what they really are. One of many, many reasons not to live in Florida.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    148. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Chickens will be fine, they've taken over the island of Kauai in Hawaii. Pigs will not have much problem, feral pigs that escaped during the various hurricanes have become a major nuisance in parts of the southeastern US. Cows, sheep and domestic turkeys are probably too stupid to survive though, although sheep might be raised for wool without eating them.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    149. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    150. Re:Cockroach rights? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone do that?

    151. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      everyone that responded to this is geekoid's toy!

      even me!

    152. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      To avoid harming an animal for entertainment?
      That is what the GP was talking about.

      Go ask a vegetarian if you want, lots of reasons from moral to religious to actual medical problems digesting animal fats.Surely you already knew that.

    153. Re:Cockroach rights? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      If you live in Alaska you should know that it is a big state with widely varying climates. While Nome is colder than Edmonton, Juneau is warmer (Wikipedia says Juneau's daily mean of 5.58C is warmer than Edmonton's at 4.2C.) Sitka is much warmer still.

    154. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most modern factory farmed meat *IS* produced using inhumane treatment. It's cheaper to keep an animal in a box so small it can't move it's entire life because it wastes less calories that way, and if you don't consider that torture I don't know what is.

      So, if you ever eat fast food, or you don't ensure that your local grocery store buys humanely-raised meat, you are eating meat that was raised inhumanely.

    155. Re:Cockroach rights? by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      The brain is an input/output system at any level. Where are you drawing the line?

    156. Re:Cockroach rights? by icebike · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your insight, kid. I'm sure I would never have figured that out by myself even after living here for longer than you have been alive.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    157. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I figured out this mod thing: NSA probably controls "inconvenient" posts (by IP etc.) and then assigns negative points whenever the AC comes back. /. was nice around 2000.

      Alas, it seems to be under "new management".

      And, yes, I'm being paranoid. Yeah,right.

    158. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My ethical spectrum is more of a kaleidoscope, then.

      I'd put my dog's life above that of a person's who just broke into my house and is attempting to kill me. There are ethics and then there are consequences, and some people have it fucking coming.

       

    159. Re:Cockroach rights? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      You could not have lived 46 years in Alaska. Only cockroaches could survive there that long. :)

      My point of course was not that you would be unfamiliar with the range of climates within Alaska, but that its enormous size makes blanket generalizations somewhat difficult to make correctly.

    160. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...one notable exception being the Chia Pet.

      Ch-ch-ch-CHIA!

    161. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Bullspit! The majority of the bees time is spent gathering and, well doing what bees do to make honey, live, make new bees, care for the hive, etc... There is a short amount of time required for the removal of the combs and extraction of honey. To claim that this is 5% of a bees life would be asinine, because it's not that much intervention and does not require that much time. Smoking the bees to reduce their activity is intrusive, but it's short duration and infrequent. It does not cause permanent damage to the bees. It does not burn, maim, or kill the bees. I'm sure a bee keeper accidentally squishes one on occasion, but it's not intentionally done or required for extracting honey.

      If you wish to bring up locations that lack the ability to cultivate honey bees, then you can't bring up torture there either. The person killing bees to knock a hive down and gather honey is doing so because of food, not torturing the bees.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    162. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      IMHO it's not about whether or not the AI is aware or conscious. It's about desensitizing a person to abuse and torture. I have no issue with teaching someone programming, and kits to make little robots move around and perform tasks.

      The question is really, why is this kit done without a receptacle of some type that does not require simulated mutilation? It could be built that way, but has not been. Does this simulated mutilation have long term psychological impact on young person? The potential is there and proven. We should question the implementation not for the AI's sake, but for the sake of the kids doing the experiments.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    163. Re:Cockroach rights? by icebike · · Score: 1

      If they exist in Nome, I'm at a loss to figure out where they wouldn't.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    164. Re:Cockroach rights? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      I don't know that they can survive there oudoors, but indoors, they probably can and do live everyplace humans do, because any indoor temperature that we would find survivable, they would too.

    165. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations, now you've sparked the evolution of mosquitoes into something even more annoying.

    166. Re: Cockroach rights? by janerules · · Score: 1

      More educational would be a backpack I could wear that would control all (approx 5000) the roaches in my apartment (650s.f.) and cause them all to leave, or be squashed all at once. Willing to pay for a prototype!!!!!

    167. Re:Cockroach rights? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Hey, everyone. It's Rupert Murdoch.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    168. Re:Cockroach rights? by unrtst · · Score: 1

      ...but studies suggest this is how psychopaths start out; torturing insects and small animals.

      Correct me if I"m wrong, but I believe those studies are in retrospect. IE - many psychopaths, when questioned, admitted to torturing animals as a child.

      As far as I know, there reverse has not been proven. IE - that if a child is introduced to animal torture, they are more likely to become psychopaths.
      I'm not saying it's impossible, but I doubt the correlation holds up in both directions with similar numbers. Besides, how many non-psychopaths, when questioned, admit to torturing animals as a child? Seems like there are are a fair bit of them right in this thread (if animals includes insects such as spiders, ants, and bees).

    169. Re:Cockroach rights? by unrtst · · Score: 1

      The reason parts of an insect keep moving after they die is because they have independant nervous systems controlling their movement,

      Right. They are very different organisms, similar to lobsters. I mention lobsters because there's lots of material out there on how to kill/cook them humanely (fyi, putting them in a wine bath first probably hurts them more than boiling water; putting a knife through their head may hurt them more than boiling water too, as their sense organs are still sending signals to neurons that still act on that stimuli even with a split brain).
      Anyway, I don't think these electrodes actually hurt them - not in the way we think of pain. If it does, it's not significantly different from flashing a strobe light on them. And in the end, this discussion has little to do with them, and more to do with the impact on the kids.

      What would you consider a less inhumane treatment, somebody smashing you to death in an instant or mutilating your body to make you some kind of gadget controlled android?

      So I'm either dead, or I get fed artificial stimuli... for the record, I'd take the latter (there's a chance it'd even be enjoyable, as opposed to no chance of anything cause I'm dead). I'm sure we'd both prefer an option where neither happen.

    170. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The very same Nietzsche who had his works edited after his death by his Nazi sister to better fit the doctrine?

    171. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stress kills the honey production, so keep in mind that beekeepers do not torture their bees. Killing an animal to save a human's life is one thing. Torturing it and then killing it for some pseudo-educational purpose is just wrong. Not only that, but it also has a side-effect teaches the kid that it is okay to control other creatures by stabbing them in the back and zapping their antennas, and then kill it when it's no longer fun.

    172. Re:Cockroach rights? by JakeBurn · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. We're 'wired' to empathize with ourselves. If children aren't taught to share their instinct is to be selfish. We CHOOSE to empathize with what we call "our own" regardless of whether its human or animal and its completely arbitrary what a person chooses to identify with. I grew up on a farm where hurting the family dog was inconceivable but shooting a random dog that was killing or mauling your own animals was a necessity of life. Why? Because we chose to have emotional attachment to the animals we called our own. We set rat traps to protect our horses' grain and I guarantee if their were monkeys breaking into our barn and tearing into the food we had for our animals we would not have given a second thought to finding a way to destroy them.

    173. Re:Cockroach rights? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      As I'm teaching my boys, the point of life is to get other people to do stuff that is against their interests and in yours. All this talk of dignity, human rights, liberty &c. is, as Nietzsche pointed out, merely the pathetic cry of the weak, whom it is the right of my offspring to manipulate and exploit.

      And they call me a sociopath ...

      With good reason.

      Antisocial (Dissocial) Personality Disorder is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for, or violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. There may be an impoverished moral sense or conscience and a history of crime, legal problems, impulsive and aggressive behavior.

      In other words, you're one sick puppy.

    174. Re:Cockroach rights? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Why is it any different if you replace cat with human?

      Because the cat is acting entirely on instinct. It doesn't and can't know any better. Don't you?

    175. Re:Cockroach rights? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I don't know man, I've seen a lot of people eat meat and live to be into their 90's in pretty good shape. I think maybe the hazards are overstated. I understand the need for a "balanced" diet and I don't know that I'd qualify a vegetarian diet as balanced.

    176. Re:Cockroach rights? by Zynder · · Score: 2

      They call you a sociopath cause you go around quoting Neitzsche.

    177. Re:Cockroach rights? by capt_mulch · · Score: 1

      I got so sick of having twenty roaches scuttling for cover when I turned the kitchen light on that I just used to smack them with my hands (used to live near the ocean in Sydney - 365 day a year roaches).

    178. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Because a cat does not know any better. He cannot contemplate another option.

      Says you.
      You have no idea, nor can you find out, since you can't talk to the cat.

      I have two cats living at my house. One plays with lizards, the other sits around and watches. It made a choice. Perhaps because its fat and old, but it still made a choice.

    179. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Explain why I sometimes get whole birds on the floor and sometimes just a head?

    180. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Because the cat is acting entirely on instinct. It doesn't and can't know any better.

      Have you got evidence to back that up, or is it based on your "I'm a human, I'm better than all other animals because I said so. Nothing else is capable of thinking on its own" theory?

    181. Re:Cockroach rights? by cavebison · · Score: 1

      > You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?

      Many people wouldn't see the difference between this and what we routinely do to insects and animals in labs.

      In my mind (assuming we accept that animal lab experiments are essential research) the main difference I see is that this is aimed at kids and not adults - who have already taken ethics classes and are doing it for a "good reason". Kids WILL use this to experiment with other insects, that's just what kids do.

      The word of generations of parents, who told their kids not to pull wings off flies, will be undone.

    182. Re: Cockroach rights? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      That's the MO of the 2nd ex

    183. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      A head?!? I've never seen that. I imagine that some birds taste better than others, or maybe some bags of Purina taste better than any bird would. Just my guess. I have seen a cat that learned mice were eatable stop leaving them lying around and start eating them, or at least parts of them. Perhaps that's what happened, although Lauren's cat mostly left tails lying around rather than heads.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    184. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      No one have ever called me a sociopath, I didn't quote Nietzsche [sic] (whom I doubt you have ever read), and your sense of irony is somewhat underdeveloped.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    185. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      In other words, you're one sick puppy.

      Thanks for the opinion Doc. But if you think I'm sick, you don't even want to hear about Jonathan Swift's ideas about what to do with Irish children.

      You're not Canadian by any chance, are you?

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    186. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      What scares me most about this post is your +5 mod. I bet lots of those points came from folks who actually believe that.

      Yes, I was wondering the same thing actually. I trust that the moderators, like you, understood what was being said. You did guys? Cool!

      It's one of the few times where one would almost be more comfortable having one's post modded Troll by some irony deprived dullard ... :/

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    187. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      1 s/have/has/

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    188. Re:Cockroach rights? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      I often joke that we'll create self-aware AI by accident. In the arms race between spammers and spam filters, either the spamming software or spam filtering software will one day become self-aware...

    189. Re:Cockroach rights? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Mine do. They tend to leave the giblets lying around.

    190. Re:Cockroach rights? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      I never suggested anything for the average person. Some humans have trouble with animal fats, some can't eat some plants. I believe a vegetarian diet can be as balanced as a meat including or even meat only one. The simple fact is almost no one puts that kind of effort into their diet.

    191. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually that is 100% wrong.

      While children are incredibly selfish, they are also raw nerves that feel the joy and pain of all those around them. Selfishness and empathy have NOTHING to do with one another.

    192. Re:Cockroach rights? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You're not Canadian by any chance, are you?

      Nope, the only time I ever went outside the US was in the Air Force.

      As to Johnathon Swift, did you bother reading your own link? "A Modest Proposal" was satire. As to the Irish (who I'm descended from), the famous Irishman Oscar Wilde said "work is the curse of the drinking class."

    193. Re:Cockroach rights? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It's based on what I've read, almost all of it from printed books by biologists and veterinarians. No two species thinks or acts alike.

    194. Re:Cockroach rights? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      The brain is an input/output system at any level. Where are you drawing the line?

      Obviously it's hard to draw an exact line where you can easily say whether an animal should deserve rights or not. If there's any question, you should ethically err on the safe side. That said, cockroaches are so far away from the line, that even though the line is fuzzy, you still know which side they're on with 100% confidence, in the exact same way that you wouldn't argue a human being is on the other side of that line just because you don't know where the line is.

      The line should be drawn at the point where the organism has some sense of self-awareness (which can be very difficult to test, therefore the fuzziness). The cockroach has the electronics connected to its antennae. it gets the obstacle signal, it turns. There's no question it's going to turn. And regardless of the fact that there are no obstacles, it's still going to turn, even though it also has vision, which is giving it the contradictory signal that there's no obstacle. When I pretend to throw a toy to a dog, it's going to anticipate my throw, and start running. After enough pretend throws it's going to start making the connection that the throw movement doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to send the toy flying. And now it's going to flinch in preparation to run, but stop itself if it doesn't see the toy leaving my hand. It changed the output to the same input purely through internal processes.

