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.
People who have never killed a roach in their life are free to throw the first stone.
Anyone?
Anyone?
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
If you live anywhere cockroaches run rampant, you know the score. Kill them, or be infested.
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.
IPhones have been turning humans into mindless drones for years, now its the insects turn.
A beowulf cluster of those!
But do you actually get to kill the cockroach at the end of the experiment?
Would be such a waste not too. Brouhaha!!!
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.
I tried the app, but it was too buggy.
We do something similar to horses, They're called "reins".
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?
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.
Where was this outrage when I had to dissect a frog?
and by others they mane people who ahe no clue what a psychopath is?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
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.
... 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!!!!
So cyborg cockroaches are smart enough to start up an ethics debate? These suckers are advanced!
Happy people make bad consumers.
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});
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.
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});
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!
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.
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.
Required reading for internet skeptics
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...
I have a totally ethically consistent 'only torture delicious animals' policy in place!
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?
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
...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
I thought that this was about education/research rather than amusement
. .
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?
...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!
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.
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.
Probably a combination of initial biology and environment, as always.
(e.g. 'Made not Born', and 'nature and nurture')
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.
I tried the bug, but it was too appy.
Appy Normal, that is.
Table-ized A.I.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
You're hurting an animal for the wrong reason! Quick, get the morality police! This person sprayed Raid on a roach and enjoyed it!
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Bashevis_Singer
I was talking law, not biology (or theology).
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
Good example.
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."
NIFO. ITOWTBS.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
“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.
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.
We need to teach kids the basics so that when they are ready, they can build their very own human centipede without mistakes!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You forgot the most important one: Magnifying glasses!
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.
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
Smarter than congress proves nothing, rocks are smarter than congress.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
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});
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.
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.
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.
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.
[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.
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