      Cockroaches are capable of some rudimentary learning behavior, but it's very, very limited. Like I said, my e-mail spam filter is capable of more complex learning.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    195. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      did you bother reading your own link? "A Modest Proposal" was satire

      Hold that thought for a while.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    196. Re:Cockroach rights? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      The question is really, why is this kit done without a receptacle of some type that does not require simulated mutilation? It could be built that way, but has not been. Does this simulated mutilation have long term psychological impact on young person? The potential is there and proven. We should question the implementation not for the AI's sake, but for the sake of the kids doing the experiments.

      Because what the kit is supposed to teach is how a cockroach works, not robot design. I understand your concern, but kids everywhere have to dissect frogs when they're relatively young, and they're not turning into psychopaths everywhere.

      The ethical issue isn't the mutilation (surgeons have to amputate people's limbs on occasion, but you wouldn't call that unethical). What you need to be careful is the motivation behind the action of the child. You should, of course, never teach a child to hurt any animal for no reason. No human being should ever enjoy witnessing any life suffer. And when you dissect frogs, you first anesthetize the frog to eliminate any suffering. When you install this kit, you first numb the cockroach with ice, for the same reason. The ethical issue here is whether the control of cockroach itself is torture, and I argue the cockroach isn't capable of the level of awareness that would imply. It can't know that it's being controlled, it can't know that there's anything different, because it doesn't know anything at all.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    197. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that dissecting a frog is the same thing as mutilation of a simulated living creature? Be honest, I see a very large difference myself and would like to understand someone that claims that it's the same thing. Even claiming that they are similar I find a very bizarre method of thinking. Further, dissecting frogs is not done by children, but by teenagers. There is a very large developmental difference between the two.

      You then compare an amputation to mutilation, which again is very very odd in my opinion for numerous reasons. Starting with the fact that a kid seeing an amputee is not the person performing the amputation. We would not subject a child to performing an amputation because it has known traumatic effects on that person in addition to the recipient.

      To further emphasize the mutilation of a living creature aspect, the creature must be numbed prior to the act.

      I think a parallel you are missing comes in a question I hinted at above. Should a child (and yes these are geared toward children below the age of 10) be witness to, or help perform, amputations of limbs? Surgery of any kind? At what age is this appropriate activity for even a teenager?

      Again, we know that desensitization works. We know that there is a relationship between children that torture and kill creatures for fun and adult psychological disorders which often lead to violent crime. We also know that there is no need for this mutilation in the creature for the purposes of learning. I believe it's fair to be concerned.

      I think we would both agree that the AI morality issue is null, especially with this primitive of a critter. Maybe when we have larger full androids capable of more that would be an issue. In this case, it's absolutely not of concern in my opinion.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    198. Re:Cockroach rights? by Zynder · · Score: 1

      And they call me a sociopath ...

      They do or they don't call you a sociopath? Maybe you're right. Sounds more like schizophrenia.

      is, as Nietzsche pointed out, merely

      First off, don't [sic] me, boy. You misspelled it first. Secondly, sure you aren't "quoting" it but you're spouting off his ideas which is just as bad.

      and your sense of irony is somewhat underdeveloped.

      This made me laugh, thanks! I couldn't help but read it in Clark from Good Will Hunting's voice. I know you've probably been doing the irony thing since before it was cool but I've just one thing to say: How do ya like dem apples?

    199. Re:Cockroach rights? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that dissecting a frog is the same thing as mutilation of a simulated living creature? Be honest, I see a very large difference myself and would like to understand someone that claims that it's the same thing.

      Uh...the frog is alive when you dissect it, not dead. And you're cutting it up. You get to see its heart beating, the lungs moving. I don't see how it's different at all.

      Even claiming that they are similar I find a very bizarre method of thinking. Further, dissecting frogs is not done by children, but by teenagers. There is a very large developmental difference between the two.

      When I did it in school, it was third grade and I was 9.

      You then compare an amputation to mutilation, which again is very very odd in my opinion for numerous reasons. Starting with the fact that a kid seeing an amputee is not the person performing the amputation. We would not subject a child to performing an amputation because it has known traumatic effects on that person in addition to the recipient.

      My point is that it's not the action that is bad or good, but the motivation. If you cut the limb of the cockroach just to watch it suffer and hop around without a limb, that's very bad. That's the action to which there's all that correlation with later violent crimes that you're talking about. If you perform surgery on an anesthetized cockroach in order to learn about it, that's not bad. Because you're trying to minimize the suffering, and you're doing something to learn about it. And it absolutely is necessary to perform the action in order to learn it, the same way the a kid will learn a lot more doing the dissection of the frog himself than watching a video of it.

      I'm honestly not disagreeing with you on the problem of dissensitization. I agree with you completely that there's a correlation between kids who enjoy inflicting pain in animals and sociopathic behavior. It's just that, in my opinion, it's not the action that causes the dissensitization, it's the motivation behind it. My mother grew up in a farm and watched as her mother snapped the necks of chickens as a 5 year-old. She was forced to do it herself when she got older. It's a gruesome action, but this didn't dissensitize her. In fact, she turned vegetarian for ethical reasons, because she saw too many animals she bonded with being killed for food. The reason the action itself didn't teach her to lose empathy is because they weren't killing to cause suffering, they were going after a quick death with minimized suffering for the purpose of eating it. It didn't encourage the enjoyment of pain in the animals, it discouraged it by enforcing correct procedure. The fact that the kit includes a procedure that minimizes the pain of the cockroach by numbing it eliminates that problem.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    200. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Maybe you're right.

      That would usually be the case, yes. As far as your clinical diagnosis is concerned, here's my advice: Don't give up your day job.

      First off, don't [sic] me, boy. You misspelled it first.

      Sorry granddad, I neither misspelled his name (you did), nor sicced you. Look! I sicced myself (which is to say I'm spelling it this way knowingly). Und es ist doch ganz klar wie dass buchstabiert ist, oder? Ich meine es ist mit einem 'ei' ausgesprochen. ... Mann!

      ... spouting off his ideas which is just as bad.

      So terribly sorry there chief censor. I had no idea his works were on your Index Librorum Prohibitorum. But why do I have this feeling that you are still not quite getting it?

      Seriously though, I will continue to quote Nietzsche where doing so illuminates some point, the sensitivities of the unread notwithstanding.

      This made me laugh, thanks!

      Which was the intent of the original post, glad you finally got there. And your most welcome.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    201. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Palmetto Bugs are more or less just a specific kind of cockroach, one that tends to be less of a pest because they don't like the conditions of a normal home, and thus do not infest them. Just calling them "cockroaches" would be confusing. Also cockroaches don't stink that goddamn bad. oh dear lord do squashed/stressed palmetto bugs stink.

    202. Re:Cockroach rights? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Still doesn't mean all other animals act purely on instinct.
      Maybe insects are that simple, but I doubt any mammal is.

    203. Re:Cockroach rights? by gsslay · · Score: 1

      Which is pretty much what I said in the first half of my sentence that you chose not to quote.

    204. Re:Cockroach rights? by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      He is truely living the life.

    205. Re:Cockroach rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I lived in St. Petersburg, Florida for a century one year.

      Were you working on some sort of time-dilation device?

    206. Re:Cockroach rights? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Live in St. Petersburg for a year. They you'll understand.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    207. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Uh...the frog is alive when you dissect it, not dead. And you're cutting it up. You get to see its heart beating, the lungs moving. I don't see how it's different at all.

      I'm not sure what country you went to school in, but in the US we use frogs that are already dead and soaked in preservatives. Kids don't kill their own frogs, and surely don't cut them open alive to watch their living hearts beat.

      Your claim about being 9 does not match any school in the US either, so you are either from somewhere else making false claims regarding US Education, or simply not telling the truth. Prior to Junior High school, kids see pictures in Biology books and maybe (and it's a big maybe depending on the school) see a computer program that allows virtual dissection.

      My point is that it's not the action that is bad or good, but the motivation. If you cut the limb of the cockroach just to watch it suffer and hop around without a limb, that's very bad. That's the action to which there's all that correlation with later violent crimes that you're talking about. If you perform surgery on an anesthetized cockroach in order to learn about it, that's not bad. Because you're trying to minimize the suffering, and you're doing something to learn about it. And it absolutely is necessary to perform the action in order to learn it, the same way the a kid will learn a lot more doing the dissection of the frog himself than watching a video of it.

      In this case you are talking about something other than mutilation for effect. Dissecting to educate is not the same thing as ripping something open to attach wires and make it work.

      I think we could agree that we simply lack the information currently to make an educated statement on if or how this would impact a person's development. I'm sure a teacher's perspective when teaching could make all the difference in the world. The problem of course is that teachers are not supposed to be teaching morality and often get in trouble if they do.

      I still question why this was built this way, when there are viable alternatives that would never bring up the question. Most technology has a similar ability to be seen as good, yet used for very bad things. We have always crossed the line with technology. Computers have been used to spy on everyone, atomic energy has been used to kill and threaten, sound has been used for propaganda and weaponry in addition to education and entertainment, the same can be said with radar and microwaves.

      I'm not anti-tech mind you, nor am I anti-education.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    208. Re:Cockroach rights? by Zynder · · Score: 1

      Look kid, you're a grade A asshole- I'll give you that. How about you go take your assberger's[SIC] meds and give your 6 digit UID back to your grandpa? You're too ranty to sit at the big boys table.

    209. Re:Cockroach rights? by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      You were too dense to get his obviously satiric post, and you're calling him an asshole?

    210. Re:Cockroach rights? by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      Well then, that would apply to the millions of kids (myself included) who have had great fun zapping ants with a magnifying glass in the summer.

      Insect don't have a consciousness as we understand it, so "torturing" them is not a realistic concept.

    211. Re:Cockroach rights? by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      It's not dead.

      It's pining for the fjords.

    212. Re:Cockroach rights? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      ... his obviously satiric post ...

      Thanks for that. I thought it was obvious. But these guys nearly had me providing an interlinear translations along the lines of ...

      Original:
      And they call me a sociopath ...

      Translation:
      In the even that the dripping irony of the above is not already blindingly obvious, allow me to state explicitly that this post is of satirical intent.

      But then again perhaps an ironic statement is not itself the clearest way to alert the slower reader to the presence of irony.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    213. Re:Cockroach rights? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what country you went to school in, but in the US we use frogs that are already dead and soaked in preservatives. Kids don't kill their own frogs, and surely don't cut them open alive to watch their living hearts beat.

      For that particular dissection, I was in a school in Sao Paulo, Brazil. That said, it was an American school, so I figured the curriculum wouldn't deviate that much from the norm here. And I wasn't wrong, read on.

      The "norm" just happens to deviate a great deal between different schools in different parts of the country. A quick search brought me a curriculum resource for middle school teachers with a page on dissection. The relevant quote you should be looking for is, "It is recommended that you get a preserved frog. If you use a living frog, you will have to put it in a bottle or jar and drop a cotton ball of chloroform to put it into deep sleep." That was the procedure followed at my school, and the page seems to confirm that it does happen in the US, it wasn't particular to my school. You're just thinking, "that's not how I did it, so no other school could have possibly done it differently."

      That said, most of the results from my web search were pages talking about how evil and unnecessary dissection is, how we need to move to more humane education, a bunch of PETA and "anti-vivisection society" pages...well, I'm guessing the dissection of frogs, especially live ones, have become a rare occurrence now. So here I am trying to use it as an example of why we shouldn't be fighting the cockroach rights battle, but the battle has actually been going on with the very examples I'm trying to use to explain why it's alright. And I'm on the losing side, with a lot of school opting for "virtual" dissection on ipads.

      Your claim about being 9 does not match any school in the US either

      Hey, look! Pictures of a frog dissection in a US elementary school in third grade! So they still do that, at least. Did you even bother doing a search before deciding to call me a liar? Or did you, once again, decide that whatever education experience you had when growing up was the exact same everyone else had?

      In this case you are talking about something other than mutilation for effect. Dissecting to educate is not the same thing as ripping something open to attach wires and make it work.

      We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm pretty sure we're not going to find common ground if we disagree on the educational value of the kit.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    214. Re:Cockroach rights? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      For that particular dissection, I was in a school in Sao Paulo, Brazil. That said, it was an American school [graded.br], so I figured the curriculum wouldn't deviate that much from the norm here. And I wasn't wrong, read on.

      Reading the guidelines is not the same as attending the schools and knowing what is done. At least I was correct in one of my assumptions. Public schools in the US will not use live frogs, it does not happen. Another thing you are incorrect on is the age, because Middle school in the US is grades 5-6, not 3rd grade. Children below the age of 10, as previously stated, will _not_ perform any dissection in public schools. 6th grade is usually starfish and worms, Frogs may come in grades 7-12. In all cases, these dissections are optional and students can opt out or the parents can opt out for their children.

      As previously mentioned, this is because performing a dissection is a traumatic experience. It has nothing to do with PETA as you incorrectly claim. PETA may also disagree with dissection, but the omissions for dissection came about long before PETA existed (1960s).

      Hey, look! [smugmug.com] Pictures of a frog dissection in a US elementary school in third grade! So they still do that, at least. Did you even bother doing a search before deciding to call me a liar? Or did you, once again, decide that whatever education experience you had when growing up was the exact same everyone else had?

      Did you not notice that the school you linked pictures from claiming "everyone does it" is a private school? My kid went to private school, and that school did very different things from public school. Since most of his friends were in Public school, I'm very familiar with the curriculum and aging for tasks. I have nieces and nephews that attended only public school, so again I have first hand knowledge.

      I did not call you a liar, I stated that you were incorrect. There is enough difference between those two things to be concerned about, which is why I mention it. You incorrectly assume that your experience matches everyone else, and that is not the case (interesting that this is the same thing you are accusing me of, yet your experience is in Brazil and Google). You were not in a US school, and seem to have no first hand knowledge of the US public school system.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If anyone is worried about these slight actions turning kids into psychopaths, they would be AGHAST at what kids normally do with insects when they catch or find them...

    Fire, pliers, rocks, etc. All are involved.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 4, Informative

      I remember when I was 5, I used to make paper balloons and stick as many crickets as I could find in them, and then I would set it on fire just to watch the hoppy action.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    2. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My brothers and I used to love to use a magnifying glass on ants on my parents' patio. I don't think you would classify any of us as psychopaths 50 years later. Fortunately, we don't have any roaches where I live now, but I remember them in the apartment I first rented when I got married...took a month or so to exterminate them all.

      I wouldn't buy anything that used roaches, not out of concern for roaches, but out of dislike for roaches.

    3. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird.
      I never tortured insects.
      I mean, I captured them and kept them in glass bottles without holes and wondered why they died.
      But I never liked touching them.
      And I enjoyed burning paper and wood more than burning insects.
      Cockroaches usually just got hit with some flip flops.
      Tennis rackets were for bats.
      In hindsight my childhood was pretty sick too. Carry on.

    4. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When I was a little kid and pulled the legs off a daddy longlegs, my scoutmaster told me not to do that, that it was cruel. Now we're encouraging kids to inflict pain on animals for their own amusement. Can you really not see a problem with that?

    5. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by geekoid · · Score: 0

      IT's a cock roach.
      You scoutmaster was a douche. Did he care to explain why it was cruel? oh right, no.

      Pulling the legs off insects doesn't make you a psychopath.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by TheResilientFarter · · Score: 1

      My tool of preference was the magnifying glass.

    7. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It desensitises kids to unlawful actions is what it does.
      Once this kind of thing starts, it can easily lead to much worse things.

    8. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to swat wasps out of the air, and then while they were on the ground dazed, pull out their wings. Sometimes I would rip their legs out too, and then drop them in spider webs. The spiders never seemed to take the bait though... I guess they were still afraid of the wasps.

    9. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by narcc · · Score: 2

      So it's okay to torture cockroaches? What about other bugs?

      Is it okay to torture fish? Lizards? Mice? Dogs?

      What about people?

      Where do you draw the line? On what basis did you make that determination?

    10. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You scoutmaster was a douche. Did he care to explain why it was cruel? oh right, no.

      Are you asking if my scoutmaster gave my ten year old self a lecture on consciousness and solipsism and morality?

    11. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by stenvar · · Score: 2

      Where do you draw the line? On what basis did you make that determination?

      Vertebrates would seem to be a sensible line.

    12. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by bitt3n · · Score: 2

      Now we're encouraging kids to inflict pain on animals for their own amusement.

      You're overstating your case, given that their intent is presumably to educate, not to amuse, and there is a long precedent for harming animals in the interests of educating humans, continuing to the present day.

    13. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, is the purpose of life to do as much as you can for yourself or to do as much as you can for others? Fundamentally, it's not clear that the concept of life having a purpose is even meaningful - plus, free will is most likely an illusion (everything that happens, happens because of some combination of random chance and the laws of physics).

      But, if you could somehow alter random chance or the laws of physics such that people were more empathetic, then we would almost certainly have a more cooperative society with a much higher standard of living for most people. Imagine if rich people were to look at poor people and think "But for the laws of physics and random chance, that could be me - and how would I feel if that were me?" Imagine that rich people were to devote themselves less to acquiring frivolous luxury items and more to creating a society where it was easy rise up out of poverty to become a productive highly skilled member of the workforce. Imagine a society that focused on solving the big problems: disease, conflict, and poverty - rather than simply producing frivolous luxury item for rich people.

      So, how do you make people more empathetic? Well, fundamentally, alter the laws of physics and random chance. But imagine that when parents talked to their children about cockroaches they talked about what the cockroach might be feeling. That they showed pity rather than fear. That is, they expanded the child's circle of empathy - not just to include people from the same social class and race, or even different social classes and races - but even to the lowest of the animals.

      Of course, the laws of physics and random chance are a harsh mistress. So that it won't happen. And the sufferering will continue, as it has throughout history. But one can at least dream of a different world - a world of empathy and cooperation - without the inefficiencies of ignorance and competition.

    14. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by narcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why?

    15. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by RealGene · · Score: 2

      In bio class, we pithed frogs before dissection. If you blew out the cockroaches' neural ganglia and replaced them with a bluetooth controller, would that be torture?

      --
      Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
    16. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by girlintraining · · Score: 0

      Can you really not see a problem with that?

      Antibiotics, antibacterial, antidepressants, shampoo, shaving cream, blood and heart medication, birth control... all of these are of great benefit to society as a whole and the majority of people reading these will have needed them at one point or another either to improve quality of life, or flat out save it. And they were tested on animals before people, because a human life is worth more than an animal life.

      This may be ethically inconvenient for you, and if that's the case, please stop taking all of the medications listed above. Forever. In fact, skip the aspirin and just bear the pain of a headache. Skip the cold medication when you get sick, because you don't want to miss work. Forego all modern medicine, because the overwhelming majority of it came to market because it passed testing on animals. But I should warn you: Your average life expectancy after doing this will be about 15 years.

      Now, if that's a trade you want to make, I applaud your steadfast devotion to your high ethical standards. I also applaud your rejection of over 20,000 years of human evolution that put us at the top of the food chain. We kill and eat them, and they're delicious and go good with ketchsup and rosemary. And if we're willing to do that, is using them for experiments really so bad?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    17. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      "I guess they were still afraid of the wasps."

      And fair enough: if you think humans are bad, 'parasitoids' are a class of organisms that would leave you crying for mommy. A class of organisms that a fair few wasp species belong to.

      Oh how very subtle they are: the ones that parasitize caterpillars inject a venom that includes a specialized virus (found nowhere else but the wasp's oviduct, it's more part of the wasps' DNA than a free-living organism) that suppresses the caterpillar's immune response and increase the protein concentration in the hemolymph, perfect for the larvae.

      Or the fascinating ones that prey on cockroaches. Those are too heavy to transport after paralysis, so they have specialized sensory capabilities on the tip of their stinger, ideally suited to locating the part of the cockroach brain to disable in order to halt voluntary movement, while leaving the victim otherwise functional and ready to be steered by its antennae back to the burrow where it will be devoured alive by wasp larvae.

      And, finally, the ones that prey on spiders, the hunted become the hunter, using their impressive reflexes and even more impressive venom to paralyze spiders (nonlethally, to preserve freshness) so that their larvae can devour them, leaving the vital organs for last (again, to preserve freshness, the victim must live as long as possible while being eaten alive) and then emerge to hunt spiders for their own young.

      Parasitoid wasps are badass motherfuckers. Not quite as badass as Cordyceps fungi (not that I'm biased); but pretty fucking badass.

    18. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're okay with slaughtering dolphins and keeping orcas in captivity. And, I'm not sure that a daddy longleg has a nervous system complex enough to feel 'pain.' So I'm not sure that the moral high road starts with bugs.

    19. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. Roaches have survived billions of years, and would survive the nuclear zombie apocalypse. They have enough survival abilities.

      Do you know what happens in nature? Every nasty bit of stuff eats these things, live without anesthetizing them. Sometimes they go down live and just get digested. Nature is cruel. And it hates you, and me, and roaches.

      Should we be doing this in schools? That's the question here.

    20. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by quantaman · · Score: 1

      You're overstating your case, given that their intent is presumably to educate, not to amuse, and there is a long precedent for harming animals in the interests of educating humans, continuing to the present day.

      Killing and dissecting for educational purposes yes, performing harmful experiments on living creatures? Not so much.

      I can see the value, using technology to control the behaviour of a cockroach is cool and teaches you about how the creature works, I think this could be a valuable tool in a biology class. But take it outside the class and you're turning a living creature into a toy.

      I think it overstates things to say it's turning kids into psychopaths, but you can't deny it isn't a bit creepy.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    21. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you describe this as "normal" is highly distressing.

    22. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Twinbee · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you want really twisted. How about that sea creature (Cymothoa Exigua) who starts by eating the tongue of a fish, then actually BECOMES the tongue for the rest of the fish's life.

      See number 6:
      http://www.cracked.com/article_17199_the-7-most-horrifying-parasites-planet.html

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    23. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Imagine if rich people were to look at poor people and think "But for the laws of physics and random chance, that could be me..."

      Yeah, laws of physics and random chance... Not determination and hard work...

      Your kind make me sick. You have your head so far up.... in the sky and believe you are SO enlightened you don't even recognize reality even though you live in it like the rest of it. You have no standing ground to talk of physics let alone anything else. Go back to your drum circle and dream up alternate explanations for the world. You would better serve as one of these cockroaches rather than a thinking human.

    24. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Any+Web+Loco · · Score: 5, Funny
    25. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We kill 9 billion animals for food each year, in the USA alone. We still somehow manage to remember that killing humans is bad.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    26. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      The horrid tongue arthropod is pretty good. As is the emasculating crab barnacle. Note that #1 on the list you link to is one of the cockroach-zombifying parasitoid wasps, though. Seriously, how sneaky is being able to shove your stinger into the victim's brain and precisely disable volitional movement, while leaving the target otherwise intact. A neurosurgeon would be hard pressed to do as much, and they have the benefit of medical imaging technology, training, and a childhood not spent devouring still-living cockroaches...

    27. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't say what you are doing these days...

    28. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by elashish14 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but one difference in this situation is how children could be/are encouraged to do this.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    29. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      Hey, if it's ok to torture suspected terrorists, cockroaches must be fair game...

    30. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You should study up on psychological disorders, especially those that lead to violence, before spouting off. Psychological profiles start with questions like "did they abuse or kill small animals when young. Not one type of violent crime mind you, all types of violent crimes.

      We know that there is a connection psychologically between violence when young and extreme violence when older. So the concern here, from a psychological stand point is absolutely valid and backed by science. What we currently don't know is whether or not the abuse of inanimate critters, such as this roach, would have the same impact on people psychologically.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    31. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked my ass off to get somewhere in life. I had a great job and a great life. Then I was in a car accident and I lost it all. My health, job, wife, money, everything was gone and I wound up on the street. Anyone can wind up losing everything through random chance.

    32. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      You can't do a dissection without harming a living creature. Whether the frog suffers more than the cockroach seems like the topic for a breakout session in some sort of woolly philosophical symposium. As for creepy, I know a fellow who earned beer money in medical school by killing cats with an icepick for purposes of dissection, so creepy is rather the nature of the beast.

    33. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We kill 9 billion animals for food each year, in the USA alone. We still somehow manage to remember that killing humans is bad.

      [Emphasis added.]

      That's something most southern and mid-western US states' governments have yet to consider, let alone remember.

    34. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you (intentionally?) misunderstood the problem. When drugs are tested on animals that's done with certain objectives in mind (e.g. does X causes cancer in mice in California? (the answer is yes)), it isn't done just for the heck of it and certainly not by kids. There are dozens of regulations you have to follow as well.
      There's no evidence showing that teaching kids to torture (or whatever you prefer to call it) lesser creatures will be benefical for anyone other than BackyardBrains. If it is indeed benefical that must be proven as it's by no means obvious. Kids are horrible enough as it is, personally I see no reason to try to make them even worse.

      PS: following your flawed argument we should ignore the scientific advances of the Nazis since they did experiment on "lesser" humans (assuming, of course, you're against experimenting on people against their will).

    35. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by quantaman · · Score: 1

      You can't do a dissection without harming a living creature. Whether the frog suffers more than the cockroach seems like the topic for a breakout session in some sort of woolly philosophical symposium. As for creepy, I know a fellow who earned beer money in medical school by killing cats with an icepick for purposes of dissection, so creepy is rather the nature of the beast.

      The difference is the dissected animal is killed in a way to minimize suffering (the ice pick probably qualified). The remote control cockroach is arguably going through an extended period of suffering, how would you feel about someone making a remote control frog or cat?

      --
      I stole this Sig
    36. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Ketchup and rosemary?

      You sick fuck.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    37. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals#Psychological_disorders

      Just saying...

      Oh good, cruelty to animals is an indicator of disorders, not a cause. Nothing to fear then.

    38. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't ALL kids pull the legs off daddy longleg spiders? As I recall, it was amazing to see the difference in capabilities as you remove the legs, one by one. I was amazed they could still move with just one leg. Been decades since I did that, and I now recognize the good job they do in keeping down other insects.

    39. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention his username...

      seriously, that link needs more upvotes / modpoints.

    40. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So all this experiment/kickstarter is teaching kids:

      Why kill when you can control. What would you rather have?

      Considering privacy is lost, economies and gov'ts are manipulated, and science is now on judgement as much as religion. The former option doesn't sound so bad?

    41. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Well, since we're all confessing... I pulled the glowing part off a lightning bug once. My parents saw it and told me never to do that, that it was cruel. Deep down I probably knew that before I did it; but kids have to be told. I really feel sad thinking about it now. Even if these creatures live for just a season, it's inhumane for us to accelerate that season.

      OTOH, real scientists probably killed lots of lightning bugs to develop an understanding of the chemistry. I can excuse that because they actually had a chance. I was just a stupid kid who wanted to see how long the glow would last without the bug.

      It's not a cut-and-dry issue. FWIW, I think the roach cyborgs are creepy... but I was always happy to see the exterminator around this one apartment building I lived that had a problem with them. Horrible creatures they are, fully worthy of chemical warfare. There was this one condo I looked at where I saw baby roaches during the walk-through. During the day. Instant "no" on buying that place. If you see roaches during the day, the infestation must be truly massive. It's also impossible to kill them in an apartment building in any practical way--just a few dirty tenants are enough to keep the population viable. They'd all have to live like Felix Unger from the Odd Couple for a couple years, and that's not happening... but, I digress.

      The best analogy here is to warfare. We can kill people in war, but we can't torture them, gas them, or starve them. We can gas the roaches... but turning them into cyborgs? I'm just not so sure. It's not rational. "Whoever said humans were rational?".

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    42. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by msauve · · Score: 1

      "I know a fellow who earned beer money in medical school by killing cats with an icepick for purposes of dissection"

      He killed way more yeast than cats.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    43. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about cruelty to vegetables?

    44. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your average life expectancy after doing this will be about 15 years.

      WARNING. You're entering troll territory. Hyperbole is one of the first symptoms of Acquired Trollish Disorder.

    45. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by bitt3n · · Score: 2

      It depended on the purpose of such a remote-control cat. For example, such an animal might be used to develop technology by which a quadriplegic could occasionally command a helper monkey's brain directly, so to perform complex tasks that the animal normally wouldn't be able to do (like, say, opening a safe, or changing the time on a clock). Or say you could train someone to play the violin by actually moving his fingers for him (assuming he allowed it). If they started selling the relevant equipment at pet stores as a novelty item, that might provide some cause for reflection.

      I'm suspicious of arguments that employ a clear divide between the ethical acceptability of killing an animal humanely, and the unacceptability of harming the animal while keeping it alive, even if the harm is limited to what is necessary to achieve some specific beneficial purpose. I don't think it's possible to make a clear comparison between the relative undesirabilities of suffering versus non-existence, given that no one has ever been able to sample the latter and then return to weigh its relative merits.

    46. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You don't draw a line. You see it as shades of gray.

    47. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't imagine how fucked up you are now.

    48. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IT's a cock roach.
      You scoutmaster was a douche. Did he care to explain why it was cruel? oh right, no.

      Pulling the legs off insects doesn't make you a psychopath.

      No, it just means you already were one.

    49. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      This is why psychology is a joke. Just a couple of generations ago, torturing insects as a game was ubiquitous. A few generations before that, and killing small animals was ubiquitous outside of large cities. The questions like "Did they abuse or kill small animals when young?" is confirmation bias and pure fantasy.

    50. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It took another person to tell you that this was wrong?!?

    51. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, the Donner Party didn't undertake cannibalism because it was entertaining or educational.

      And while arguments can be made against the necessity of killing animals for sustenance - there are many mechanisms that we employ to make life better on what ultimately ends up on our dinner table. (Free range whatnot, humane slaughtering, etc)

    52. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by danlip · · Score: 2

      10 years old is plenty old enough to ask children to think about those issues. We expect far too little from kids.

    53. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Because while dumb motherfuckers like you are a member of PETI (People for the Ethical Treatment of Insects), the rest of us aren't.

    54. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF is a paper balloon? I thought they were made of rubber. Googling, thanks.

    55. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Can you really not see a problem with that?

      With a roach? No. In fact, Hell No.

      I can tell you live north somewhere.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    56. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Is it okay to torture fish?

      I don't think so but millions seem to think catch & release is fine.

      Lizards? Mice? Dogs?

      I'd personally rather not But I also don't see any problems eating any of those things. Do you?

      I don't really see that lizards and mice warrant much care about actions taken with them, just given how they fare in nature. If we aren't doing anything crueler to them than they would otherwise experience then I am OK in the abstract with someone doing something with a creature.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    57. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, random chance.

      You might be lucky enough to have been born in a society where you can achieve a lot though hard work, but most of the world's poor arent so fortunate. The sad fact is that there are many places in the world where hard work is the bare minimum required to survive, and poeple can never get ahead no matter how much harder they work because there are no opportunities or resources or education.

    58. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about people?

      It's only OK to torture people if the gain you hope to make by it outweighs the mess you have to tidy up afterwards.

      However, implanting electrodes into people's brains in order to control their actions against their will, now that's OK all of the time. Hell you can even get them to tidy up for you. For kids though, they are probably better off staring with cockroaches and working their way up.

      These do-gooder ethicists -I mean how can a simple science experiment teach children to be psychopaths? Pur-leaze!

    59. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, we do. We do not, however, jam electrodes in them and treat them like the latest RC toy while they're still conscious first.

    60. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by sjames · · Score: 1

      What would you have thought if he came in with an RC transmitter and drove the cat around the dorm a few times pushing the meow button rhythmically for fun?

      How would you feel when you realized the cat was still conscious?

    61. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A ten year old brain don't have the necessary functions to deal with abstract concepts like that.
      You should definitely teach the ten year olds those things but know well that they can't really apply them until they reach their mid-teens.
      It is possible to tell when a child has developed all the functions necessary to deal with those things, they usually enter into an existential crisis when they do.

    62. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Znork · · Score: 1

      Frankly I doubt it's that useful an indicator, with the prevalence probably ranging in the 50+% range (and I wouldn't be surprised at an actual 100% prevalence). Traits like empaty and reasoning like ethics take time to mature. Now, if they still abuse animals or insects at 20+ there may be some possible issues.

      Personally I can recall some magnifying glass incidents I'm not proud of. 30 years later, I'll usually release flies outside if I manage to catch them alive.

    63. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      What about cruelty to vegetables?

      Not acceptable, even during visiting hours.

    64. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. Causation != correlation. And in fact the science is clear--killing animals is not causative of violent behavior in adulthood, it merely correlates.

      Real psychopathy is a physical abnormality in the brain. The center for empathy is missing. Most psychopaths aren't actually violent, however. The ones who are have other psychological issues, which killing animals doesn't cause either, but is merely correlative.

      A typical human, with intact empathy and no psychological predisposition to violence, will never become violent because of some science experiment. The tiny fraction who would will become violent aren't going to be hastened to criminal violence by said science experiment, either.

    65. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most 10 year olds would understand why it's cruel almost immediately. It's called empathy. Golden rule and all that. By saying it was cruel he made them see the situation from that perspective and so more likely to see other situations from that perspective later.

      It's the other 10 year olds who don't get it you have to watch out for later.

      Explaining why it's cruel to them would probably just make them more likely to turn into CEOs or politicians who harm millions instead of petty criminals who harm dozens.

    66. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Catch and release fishing comes to mind. Got a problem with people fishing too?

    67. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck the scoutmaster. That's what a can of WD-40 and a lighter is for. Torch the damn spiders.

    68. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comparison is a bit ridiculous. A cokroach is hardly above a plant in terms of self awareness. There's a world of difference between it and even the least intelligent mammal. Might as well compare cutting the lawn to cutting a cat's paws off.

    69. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by JeffOwl · · Score: 1

      Yes they would survive. And after the apocalypse, when humanity is reduced to a few hundred thousand scattered across the globe, the roaches will remember how we treated them and seize the opportunity to rise up and exact their revenge.

    70. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we should insert electrodes into their brains and radio control them with our smartphones ...

    71. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Roaches have survived billions of years, and would survive the nuclear zombie apocalypse. They have enough survival abilities.

      Do you know what happens in nature? Every nasty bit of stuff eats these things, live without anesthetizing them. Sometimes they go down live and just get digested. Nature is cruel. And it hates you, and me, and roaches.

      Should we be doing this in schools? That's the question here.

      (Burrrrp) Oh, pardon me. These No Child Left Behind buffets are so filling.

    72. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by quantaman · · Score: 1

      There's certainly purposes for which remote-control animals are acceptable, if the benefit is great enough to justify the ethical cost. For a creature as low as a cockroach I'd say children's education qualifies, but children's entertainment doesn't.

      As for killing vs harming, it basically comes down to quality of life, at some point quality of life is negative at which point it's a greater moral cost than killing. Where this point is we don't really know, but we seem to establish negative quality of life at a somewhat sooner point when it comes to animals.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    73. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by ZigiSamblak · · Score: 1

      I think that post is more insightful than funny. Probably most/a lot of children are not innocent of harming animals, but will sooner or later develope a sense of moral responsibility and shame about their actions. However if you think it is something to boast about that you tortured helpless creatures it probably is a good idea to have your head examined.

    74. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by antdude · · Score: 1

      Why ask why?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    75. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      at some point quality of life is negative

      This is the statement I find difficult to defend. Negative compared to what? Let's take veal as an example. Many people who eat other meat don't eat veal on account of the fact that producing it requires treating an animal cruelly. On the other hand, not producing it doesn't mean those animals get to live in a field of clover somewhere. They wouldn't exist at all. I consider the suggestion that a brief life replete with miseries is worse than no life at all to be the product not of any logical argument but rather of a desire to rationalize one's behavior, in this case, the eating of meat other than veal. (I don't make any claims about whether eating meat is ethical, but only use this issue to illustrate the point that such ethical distinction between an easy death and a hard life appears to be self serving.)

    76. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      The difference is that it's for a possible benefit, not just for the sake of torturing the animal. Not that it makes it "right", but I still use modern medications. I've never tortured an animal for the fun of it.

    77. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      That's not normal. I'd keep an eye on my psyche if I were you.

    78. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      What would you have thought if he came in with an RC transmitter and drove the cat around the dorm a few times pushing the meow button rhythmically for fun?

      How would you feel when you realized the cat was still conscious?

      Given that the intent of controlling a cockroach is not amusement but education, the fact that similar technology could be abused to harm a different organism doesn't appear to inform upon the ethicality of the former exercise.

    79. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Why not?

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    80. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have to say, I thought it was pretty messed up.

    81. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked my ass off to get somewhere in life. I had a great job and a great life. Then I was in a car accident and I lost it all. My health, job, wife, money, everything was gone and I wound up on the street. Anyone can wind up losing everything through random chance.

      Yeah, I bet you felt sorry that you weren't insured in some way. You thought you were untouchable, didn't you? It must have felt bad when your wife left you for someone with more sense between his ears and more activity below his waist. Ain't life a bitch when you don't expect anything bad to happen because lo and behold you are the chosen one so nothing bad could ever happen to you?

    82. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't feel bad at all for laughing at this. Maybe I have one of those disorders?

    83. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by cusco · · Score: 1

      Magnifying glasses and kitchen chemicals as well.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    84. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Yeah what she said, and not only that but all them creepy suckers drank Milk, it's the milk that's corupting our essential fluids and turning us into monsters! (Save your urine, they'll try to steal your essential fluids so they can controll you).

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    85. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by sjames · · Score: 1

      The stated intent is education, but I don't see much education there that can't be had by less extreme measures.

    86. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um, yeah. how many people do you eat per year now?

    87. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between tormenting invertebrates and something like throwing cats off buildings. The former is unlikely to be of concern if it doesn't progress into more insidious behavior.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    88. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nature isn't cruel. Nature just is. People tend to forget that. We're the only ones who find a more grandiose purpose for living (including some rather beautiful reasons). Everything else lives because it has only one purpose: to continue being alive.

    89. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by s.petry · · Score: 1

      For much of psychology I would agree, but there are some areas that are not poppycock invented to make a buck. Abuse and killing for fun is not something new in psychology. Killing for survival (eating, removing pests, etc...) is not the same as killing for pleasure. We have only had a small portion of our time on earth where we had people with enough free time to kill for fun, but we have had enough study to see some very real connections to mental health and killing/torture for pleasure.

      Desensitizing people is a well known, and proven to work. That goes back thousands of years in knowledge. Correlation != causation, but in this case there is no need to perform a simple correlation. Science has proven a connection to abuse when young and mental health in age.

      We don't have our morals and ethics when we are born, we grow and learn them. Those ethics and morals change constantly based on what we do and what we see.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    90. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by cusco · · Score: 1

      Actually, without their wings they probably didn't vibrate the web at the correct frequency that the spider would recognize it as prey. A fly without wings would get ignored, but the fly with the wings in the same web prompted a response.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    91. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by s.petry · · Score: 1

      So you are trying to claim that our ethics and morals come at birth and we can't learn ethics and morals as we grow? The only way a person becomes psychopathic is by being born with a physical disability? You would do well in the Rockefeller eugenics labs!

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    92. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We kill 9 billion animals for food each year, in the USA alone. We still somehow manage to remember that killing humans is bad.

      Actually, we don't. The USA has a deplorably high murder rate compared to similarly developed countries. The USA has also killed scores of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of humans abroad in wars that the USA initiated, just in the last decade.

    93. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Actually yes, the bullies in my school used to do that.
      I never did or thought of doing it (and yes, I kill mosquitoes and sometime cockroaches, though I try to do it quickly rather than let them suffer).

    94. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Dude they're cockroaches, torture invovles the infliction of pain for gain, you are assuming they even feel pain. Each animal has a very different sense of what causes pain. If I've cut your finger nail it's nothing to you, your dog goes into whimper mode, yet if I grab a hemostat full of ear hair and rip it out you'll scream like your being murdered, but your dog will not even flinch! Also you're assuming we don't do it on people. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was attempted by Silvanus P. Thompson back in 1910, and it has evolved into something that can allow a human brain-to-brain interface. Brain pacemakers and are being used more and more.

      Hell you could a take a cockroach, cut off it's head and as long as you could jab a feeding tube down it's gullet, it would even die!

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    95. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Most animals taste like they smell, so I'll pass on the Mice, or at least put them on my last resort list.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    96. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Every drug addict has drunk cow's milk, it obviously corrupts our essencial fluids LOL

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    97. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by narcc · · Score: 1

      you are assuming they even feel pain.

      You're assuming that they don't. Which has the more potential for harm? Remember: Until recently, it was thought that babies don't feel pain.

      If I'm to err, I'd rather my mistake not result in torture.

    98. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by budgenator · · Score: 1

      What would you have thought if he came in with an RC transmitter and drove the cat around the dorm a few times pushing the meow button rhythmically for fun?

      How would you feel when you realized the cat was still conscious?

      You've never seen a stage hypnotist act before have you?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    99. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by sjames · · Score: 1

      And you don't know how hypnotism works.

      Including the part where the hypnotist most certainly does not send hired goons out to grab random people and subject them to hypnotism.

    100. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a key distinction to make here. These are the keys to their survival. Turning cockroaches into steerable toys has no educational value. Another issue is that teachers may not properly teach the distinction between doing experiments by zapping cockroaches with a kit, and say, doing experiments by plugging a cat's whiskers in a 220VAC domestic plug.

    101. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Any+Web+Loco · · Score: 1

      Thanks - it wasn't meant to be a joke :-/

    102. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what tiny percent actually kill their animals for food? Insightful my ass.

    103. Re:Missing the reality of what kids do to insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stimulating one antenna or the other is different from pulling on reins?

  3. It's a fucking cockroach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you live anywhere cockroaches run rampant, you know the score. Kill them, or be infested.

    1. Re:It's a fucking cockroach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, what you do is actually do the dishes and clean up occasionally, and you will find the cockroaches move out in disgust.

    2. Re:It's a fucking cockroach by dhammabum · · Score: 1

      Not always. We once lived in an inner-city neighbourhood with a high cockroach population. Didn't matter how clean we were (and we were clean, plugged holes in walls, made sure there was no water, etc) they still came in just from population pressure. Not much you can do if they crawl up through the drains.

      --
      I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
    3. Re:It's a fucking cockroach by mjwx · · Score: 1

      If you live anywhere cockroaches run rampant, you know the score. Kill them, or be infested.

      Maybe you'd consider your actions more carefully in the future now Cyber-Roach is back with a vengeance.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  4. Cruel by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Funny

    I completely agree. It's completely unacceptable to force innocent students to used something as restricted and crippled as iOS. For once could someone actually think of the children.

    1. Re:Cruel by LifesABeach · · Score: 2

      I'm hoping that parents can fill out a permission slip to use another phone based o/s; "it's for the children."

    2. Re:Cruel by Richy_T · · Score: 5, Funny

      Forget psychopaths. It might turn them into... hipsters.

    3. Re:Cruel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything non-iOS is about to become hipster in a worse way then anything Apple ever put out. So two years from now, have fun with your new non-cool iPhone.

    4. Re:Cruel by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I completely agree. It's completely unacceptable to force innocent students to used something as restricted and crippled as iOS. For once could someone actually think of the children.

      In version 2, the system will prevent the cockroach from having thoughts that aren't cryptographically signed by Apple. True Facts.

    5. Re:Cruel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that there is a difference between "than" and "then" don't you?

    6. Re: Cruel by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      That's probably better for the roaches, keeps poor fandroids from controlling them.

  5. Makes sense by WGFCrafty · · Score: 5, Funny

    IPhones have been turning humans into mindless drones for years, now its the insects turn.

  6. Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A beowulf cluster of those!

    1. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      multiboxed roaches?

    2. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you sir, for reminding me of the good ol' days of overused jokes in /.

    3. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded Insightful?!? WTF?

    4. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q: How do I control my cyborg cockroach army?
      A: There's an app for that!

  7. Kill Glorious kill by Anti+Cheat · · Score: 1

    But do you actually get to kill the cockroach at the end of the experiment?
    Would be such a waste not too. Brouhaha!!!

    1. Re:Kill Glorious kill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      v2 of the kit comes with a remote control firecracker that blows the roach up. Game Over! ;)

  8. I hate roaches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I absolutely hate and despise roaches, far past a phobia.

    I still felt sorry for the damn thing.

  9. For one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I welcome our cyborg...whatever.

  10. Inmates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Using that on inmates instead would comply with the US philosophy and ethics. Or maybe on terrorists, so many of them are caught each day, we could do endless research virtually for free, fundings wouldn't even be necessary anymore.

    1. Re:Inmates by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      Troll.

      Only responding because way too many Slashdot readers actually believe this.

      Most of the US has stringent ethics protecting prisoners, so much so that we've really gone quite soft. Those that you're most likely to hear about are the exceptions... and you're most likely to hear about them because they're the exceptions. The only reason the world found out about Abu Ghraib is because reporters knew that the entire US would be shocked and outraged.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    2. Re:Inmates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the problem emanates from the "they should never have been put in jail in the first place" part.

  11. for the first time in 15 years i can say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i want to go back to school

  12. Too buggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I tried the app, but it was too buggy.

  13. Libertarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    You can always count on Libertarians to miss the point. The ethical issue has nothing to do with cockroaches themselves, but whether it's ethical for humans to forcibly subject other animals to being implanted with technology to manipulate their behavior. Funny how much Libertarians love the slippery slope argument unless it's against something which they personally do not mind.

    1. Re:Libertarians by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Oh, come now, surely you can see that libertarians have a strong selfish interest in whether we are allowed to implant electrodes in subhuman animals or not...

    2. Re:Libertarians by clarkkent09 · · Score: 3

      It's simple: animals don't have rights. Forcing animals to do something and forcing humans to do something are two fundamentally different things. If you disagree, fine. Howevere, it is strange that you draw a line at implanting animals with technology for purposes of education, rather than, you know, slaughtering them by the billions each year, or using them as slave labor etc.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    3. Re:Libertarians by Empiric · · Score: 1

      Forcing animals to do something and forcing humans to do something are two fundamentally different things.

      And I hope you can therefore reference something that you propose exists, that differentiates these two forms of biology.

      --
      ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
    4. Re:Libertarians by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      It really is kind of scary how common it has become for people to equate humans with other lower animals. There was a time when the crazy cat lady was considered...well... crazy. Today, she is considered normal.

    5. Re:Libertarians by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      I was talking law, not biology (or theology).

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    6. Re:Libertarians by Draknor · · Score: 1

      "Lower", huh? How would you like to qualify that?

      I've lived with animals before. Sometimes I wonder if we really are "smarter" then they are.

      Besides, I'm positive that I've had pets that were smarter than many members of Congress.

    7. Re:Libertarians by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Good example.

    8. Re:Libertarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps instead of rights, there could be the concept of a continuum of considertion...

    9. Re:Libertarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was done decades ago. SINce then such experimentation has increased, year-on-year.
      Rather than the thorax of a cockaroach, the criminals at the Wiezmann Institvte in israel have cut the top off of hominids, and implanted not rudimentary electrodes, but entire netlike conductive mesh. They do it on kittens, cats, and monkeys. (see youtube /watch?v=yVT2xNB5J1k&list=PL_j-9gobvzwQVV_7cz2JNNDz-7NzWImob )

      This is not the first time they have been exposed doing dirty things, the Wiezmann Institute is also a source of POLLONIUM, they have been producing and applying polonium there since the late `60`s. Alexander Goldfarb, a personal associate of Litvinenko and Berezovsky matriculated (got a degree) at the Wiezmann Institute.

      The captive population of Palestinians (their borders are tightly controlled by the israeli military) have a very high incarceration rate, more than half Palestinian males have been detained in israeli jails, prisons, and military bases, and it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they have also been conducting heinous human experimentation. The news simply does not get out (much like the late Arafat, who was tightly cordoned by israeli forces for years preceding his death, likely due to POLONIUM.

    10. Re:Libertarians by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I wonder if we really are "smarter" then they are.

      They might be smarter than you, but of course, that's just because you're an idiot. Run along now and burrow a hole, be one with the earth, noble savage! I shall remain here confident in my ability to outsmart a dog on anything other than identification by urine scent.

    11. Re:Libertarians by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Smarter than congress proves nothing, rocks are smarter than congress.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  14. In a low tech way, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    We do something similar to horses, They're called "reins".

    1. Re:In a low tech way, by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The horse doesn't die, and can develop a relationship with the rider and actually enjoy riding sessions.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:In a low tech way, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reins can be removed, this can't.

    3. Re:In a low tech way, by Draknor · · Score: 1

      Not too mention, the horse still retains full autonomy and can, at its discretion, ignore you.

    4. Re:In a low tech way, by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Very true.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:In a low tech way, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we want students to build a relationship with bugs? (and a horse would probably say they enjoy the not-caged sessions)

    6. Re:In a low tech way, by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      The reins can be removed, this can't.

      I think we need more research to verify this.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    7. Re:In a low tech way, by cusco · · Score: 1

      Do you know whether the roach enjoys being directed around?

      More to the point, you apparently don't know many working horses. There aren't many who are anxiously anticipating their next opportunity to pull a plow for ten hours, or carry hundreds of pounds of cargo up and down a mountain.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    8. Re:In a low tech way, by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Do you know whether the roach enjoys being directed around?

      Good question.

      More to the point, you apparently don't know many working horses. There aren't many who are anxiously anticipating their next opportunity to pull a plow for ten hours, or carry hundreds of pounds of cargo up and down a mountain.

      I've seen horses get bitter and sad when they were not taken out to work for a while.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  15. What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like harmless fun. What could possibly go wrong?

    Cyborg cockroaches controlled by heartless immature humans turn on their cruel tormentors. . . . .

    I for one welcome our new 'Techno-Blatterian' overlords. . . .

  16. I certainly hope those protesting are vegetarians. by Caspian · · Score: 1, Informative

    Because if you think it's okay to kill a pig or a cow, but not to cyborgify a cockroach, you have some serious double standards going on.

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  17. SENDING them a cockroach? by tannhaus · · Score: 1

    Have they ever been to a school? I'm sure any school in the country has a surplus of cockroaches they can send back to the company.

  18. Frog? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Where was this outrage when I had to dissect a frog?

  19. others say it's turning kids into psychopaths." by geekoid · · Score: 1

    and by others they mane people who ahe no clue what a psychopath is?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  20. What does this have to do with science? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand the value of doing experiments, and I understand the value of replicating experiments. But this doesn't sound like either. It just seems like something that you install on a roach and watch it go. What is to be learned from going through the motions? That it works? We already know that. Are the students practicing some valuable skill when they clip the antennae and attach the backpack? If so, then doing this might have some value. But if this is being done "just because" then yeah, they probably shouldn't be doing it.

    1. Re:What does this have to do with science? by bitt3n · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What's the point of dissecting a frog? We already know what's in the frog. We're not going to find anything new. It just seems like you cut the frog open and look at the organs. What is to be learned from going through the motions?

    2. Re:What does this have to do with science? by gnoshi · · Score: 1

      What's the point of dissecting a frog? We already know what's in the frog....

      I think that there is a lot more to be learned from actually doing a dissection than there is from looking at photographs of a dissection, because of the poking and exploring that can only be performed during a real dissection. In contrast, this particular project provides a visual illustration of a phenomena - i.e. that cockroaches movement is driven by electrical input in the nerves which run through the antennae - but I don't think is has the same degree of exploratory value.

      That said, I think this question is certainly among the right ones to be asking in considering the ethics of devices/experiments like this.

    3. Re:What does this have to do with science? by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      I understand the value of doing experiments, and I understand the value of replicating experiments. But this doesn't sound like either.

      Then you misunderstand. I'm a neuroscientist and I've taught PhD students using the backyard brains kit. There's lots to learn: I wish I had a kit like this in school. You can do simple "research" with it, no question. It's a super-cheap way of recording action potentials. With a little creativity there's plenty to learn: rate coding and temporal coding of sensory information using spikes, stimulation and adaptation of sensory input. Everyone can have their own kit and just get going. No need for expensive amps and scopes. We started using the kits last year but they've been on sale for longer than that. I don't know why the article says "starting this November", none of this is that new.

    4. Re:What does this have to do with science? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " I don't know why the article says "starting this November""

      All that University education and you can't see through some deceptive marketing?

      I fear for the future of education.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:What does this have to do with science? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever look inside a frog? The insides are color coded as they are in the textbooks. All the pieces are pretty much the same color and it's up to the student to figure out which is which. Think about what it would be like if surgeons only looked at textbooks.

    6. Re:What does this have to do with science? by sjames · · Score: 1

      It says that because this is the cheap dumbed down version that does not record action potentials or allow setting the stimulation parameters in any way. Just zap the right antenna to turn right or zap the left antenna to turn left.

      They have other products that appear to be far more educational (and ethical). They are probably safer than when I used two needles and a sound blaster to connect my own arm to a PC.

    7. Re:What does this have to do with science? by fonske · · Score: 1

      I think you are correct that this kit has value for neuroscientists.
      However these debates also need to shed light on an evolutionary pathway of the nervous system.
      Nerves are important for all organisms with heterotrophic food pattern - it gives them an incentive to react on a changing environment.
      In the evolutionary sense our nervous system is very comparable to that of a cockroach having a ventral and dorsal nerve string with some ganglia (group of nerve cells) strewn along those strings, and one ganglion that is very intricate - the central processing unit - the brain.
      Functional grouping of the nervous system:
      1) Central Nervous System (CNS) bunches the inputs (afferent part of Peripheral Nervous system (PNS)) and gives output (through efferent part of PNS) to muscles
      2) Autonomous input/output part of PNS helps for eg fight or flight, digestion, defecation...no CNS involved although CNS does record problems
      Since pain is an input related part we do have an important clue that invertebrates can have this stimulation.

    8. Re:What does this have to do with science? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But seeing, and more to the point, doing, reinforces a concept in a way that simple explanation and video would not. It also drives interest and curiosity along Bacon's lines of "To be mastered, nature must be obeyed." It's empowering and encourages them to think of the possibilities....to make new connections....

    9. Re:What does this have to do with science? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The one I'm waiting for is the version with a video camera and uplink transmitter, wouldn't that be enough to give the NSA an all-day woody?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  21. Some psychopath... by namgge · · Score: 2

    ... stabbed me earlier today and fitted me with bluetooth. A couple of hours practice, however, and I am spoofing his to keyboard connection.

    Pwned by Roach 2.0...

    Bwwahahaha!!!!

  22. Wow! by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 2

    So cyborg cockroaches are smart enough to start up an ethics debate? These suckers are advanced!

    --
    Happy people make bad consumers.
    1. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So cyborg cockroaches are smart enough to start up an ethics debate? These suckers are advanced!

      No the funny part is we're worried about kids becoming mindless murderers while dissecting a cockroach (as if they would keep it for a pet under normal circumstances), and yet there seems to be this large elephant in the room called "video games" that allow people to become a much more realistic and effective killing machine.

      I guess no one can hear or see the elephant through the shitstorm of money he's blowing out his ass non-stop. Fuck morals or ethics when there's money to be made.

  23. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I am.

  24. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    I think it's okay to kill a pig or cow to eat it. I also think that intensive livestock farming is cruel to the animal, and therefore morally wrong.

    Where I live, if a university scientist wanted to cyborgify a cockroach as part of a legitimate research project, it would require ethics approval.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  25. Gokiburi Gijinka Manga by Guppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FYI: If you've ever doubted the ability of Japanese manga artists to make anything cute, take a look at Gokiburi Gijinka, which features the adventures of adorable little Gokicha-chan and her misunderstood struggle to make friends with humans -- who for some inexplicable reason she can't understand -- keep trying to squash her.

    1. Re:Gokiburi Gijinka Manga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly, I think manga is a better predictor of psychopathic behavior.

    2. Re:Gokiburi Gijinka Manga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /!\ *** sexy cockroach *** /!\

      Sadly nothing with the mind_control tag.

  26. Re: others say it's turning kids into psychopaths. by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    Maybe we could use it as part of a psych screening programme?

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  27. Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonton by Phil+Urich · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, with the exception of the big indoor mall water park, since the ultra-rich owners of the mall greased things to get the palm trees in without inspections . . . which meant that nobody checked for cockroaches. So the only cockroaches in all of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada are in the West Edmonton Mall waterpark.

    Best part, by the time the owners finally admitted they needed to do something about them, it was too late, because you know what exterminators use to kill cockroaches? Yup, you guessed it, chlorine-based insecticides. So at this point after so many generations living around chlorinated water and then a few attempts at extermination these are basically unkillable cockroaches. With the exception that the winters here are cold enough that they've never gotten out of the mall.

    In retrospect, thank god the LRT (ie. subway or "underground", basically, although it is mostly above ground) never ended up going to WEM.

    --
    I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
  28. ...others say it's turning kids into psychopaths. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They either are or they aren't. Manipulating a bug will not change them.

  29. No way, totally wrong by russotto · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not ethical to force an animal to move left and right by attaching electrodes to its head. Not at all. The ethical way is to put a metal bar in its mouth and pull on THAT to force it to move left and right.
     

    1. Re:No way, totally wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reins are for signalling, not coercion, man. If you're trying to force the horse, you are doing it wrong and either the horse or you requires more training.

    2. Re:No way, totally wrong by crazyvas · · Score: 2

      Parent is modded funny, but is actually more insightful than funny:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_(horse)

    3. Re:No way, totally wrong by sjames · · Score: 1

      That does not actually force the horse to do anything. All that does is let you know what you want it to do, it is up to the horse if you get your wish or not.

  30. Unless you want bestiality advocates to use this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't use this argument.

  31. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by narcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Killing a pig or a cow to eat is very different from killing a pig or cow for pleasure -- and very different from mutilating them while they're alive for our amusement.

  32. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By that logic if you do eat meat (eg cows, pigs) then you must also be okay with attaching robotic controls to cows and pigs, forcing them to move by remote control.

    Frankly, I think the logic is flawed, in either direction. Killing something for food (while unappealing to me as a vegetarian) is putting the animal to use. The death has purpose. Turning an insect into a cyborg does not strike me as having a purpose, at least not in this context. Why not send the students tiny robots that operate on their own? Why not create a tiny plastic cockroach and ship it with the robotics? Treating a living thing as a toy to be used solely for (apparently) amusement seems like morally shaky ground.

  33. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are right! And by the same reasoning, if you think it's ok to read a book, but not to stab someone with a fork, you also have some SERIOUS double standards going on. I mean really!

  34. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a totally ethically consistent 'only torture delicious animals' policy in place!

  35. Re: others say it's turning kids into psychopaths. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    and by others they mane people who ahe no clue what a psychopath is?

    Is there even any consensus on whether you can manufacture psychopaths?

  36. 5th Element by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Please tell me they have a version that uses a rotating dish instead of a backpack.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  37. After reading this thread... by bmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...and reading all the faux outrage (because it is) over the poor cockroaches...

    I'm gonna go boil up some lobsters - just to piss you guys off - and I will savor every butter-dipped bite.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:After reading this thread... by Xarvh · · Score: 1

      You really savior other's suffering, don't you?

    2. Re:After reading this thread... by bmo · · Score: 1

      >savoir

      french - v. "to know"

      Yes, I do know others' suffering.

      I also savor, with drawn butter.

      --
      BMO

    3. Re:After reading this thread... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just when you thought you couldn't find an appropriate XKCD...

    4. Re:After reading this thread... by sjames · · Score: 2

      Fine, just don't jam electrodes into it and drive it around the kitchen first.

    5. Re:After reading this thread... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me put it this way:

      1) Killing lobsters to eat: ok
      2) Giving lobsters to kids, so they can dissect them and learn something: ok
      3) Giving lobsters to kids, so they can maim them and control them with their iPhones, learning absolutely nothing in the process: pointlessly cruel and with arguable educational value

    6. Re:After reading this thread... by Splab · · Score: 1

      That actually sounds like a lot of fun, remote controlled lobster; better go start a kickstarter project.

    7. Re:After reading this thread... by Anti-Social+Network · · Score: 1

      Oblig. XKCD

      --
      Goddammit just when I get my first +5 the Beta rolls out and kills everything
    8. Re:After reading this thread... by bmo · · Score: 1

      That actually sounds like a brilliant idea.

      Get them to put themselves in the pot.

      --
      BMO

  38. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Master+Moose · · Score: 1

    I thought that this was about education/research rather than amusement

    --
    . . .gone when the morning comes
  39. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And is it ok to kill them for profit?

  40. Not killing is not the same as killing by gnoshi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, because it should be obvious - doing something to an animal without killing it is not the same as killing it. For example, shooting a rabbit and thus killing it is not the same as breaking its legs kicking it around a football field. Thus, it could be argued that punching a hole in a cockroach thorax and clipping the antennae is not the same as stomping on the roach. So we should probably write off the "if you've ever killed or would ever kill a cockroach, then you have must accept this as ethical" arguments.
    Second, just because kids burn ants with a magnifying glass doesn't mean we should be encouraging kids to burn ants with a magnifying glass. As artor3 posted in a previous comment:

    When I was a little kid and pulled the legs off a daddy longlegs, my scoutmaster told me not to do that, that it was cruel. Now we're encouraging kids to inflict pain on animals for their own amusement. Can you really not see a problem with that?

    That isn't to say that installing this on a cockroach is equivalent to burning ants; simply that just because children do do something doesn't mean they should be encouraged to do it.

    Even if people do conclude this is ethical - and I'm not saying it is or is not - then the subsequent question is how you ensure children understand that while cutting half off the antennae of a cockroach is ethically acceptable, cutting half off the ears of a mouse is not. That is, assuming we consider that unethical.
    There is also the question of when it becomes unethical, in terms of animals used. It wouldn't be too challenging to build a kit to allow mid-teenagers to install a similar device in a mouse (assuming they had a steady hand), including sterile implements and gloves, adhesive, etc. Would that be ethically acceptable?

    1. Re:Not killing is not the same as killing by Belial6 · · Score: 0

      I am far more worried about the massive crazy being taught to kids by trying to get them to empathize with a cockroach than I am with the crazy being taught to kids by having them perform experiments on a live cockroach. There is an epidemic of 'crazy cat lady' going on these days. It has spread to men, and jumped species to create 'crazy dog men' as well as women.

    2. Re:Not killing is not the same as killing by gnoshi · · Score: 2

      I'd forgotten that the alternative to having kids cutting the antennae of a cockroach in half is getting them to empathise with the cockroach. I'll not have children in schools being taught to empathise with insects! Quick, cut those antennae! Cut those thorax-holes!

      Wait. What if epidemic of crazy cat lady and crazy dog men is the result of broader social problems, not the result of teaching people to empathise with animals?

  41. In the mammalian world... by SIGBUS · · Score: 1

    ...we have cats and Toxoplasma gondii, which alters the behavior of rodents to make them easier prey.

    --
    Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
    1. Re:In the mammalian world... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      And has exciting-but-not-yet-fully-proven correlations with a variety of nasty human psych disorders! No overt mind control; but Team Epidemiology has given us some reason to suspect that rodents and crazy cat ladies aren't the only mammals it infects...

    2. Re:In the mammalian world... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I heard the BBC was reporting on a study that showed toxoplasmosis infection rates were virtually identical between cat owners and non-cat owners. So it would seem that humans are getting toxoplasmosis from some other vector than the cats.
      Anyone know more?

    3. Re:In the mammalian world... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      And has exciting-but-not-yet-fully-proven correlations with a variety of nasty human psych disorders! No overt mind control; but Team Epidemiology has given us some reason to suspect that rodents and crazy cat ladies aren't the only mammals it infects...

      I recall reading that there's some evidence that certain varieties of schizophrenia are essentially the symptoms of toxoplasmosis infection, to such an extent that treatment with drugs designed to kill toxoplasmosis cures some patients of schizophrenia.

      See Google for more.

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
  42. Utilitarianism by nintendoeats · · Score: 2

    There does seem to be a difference here between eating animals, using them as labour or performing experiments on them. Those are examples of us sacrificing animals to serve our own ends. That is one type of ethical debate which our society is generally decided upon. This is an example of needlessly harming and terrorizing an animal. We do not allow cockfighting or recreational animal torture. This seems, at least to me, to be an example of that sort of relationship with animals. The fact that we are teaching children that such treatment of animals is acceptable (as opposed to slapping their wrists for engaging in it) is just a bonus problem.

  43. Wait...outrage over this?!? by Guru80 · · Score: 1

    We use to dissect frogs, various animal organs and even a cat when we were in high school. Granted none of it was living material but I fail to see the issue of messing with a cockroach from any perspective as a learning tool.

    1. Re:Wait...outrage over this?!? by Kidbro · · Score: 2

      In med school they dissect humans. Granted, none of those are living material, but I fail see the problem with shoving electrodes into a live human's brain and remote controlling him as a learning tool.

      The "granted, none of it was living material" is a quite relevant part.

      And no, I'm not comparing humans to cockroaches - I'm just pointing out the absurdity of ignoring the difference between a corpse and a living creature when it comes to how it's acceptable to treat it.

    2. Re:Wait...outrage over this?!? by Guru80 · · Score: 1

      A cockroach is a cockroach....I'm all for sensitivity and the plight of living beings the planet over but I refuse to reach the point where I care about an insects feelings. It seems a silly concept to me...can't cut that worm in half to bait my hook, might make you a sociopath. Don't shoot that deer, rabbit, or elk...might make you a sociopath! Don't drop that living lobster in water...sociopath!

  44. Re: others say it's turning kids into psychopaths. by gnoshi · · Score: 1

    Probably a combination of initial biology and environment, as always.
    (e.g. 'Made not Born', and 'nature and nurture')

  45. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eating is for pleasure. Or were you force feed yourself dietary balanced tasteless slurry or nutriment? Yeah, I thought so. You are just an hypocrite that let the killing be done by others.

    Life eat life. Pleasure, pain or torture are irrelevant human invention to nature. Fuck you.

  46. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you can't get your food any other way, I'm not sure you can say it's 'very different'. A bit different, maybe, but not very different.

  47. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but if the education is amusing? I mean seriously, AI/Robotic classes *are* fun. Then again, I don't see how roaches are preferable to either the simple robots with sensor/motor couplings or the simulated ones.

  48. Sovietization by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I tried the app, but it was too buggy.

    I tried the bug, but it was too appy.

    Appy Normal, that is.

  49. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So says Dr. Mengele

  50. Unkillable? by sconeu · · Score: 1

    these are basically unkillable cockroaches

    Aren't all cockroaches that way?

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:Unkillable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, nearly so. We used to have huge roach problems growing up in my old neighborhood in central Cali. Every time some new anti-roach gadget, gizmo, or spray came out, we'd try it, it would cut their numbers down for a while, then they'd come back in from elsewhere, and they'd be a little more resistant to whatever we were using.
        What eventually fixed the problem was good old Mother Nature, in the form of little black and white wolf spiders about the size of a nickel. When they moved into the neighborhood, the cockroaches died out. I've been sure to take a couple wolf spiders with me on every move since, and I haven't seen a cockroach yet. I love those little spiders. Clean, quiet, web-free, unobtrusive, little eight-legged killing machines.

    2. Re:Unkillable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we are taking a life form that already resists all forms of attack, and equipping it with cyborg enhancements?

      Gee, there's no way this could go wrong.

    3. Re:Unkillable? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      So we are taking a life form that already resists all forms of attack, and equipping it with cyborg enhancements?

      Gee, there's no way this could go wrong.

      I hope the first kid who shouts out as he is controlling a roach, "You've not seen the last of Kim Jong-Il!" gets an instant automatic A for the class.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
  51. Humans attack humans by gd2shoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because when a cat is "playing" with something smaller than itself, it's typically a bird, mouse, lizard, or small bug, etc. When a human adult is torturing something smaller than himself, it's often another human.

    The leap from cockroach vivisection to psychopathy is a bit of a leap, but there kids out there that already lean that direction. It isn't a matter of whether we are going to encourage the average child to be a psychopath (a ridiculous notion), or be a bit more callous (perhaps worth discussing). But could this be a tiny step toward psychopathy for someone already headed in that direction? Probably.

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    1. Re:Humans attack humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a tiny step toward a callous, psychopathic culture. It's cockroaches today. People tomorrow.

      Actually, I think I would take up horse-riding if they had a similar kit for horses....

  52. I agree. by sconeu · · Score: 3, Funny

    They should stop experiment on cockroaches, and start experimenting on lower life forms instead....

    Members of Congress come to mind as a possibility...

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:I agree. by sjames · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many electrodes it will take to make them vote yes on a spending bill without riders.

    2. Re:I agree. by mjwx · · Score: 3, Funny

      They should stop experiment on cockroaches, and start experimenting on lower life forms instead....

      Members of Congress come to mind as a possibility...

      They tried.

      They opened up the politician and found they lacked both a spine and a brain. Unable to find anywhere to attach the electrodes they gave up and moved onto roaches.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:I agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should stop experiment on cockroaches, and start experimenting on lower life forms instead....

      Members of Congress come to mind as a possibility...

      As if every one of them do not have Lobbyist electrodes shoved up their ass?

      I see you fail to recognize the true masters here. These financial "experiments" have been going on for decades.

    4. Re:I agree. by hawkfish · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many electrodes it will take to make them vote yes on a spending bill without riders.

      I think you have to find some neural tissue first...

      --
      You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
    5. Re:I agree. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Not practical. I think we'll have to go directly to the muscles.

    6. Re:I agree. by cusco · · Score: 1

      We're too late, Wall Street has already installed their remote-control hardware in them.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    7. Re:I agree. by hicksw · · Score: 1

      Members of Congress come to mind as a possibility...

      It's been done. They've all been wired up by their corporate sponsors.
      --
      On Fidonet, nobody knew I was a dog

  53. Come All Ye Lame and Dumb by b4upoo · · Score: 1, Troll

    For those of us who are absolutely worthless and without talent this type of article provides one heck of an opportunity. You to can me a morality wizard. America has tens of thousands of such folk who make it their goal in life to judge whether actions fall within some supposed universally agreed upon mold. It is almost like having 11 items at the check out in the 10 item line at the grocery store. Some old hag will inevitably bitch that I have violated a proper rule. At that point I usually shout with glee "Praise Jesus Christ. The Lord has delivered unto me a judge of proper conduct.". No longer do i need to make up my mind about the right or wrong of an action as these self appointed moral wizards will always do it for me. I am free at last to not be bothered with having an internal debate about the morality of harming a filthy cockroach.

  54. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People kill pigs (mammals like us) for the pleasure of eating bacon, and drive cockroaches around to educate children about electronics and neuroscience.

  55. This is animal cruelty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd really like to hear a legitimate justification for why a product like this is legal or desirable. Why can't we get the kids a Lego Mindstorms set or something?

  56. Meh. Compared to what cockroaches do 24/7 ? by jpellino · · Score: 0

    This is nothing. What's next - the labor department will be dispatched to Don Marquis' office?

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  57. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

    You're hurting an animal for the wrong reason! Quick, get the morality police! This person sprayed Raid on a roach and enjoyed it!

  58. Isaac Bashevis Singer explained the issue well by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Bashevis_Singer


    In The Letter Writer, he wrote "In relation to [animals], all people are Nazis; for the animals, it is an eternal Treblinka."

    1. Re:Isaac Bashevis Singer explained the issue well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats just swell.... but it does NOT make it OK, rhetoric and seemingly historical precedents for atrocity does not make it less atrocious!.
      Rather than the thorax of a cockaroach, the criminals at the Wiezmann Institvte in israel have cut the top off of hominids, and implanted not only rudimentary electrodes, but entire netlike conductive mesh. They do it on kittens, cats, and monkeys. (see youtube /watch?v=yVT2xNB5J1k&list=PL_j-9gobvzwQVV_7cz2JNNDz-7NzWImob )

      This is not the first time they have been exposed doing dirty things, the Wiezmann Institute is also a source of POLLONIUM, they have been producing and applying polonium there since the late `60`s. Alexander Goldfarb, a personal associate of Litvinenko and Berezovsky matriculated (got a degree) at the Wiezmann Institute.

      The captive population of Palestinians (their borders are tightly controlled by the israeli military) have a very high incarceration rate, more than half Palestinian males have been detained in israeli jails, prisons, and military bases, and it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they have also been conducting heinous human experimentation. The news simply does not get out (much like the late Arafat, who was tightly cordoned by israeli forces for years preceding his death, likely due to POLONIUM.

      Wheres the freedom-flotilla footage? it didnt make it out.

    2. Re:Isaac Bashevis Singer explained the issue well by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      I get it. Isaac Bashevis Singer was Jewish. Israel is a Jewish state. Therefore you go on a rant about bad things you believe about Israel.

      It's almost like somebody implanted electrodes into your brain and is turning the knobs to see how you react.

    3. Re:Isaac Bashevis Singer explained the issue well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      watch the youtube link you plonker

  59. Unit 731 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool, let's do more experiments !

    Let's try on mouses also, monkeys, newborns. If it works well, we can do it on humans. Don't worry, we will do these experiments in secret on captured ennemy soldiers.

    Unit 731 anyone ?

  60. Clearly unhealthy by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree that this is psychopathic. I can see how this is very harmful for children to be involved in this. One of the warning signs of psychopathy is to abuse animals in a grotesque manner. That we would actually teach children to do this and to adopt red-flag behaviours of a psychopath is nuts. This is not swatting a roach on the floor, which kills it instantly and as quickly as possible, which we have all done. This is torturing and messing with a living thing for long periods of time. They are not the same thing.

    1. Re:Clearly unhealthy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They mimic the neural signals that a roach experiences when it's antenna touch an obstacle. This is arguably much more humane than using a bit in a horses mouth. This is not intended to hurt the roach and has been engineered to match its nerve signals. You should learn about it if you're concerned. Look up their "spiker box". I've done the same with a different device and electrodes to force muscle control in my arm. It doesn't hurt, just feels weird. Super fun.

    2. Re:Clearly unhealthy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the warning signs of psychopathy is to abuse animals in a grotesque manner.

      Pretty sure that's a symptom and not a cause. Or at least, I'm not aware of any research that says it's a cause.

    3. Re:Clearly unhealthy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's my problem. You've compared it to a horse's bit. Why do you already assume that is ethical?

      Let's suppose the bit itself IS ethical. You can still abuse the horse with it, which is unethical. The horse is accomplishing something with a human. The cockroach is moving around because, hey, funny! There's a big difference.

    4. Re:Clearly unhealthy by jerel · · Score: 1

      What about the hole they have to drill in the carapace, and the fact that they have to cut the antennas to attach the electrodes? You had a choice to poke holes in yourself (I doubt you did the equivalent of cutting the antennas, whatever that would be) for a good that outweighed the bad. The fact that the roach has no choice, no ability to choose, is part of what makes this wrong. If we had to chisel out the horse's teeth, or break it's jaw to put in the bit, would that be okay for you?

      --
      Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.
  61. Now we how... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Koch brothers and the Murdochs and Roger Ailes control Boehner and the Tea bagger party republicans. It is now all abundantly clear.

  62. Playing God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a nice game they're teaching the kids in school.

    Without ethics, science is becoming a religion. Thus, let's call it Science, the Holy. He gives us knowledge and thus, power.

    Listen to the prophets (sicentists), kill (experiment), in the name of God (Science) !

  63. The power, the POWER... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...over cockroaches. Muahahahaaa...!!!

  64. WARNING WARNING Godwin's Law WARNING WARNING by dhammabum · · Score: 1

    Well, I did refrain for some obvious analogies in respect of the law but in vain.

    --
    I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
  65. Re:Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonto by sjames · · Score: 1

    The solution is clear, incinerate the mall at the owner's expense. Not just burn it, keep the fire raging until the ash turns to glass. That should kill at least 90% of the roaches and it will teach the owners to be bit less liberal with the political grease in the future.

  66. Fack PETA ethics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I admire the mucho-liberal holier than thou attitude towards the treatment of animals and the philosophical implications of altering free will (if such a thing even exists despite the possibility of a deterministic existence), there has to be a compromise. To research the field of bio-mechanical augmentation, we sadly need living samples to experiment upon. It is selfish to put human beings above others but it is normal to be biased in favor of human beings. Developing such technologies could potentially increase our capacity for animal rights in the long run.

    As for the children and psychopathic behavior, I see no causation nor cause for alarm. In fact, I believe that it is quite useful as an exercise in acclimatization to emerging technologies. Augmentations are a reality, and shielding intelligent children from the "ugly" truth of soon-to-be modern life will give them a significant disadvantage.

    I don't see why, given current technology, this wouldn't be possible to achieve in humans either. It is imperative that this field be explored and debated before we enter a trans-humanist era. It will allow us to prepare for the implications and have supporting evidence to guide augmentation regulatory legislature in advance, and not in a reactive manner at the last minute when things are already tumultuous.

    P.S. Sorry Roaches, I sincerely hope you are treated as humanely as possible.

  67. Meanwhile biology classes disects live frogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have a problem with working with live roaches but not live worms or frogs? Heck, in our biology class it didn't even end there, vivisection were popular although I'm not American so the standards might be different. I think maybe due to budget cuts and PETA they have to use a digital scalpel on an ipad on a cartoon frog, most likley that annoying frog from that meme long ago.

  68. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by bluegutang · · Score: 0

    And yet, most of us consider killing a deer or quail for pleasure to be OK...

  69. Wisdom follows, pay attention! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually some branches of buddhism and hinduism are so docile, their adherents walk the streets with brush in hand, in order to swipe away any insects and not trample upon them even accidentally! According to their beliefs, that bug may have the reincarnated soul of a former human. It is not easy to become a buddha (bodhisattva), enter the nihil and break the vicious cycle of suffering mixed with reincarnation. Many sinful or ignorant humans are regrettably reborn in the shape of lesser developed beings and have to re-perfect themselves many times over, starting almost from point zero. At least that's what the hindi teach, more or less.

    You don't need to agree with that, but their civilization has been around for some 7-8 k years, way before the semitic people first learned how to erect a tent. Therefore, it is not laughing matter.

    1. Re:Wisdom follows, pay attention! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um, o-o-o-k-a-a-a-y...
      then how to explain (i'm betting they don't) that there are effectively twelvety zillionplex more insects alive now than number of humans that will ever exist ? ? ?
      not to mention, what happens to the 'souls'/spirits/whatever of the *insects* who -in spite of bhuddists/etc best efforts- are killed by us or other means ? ? ?
      do they get reincarnated as dust bunnies ? ? ?

      (as per usual, sky-daddy believers skip the details and stick with the feelgood crapola...)

  70. ... crickets chiping.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and nothing stirred, not even a mouse. Crickets chirped....

    IN FEAR

  71. Re:Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonto by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I find it unlikely that being near swimming pool water gives resistance to insecticides.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  72. Re:Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonto by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    NIFO. ITOWTBS.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  73. Instead of cockroaches.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of cockroaches, why don't they send congresspeople to those inquisitive children to poke holes into, clip sensory organs off of, and send electric currents into? I for one am sure that there will be far less ethical concerns over that.

    Also, it will teach children a good real-life skill, namely the manipulation of politicians.

  74. I certainly hope you don't plan to breed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because if you think it's okay to kill a pig or a cow, but not to cyborgify a cockroach, you have some serious double standards going on.

    Because if you can't see the difference between mutilating a living thing into a puppet, and killing it outright for food, you're a fucking moron.

  75. They call you a fuckwit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any shit for brains that quotes Nietzsche should be forced to slowly castrate themself, poke their ears and eyes out and cut off all their fingers. Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger right? How about I attach an electrode to your nutsack and see if I can change your direction too. And to think you bred and continue to be an influence in their lives, you piece of shit!

  76. BULLSHIT!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We do something similar to horses, They're called "reins".

    Fuck me! Your reigns involve mutilating the horse???!!! Poking out it's throat and ripping off it's ears??!!

  77. Really that bad? by nightsky30 · · Score: 1
    FTFA:

    “If it was discovered that a teacher was having students use magnifying glasses to burn ants and then look at their tissue, how would people react?”

    When I was in elementary school we had to collect 25-50 different insect species per child. We then killed these insects with rubbing alcohol, and preserved them with hairspray. We were graded on the number collected, accurate identification, labeling of parts, and presentation. The 5th grade hallway was an insect holocaust every year. I never heard anyone in an uproar. I'm not sure this is that much different minus the technology. It's still for education, and it isn't like they are doing this to domesticated pets. Would I go out of my way to kill a harmless, relatively clean insect today? No. Would I kill an insect that posed a threat or possibly spread disease? Yes.

  78. Did you just hear that? by nightsky30 · · Score: 1

    Reminded me of the dorms in college. Roommate had been eating Doritos while playing on his XBox. The lights were currently off. I'm on my computer. I hear a crunch. I think nothing of it. I hear it again. I proceed to ask him if he heard the sound as well. However he had his headset on while playing said XBox. So we turned the light on and saw a chip that had fallen underneath his chair. First I thought perhaps he crunched the chip with his chair, but that was not the case. On closer inspection there appeared to be a roach nibbling on the Dorito. If anyone was wondering what sound a cockroach makes when eating, I can assure you it indeed makes an audible crunching sound when eating Doritos.

  79. It's a great Start by Striikerr · · Score: 1

    We need to teach kids the basics so that when they are ready, they can build their very own human centipede without mistakes!

  80. Re:Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So at this point after so many generations living around chlorinated water and then a few attempts at extermination these are basically unkillable cockroaches. With the exception that the winters here are cold enough that they've never gotten out of the mall.

    Unkillable but still not immortal All cold-blooded organisms are sensitive to temperatures elevated above their normal climate conditions. Additionally, most insects can't cope well with dry air. A company of hair-dressers armed with hand held electric hair dryers could eliminate cockroaches in their hiding places in a single day. For a perfect score just make sure none falls into a pool with a hairdryer.

  81. Because we know biology better than biologists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I assume everyone here complaining about how this is not useful became interested in computers by someone telling them about how interesting computers are.

  82. Two party system... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not right to use electronic devices and the animal's own apathy to direct it left or right with knee-jerk responses.

    Oh wait...my bad, I thought we were talking about American voters for a minute.

  83. I'd take issue with their sense of hygiene... by crovira · · Score: 1

    And can't believe that an ethicist would have a problem with using cockroaches for cybernetic experimentation.

    I come across a cockroach, its a race between me and the cockroach as to what's going to happen first.

    It gets to escape or it gets to become a greasy smear.

    And its not like it was a protected species... ITS A COCKROACH!

    They aren't throwing panda or unicorn steaks on the bar-b-que here.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  84. Missing a point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do we have a right to modify roaches further. What happens when they evolve to combat this threat?

  85. Where is my human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need a embryo to test, anyone? anyone!!

  86. "Turning kids into psychopaths"? by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    Spend some time around a 2-year old and you'll realize all kids start as psychopaths, some grow out of it, some become Wall Street bankers.

  87. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it follows that eating meat for pleasure is wrong... at what level of meat consumption does one cross the line from ethical to unethical?

    Just illustrating how those things are not so very different from each other.

    They are quite different from mutilating though. But spaying dogs and cats happens thousands of times a day with out me once ever hearing any moral objection... even from animal lovers (well we don't want more of them)...

  88. These will be a gold mine for exterminators. by JavaLord · · Score: 1

    Once they get these to the point that they can hook a small camera on to the cockroach, they will be a gold mine for exterminators. Set up an ad campaign a week or two before in a nice neighborhood, go buy a few roachdroids, run them through a few houses at night and wait for the calls to come rolling in.

  89. OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just think of all the psychopaths we've created while dissecting frogs in grade-school science class.

    Give me a break.

  90. Isn't this just a reality of neuro- research? by sinkasapa · · Score: 1

    If we want to live in a society with good STEM education, don't we just have to deal with this? This is how research in certain fields is done and if we want to have our children grow up from an early age being trained or simply informed of this enterprise this is how one must do it. It is amazing to me the reaction I'm seeing here because I thought that readers of this site would be more familiar with what is involved in certain areas of scientific research. Despite its unpleasantness, I think that the potential benefits of learning more about the topics explored by this educational experiment have a benefit to our understanding of the natural world that far outweighs my empathy for a cockroach.

    This isn't to be dismissive of the idea that there is some ethical or moral question here but the indignation some people are expressing here is naive, as though they just noticed that people eat meat and use animals as test subjects.

    How about a constructive suggestion to those in education? If we believe 1. An improvement in science education must lead to more educational experiments and demonstrations. 2. To be most effective, these experiments and demonstrations should be realistic and modeled on the types of experiments that would be performed by a researcher at some time in history. 3. Many of these experiments will involve animals because animal research has been and continues to be important. If people agree on those three things, which seem reasonable to me, why not use the ethical and moral problems that are raised by animal research as part of the teaching curriculum? If the questions are raised as they have been here in a classroom at an early age, perhaps we can raise a generation with a more nuanced understanding of the issues involved who can have intelligent conversations and debates on the topic.

    An example comes from a teaching experience that my wife had with a group of 8 and 9 year olds. She was on a field trip with them and one of them threw a rock at a duck and hit it. She told him to stop and gathered the children together. She asked them whether they thought it was ok to pelt ducks with rocks for fun. I think it was obvious the answer she was looking for so you can imagine the head swaying. She then asked them why. It happened that one of the students went hunting with his father and shared with the other students the guideline that he had learned between ethical hunting and simply torturing and killing for fun. Not everyone might agree with the kid's understanding of the line but it was nuanced because he was both killing animals but retained a sense of empathy and right and wrong when doing so. As if in a fairy tale ending, the rock thrower expressed regret at what he had done and looked ashamed.

    Obviously my wife lucked out to have such a good group of kids that were so receptive and truly lucky to have that wise little hunter kid but it is a true story and similar stories could be repeated in the classroom environment.

  91. Insects by phorm · · Score: 1

    You forgot the most important one: Magnifying glasses!

  92. How about a poll of /. users? by jerel · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see this put to a poll of the Slashdot users. I have a feeling I know how it would go, but I'd love to see it in numbers and percentages. For myself, until we know how to create a cockroach (not that I would want that!) or any living thing... like an ant, for example, from scratch and give it life, I think we have to be very careful to ask ourselves ethical questions such as this one. Do I believe in killing bugs and such? Sure I do. But I actually try not to unless I think it's necessary. The "ethical dilemna" is embodied in the word "necessary" and that's where you have to answer for yourself what responsibilities we have, if any, to other life on the planet.

    --
    Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.
    1. Re:How about a poll of /. users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Polly wanna cracker? Dolly wanna go for lambchops, mickey-mouse suddenly hard-of-hearing??

      ethics, shmethics,
      It has been established that the Wiezmann Institute tortures animals; it follows reason that if they do it to monkeys (and cats), they probably do loads of cruel stuff to the Palestinians, who they are indoctrinated to behold as less-than-cattle.

      Also, all politrix and shmolitrix aside, the Wiezmann Institute did INDEED experiment with pollonium.

      If you understand, please explain what Menachim Begin meant when he said, "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle.".

      "blame it on the russkis." Spassky-Elenin

    2. Re:How about a poll of /. users? by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      The courageous yet curiously named Anonymous Coward asked a simple question unrelated to cockaroaches turned into cyborgs by a children's hobby kit:

      If you understand, please explain what Menachim Begin meant when he said, "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle.".

      Well Mr. A.C., we have moved quite offtopic here but I think that the explanation below of what Begin did not actually say regarding drugged roaches may satisfy your request for an explanation of what did not actually occur:

      http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=1446

      Besides the false quotes portraying Israeli leaders as brutal ethnic cleansers, Walt and Mearsheimer also dredge up other supposed quotes (page 89) to argue that Israeli leaders are racists. Thus they charge that former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin called the Palestinians "beasts walking on two legs" and former IDF Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan termed them "drugged roaches in a bottle."

      Did Begin say that Palestinians are beasts? The answer is absolutely not. In a June 8, 1982 statement to the Israeli parliament, Begin did use the term "two-footed animals," but he was referring not to Palestinians but to terrorists who would murder Israeli schoolchildren. Begin's statement is available online; here is the relevant passage:

              The children of Israel will happily go to school and joyfully return home, just like the children in Washington, in Moscow, and in Peking, in Paris and in Rome, in Oslo, in Stockholm and in Copenhagen. The fate of... Jewish children has been different from all the children of the world throughout the generations. No more. We will defend our children. If the hand of any two-footed animal is raised against them, that hand will be cut off, and our children will grow up in joy in the homes of their parents.

      Obviously there is nothing racist in the least in Begin's statement, and once again the genuine quote actually undermines the point Walt and Mearsheimer were deceptively trying to make.

  93. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's get back to the bacon discussion.

  94. Re: others say it's turning kids into psychopaths. by cusco · · Score: 1

    The Bush, Assad and Kim families have managed to do it consistently for several generations . . .

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  95. Re:Never killed one, we don't have them in Edmonto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't have them in Idaho either!

  96. Re:I certainly hope those protesting are vegetaria by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    Speak for yourself. I don't mind if you get pleasure from killing a deer or quail (or a fish for that matter), but I hope that you actually use the animal that you kill (whether it's meat, leather, or what have you).

    How you kill the animal is also a very important consideration. In the UK, shooting or foxes for pest control is legal (and rightly so), but chasing and exhausting a fox which you then might kill for sport is not (and rightly so). A clean kill is humane, but torture is not.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  97. Cockroach brain disintermediated. by pupsocket · · Score: 1

    Cockroaches have sensors that directly trigger their legs to run, bypassing the central nervous system. Apparently, for long term genetic survival, it is more important to move than to know where your're going.

    Millenia of evolution were invested in freeing their brains from the annoyance of human trespassers. Do you really want know what their next response will be?

    When you are desperately trying to remove cockroaches from your iPhone, don't call us.

  98. Not inhumane by yenic · · Score: 1

    While tinkering with cockroaches hold no scientific importance or results. On what ethical base do we kill billion of pests with poisons each day, so if someone kill one without is a moral question in what level? This operation on the insect if done right, is not even lethal and you can remove those electrodes without killing the bug. Thus you at best cause little stress to one bug. I see bigger moral questions over general handling of pests humanity do everyday.

    --
    http://www.accountkiller.com/en/delete-slashdot-account Stop visiting Slashdot.
  99. The concern? Inception by fygment · · Score: 1

    Planting the seed in a person's mind that it is fine to 'control' lesser beings.

    Child/insect seems fine if it doesn't subsequently scale to boy/girl, girl/boy, adult/youth, manager/worker, country/country, race/race ... right?

    Slippery slope.

    In any case, an experiment on a living thing without purpose (say, cure for cancer) is simply animal cruelty. There is no need for this experiment, the lesson can be better taught in so many other ways.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  100. There's no debate -- science is brutally unethical by gig · · Score: 1

    It is common for laboratories to be pits of suffering and despair. It is common for scientists to be emotionally-detached sociopaths. We should just be thankful this experiment has a cockroach, not a mouse or a monkey or a fellow human being.

  101. ... do you Mr Jones? by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

    [Y]ou're a grade A asshole- I'll give you that.

    Grade A? Why thank you. One does try one's hardest. I'm relieved that you failed to mention the nicht I carelessly omitted from the second German sentence ... you're too kind. And if I might repay your compliment ... however much you may lack of it yourself, you are at least able to acknowledge talent in others.

    ... your assberger's ...

    Talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight. Seriously, if you can't do wit, don't even try. Go away and read some Oscar Wilde first, or watch a Woody Allen movie or two, or take lessons, or something ...

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke