Slashdot Mirror


Brain Stimulation For Entertainment?

An anonymous reader writes: Transcranial magnetic stimulation has been used for years to diagnose and treat neural disorders such as stroke, Alzheimer's, and depression. Soon the medical technique could be applied to virtual reality and entertainment. Neuroscientist Jeffrey Zacks writes, "it's quite likely that some kind of electromagnetic brain stimulation for entertainment will become practical in the not-too-distant future." Imagine an interactive movie where special effects are enhanced by zapping parts of the brain from outside to make the action more vivid. Before brain stimulation makes it to the masses, however, it has plenty of technical and safety hurdles to overcome.

88 comments

  1. yes!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm gonna be the LAWNMOWER MAN

  2. Stimulation via Content? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What happened to stimulating the brain via the old fashioned method by having an exciting, provocative story populated by diverse and interesting characters? Have Hollywood fallen so far that the only way they can stimulate people's brain now is by the direct application of voltage?

    1. Re:Stimulation via Content? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Better question is, if you can directly stimulate the brain and cause pleasure, why bother opening your eyes?

      Oh right. Because movies are with propaganda, and the point of the brain stimulation is to break your capacity for critical evaluation.

      I'll pass, thanks. I read Spider Robinson, I know how this turns out, and I don't feel like being found sitting in a pile of my own excrement with a beatific grin on my face...

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    2. Re:Stimulation via Content? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Be sure to put your EOL directives in order: an awful lot of people die in their own shit; but with substantially less happy expressions, as it is.

    3. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Livius · · Score: 1

      Have Hollywood fallen so far

      Yes.

    4. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you hit 90+, you'll likely be found sitting in a pile of your own excrement with a grimace on your face.
      Trading the grimace for a beatific grin simply by putting on a magnetic hat seems like a pretty good deal.

    5. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened to good old acid and weed? Sure, there are many exciting and novel neuron-tweakers available these days, but you really can't go wrong with smashing open the boundaries of the mind and tuning it in to the infinite.

    6. Re:Stimulation via Content? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have Hollywood fallen so far

      Yes.

      Well, to their credit, they did warn us. Thee was the Orgasmatron in "The Sleeper" and no-physical-contact brain-stimulated sex in "Demolition Man".

      And then there's the real orgasmatron

      Dr. Stuart Meloy never set out to study orgasms. It was an accident.

      He was in the operating room one day in 1998, implanting electrodes into a patient's spine to treat her chronic leg pain. (The electrodes are connected to a device that fires impulses to the brain to block pain signals.) But when he turned on the power, "the patient suddenly let out something between a shriek and moan," says Meloy, an anesthesiologist and pain specialist in North Carolina.

      Asked what was wrong, she replied, "You'll have to teach my husband how to do that."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    7. Re:Stimulation via Content? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      When you hit 90+, you'll likely be found sitting in a pile of your own excrement with a grimace on your face. Trading the grimace for a beatific grin simply by putting on a magnetic hat seems like a pretty good deal.

      Considering that these are electromagnetic fields, I guess it's time to upgrade the ol' tin-foil hat.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    8. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Immerman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have heard that for a long time the standard "retirement package" for at least mildly well-to-do Chinese who were facing the final inevitable decline was a pipe and all the opium they could smoke. Actually sounds a lot more civilized than the normal American routine - who wants to spend their last days/weeks/months draining their children's inheritance to fight a battle that can't be won? Let me die from starvation with a smile on my face and a sandwich beside me, ignored in favor of the pipe in my hand.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    9. Re:Stimulation via Content? by mdielmann · · Score: 2

      Or you could use it for other things. For instance, improve your focus so you can work better. Or improve your capacity to learn so that you can spend less time in school to achieve the same results. Or learn more.

      Some of us aren't so tied to stimulating our pleasure centers that we don't do anything else. Note the many people who aren't addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, or drugs, for instance. These are already simple methods to stimulate your pleasure centers (and other areas) with, frankly, the same potential drawbacks as your average Niven-esque wirehead. Sure, addictiveness may be lower, but that's already the reason I stay away from things like heroin, opium, and meth.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    10. Re:Stimulation via Content? by NIK282000 · · Score: 1

      If the result is the same electrical and chemical activity what's the difference.

      --
      Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
    11. Re: Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sorry, no one I'm 'Merica is going to let that become a common option. In the US there's an 84% likelihood that you'll die in an institution. And from the right wing Christians who believe their religious morality should trump your freedom to Big Pharma and their army of cradle to grave salesmen want you on the latest medication, to the insurance lobby who wants the highest premiums for end of life and extended care it can wring from every working person it can insure, subsidized or not, they all have a bigger financial stake in how you spend your last days than you do.

    12. Re:Stimulation via Content? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      People probably also complained in a similar fashion when talkies first appeared, and then when colour was introduced. Each one added more ways of immersing the audience, which is good. Imagine what a good story and this technology would be like. Your cynicism is holding you back.

    13. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thee was the Orgasmatron in "The Sleeper"...

      Holy fuck, way too much information Ms Hudson.

    14. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > orgasmatron
      I gather you ain't seen Barbarella.

    15. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite the myth of drugs being addictive rather addiction being a disease or addiction being a triggerable personality trait or addiction being a response to misery or all the other perfectly valid models of what addiction even IS, it's important to understand that only 23% of people who use heroin are addicted: http://www.drugabuse.gov/publi...

      Yes, it's more addictive than cannabis. But the dangers associated with it are mostly societal and political. See The Myth of Drug-Induced Addiction: http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/.... There is nothing wrong with recreational use of ANY drug. You just don't hear about the 'chippers' and responsible self-medicators because they aren't going out commiting crimes to fund their recreation.

      Also, tolerance&dependence != addiction. Addiction is psychological. SSRI users are tolerant and dependent. They're not junkies. Even most heroin users are chippers not junkies according to the US government above---and they have the most reason to artificially inflate that number!

      Also, doctors like this http://drpullen.com/cant-find-... are a pretty clear indication that all drugs should be available OTC if only because they stonewall fucking pain patients who obviously need analgesics.

      All of this pisses me off so much because we COULD be reasonable about drugs and recognise them as a tool that people can and will use and teach people how to use them responsibly, but instead we'd rather persecute them and deny ourselves perfectly good problem management and solving tools in the process.

      (I'm glad I'm dying soon and won't have to put up with this world much longer.)

    16. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What happened to stimulating the brain via the old fashioned method by having an exciting, provocative story populated by diverse and interesting characters?

      Yeah, that's what we ask everyday here. But we still come back... oh, maybe that is the answer.

      PS: Captcha is "flushed". Did someone just created a sarcastic AI to generate "funny" captchas for AC posts?

    17. Re:Stimulation via Content? by neminem · · Score: 1

      Some of us *do* occasionally enjoy, as you say, stimulating the pleasure centers, without feeling the need to do it all the time and never do anything else. That is indeed why I stay away from things like heroin, or for that matter, cigarettes - because I don't *want* to put anything in my body that will cause my body to start rebelling if it doesn't continue to get it at regular intervals. That sounds terrible. (I'm already annoyingly physically addicted to food, water and sleep, I don't need any more...)

      On the other hand, alcohol is fun occasionally, but has some unpleasant side effects. I'd *love* to have additional non-addicting psychoactive things to play with occasionally, if they were proven safe, and definitely non-addicting. I wouldn't do it all the time, or even often, because I have other things to do, but I don't understand our culture's general idea that "pure fun = evil", either.

    18. Re:Stimulation via Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw this Star Trek: TNG episode. It nearly ended in the Enterprise being taken over by rogue aliens.

      They have already proven that TV/Video games with lots of changing imagery have an effect that releases endorphins in the brain and an be addicting. This will just make that problem worse and continue to drug addicted behavior many already show in regards to technology use/abuse.

    19. Re:Stimulation via Content? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      I also have no problem with pure fun. I don't require chemicals to achieve it, and don't as a general rule frown upon other people doing so - it's their lives and bodies. It doesn't upset me that I don't find the effects of alcohol interesting, although I've had a few on occasion, and it does concern me when people I know can't handle their drug of choice. But this particular one has a real dangerous potential. Single up-front cost, multiple settings, etc. I can see where those who tend towards addiction would have a strong tendency to keep turning up the intensity and get to the state of wireheads in Niven's work. My solution is to let other people test it out and discover the possible negative side effects. As for the benefits, I'm old enough where the big everyday benefits aren't going to have a huge impact on my life, not unlike laser vision correction, but hopefully my children will be able to blast through university with a deeper understanding and less study thanks to tools such as these. Perhaps by that time they'll also have methods of determining safe limits, and my kids will be able to enjoy the synthetic pleasure such tools could provide with no downside.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    20. Re:Stimulation via Content? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who is a heroin 'chipper'. In a few weeks he has been chipping for 50 years. he uses once or twice a fortnight and is well adjusted, always worked, and is currently retired.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  3. No way I'm letting them touch my brain by Skarjak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nuh uh. I don't trust any entertainment company enough to allow them to zap my brain. Not in a million years.

    1. Re:No way I'm letting them touch my brain by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      Maybe, *maybe* I might trust such "enhancement" from an open-source game engine or similar, but from an amoral (at best) profiteering organization that specializes in bald-faced psycho-emotional manipulation? Not a chance.

      Even controlled by a scrupulously moral actor I would be leery though - I *am* my brain responses, anything that "hacks" them, hacks *me*. And frankly I'm pretty happy with the "me" I've built the old-fashioned way.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    2. Re:No way I'm letting them touch my brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even for porn ??

    3. Re:No way I'm letting them touch my brain by ranton · · Score: 2

      Nuh uh. I don't trust any entertainment company enough to allow them to zap my brain. Not in a million years.

      That's fine; they will make plenty of money from those who are willing. Facebook makes plenty of money without the people who refuse to have a social media fingerprint as well. This will be no different.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    4. Re:No way I'm letting them touch my brain by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but I might trust a doctor. The medical applications for this could bring relief to many sufferers of things like chronic pain or depression, without medication. I'm in pain 24/7, and don't even want to dream about a day when it might end because I'm trying to come to terms with this being my life.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:No way I'm letting them touch my brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A good movie "hacks" yer brain responses pretty much by definition, otherwise you'd just there absorbing visual input and walk out feeling exactly the same as you'd walked in but slightly more bored. I think it merely extends the collection of tricks they already pull in movies.
      I'm more worried about how advertisers will use the tech ...
      Or whether you could program a manchurian candidate with it?

  4. Hollywood's direction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are movies really going to be that bad in the future that they need us to have our brains zapped to keep our attention?

    Why wait? Start giving out LSD with the movie tickets.

  5. Larry Niven Anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One word: wirehead.

    1. Re:Larry Niven Anyone? by TechnoLuddite · · Score: 1

      Tanjit!! I was going to mention that ... credit to you, sir.

    2. Re:Larry Niven Anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Tek, if you prefer...

      Wire was pleasure only; Tek was direct-stimulus VR.

    3. Re:Larry Niven Anyone? by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Right. Give tasps to corporations and let them wire up the general public. Great business model.

      End of humanity.

      I'll take two.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    4. Re:Larry Niven Anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've had "wireheads" for years, but the type Niven wrote about has mostly only been achieved with lower spinal electrostim.

      What's cool about this is that there are no wires.

  6. Hey ladies!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://makezineblog.files.word...

    I'm here to stimulate your medulla oblongata!!!

  7. Technical and safety measures by handy_vandal · · Score: 2

    More like: Before brain stimulation makes it to the masses, it has plenty of technical and safety measures to override.

    --
    -kgj
  8. Wait, I've played this before! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BTL Od!

  9. The prime mover will be ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... the porn industry.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:The prime mover will be ... by disposable60 · · Score: 1

      As it was, now and ever shall be.

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
  10. Demolition Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is everyone ready for sex and the three seashells?

    1. Re:Demolition Man by greenwow · · Score: 0

      What are the three seashells for?

    2. Re:Demolition Man by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      You want to be found dull-eyed, emaciated, sitting in a disheveled heap, squishing around on your own excrement? The three seashells ensure that you'll only be found dull-eyed, emaciated, sitting in a disheveled heap -- clean as a whistle. :)

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    3. Re:Demolition Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He doesn’t know how to use the three seashells!

  11. Sounds like the MPAA's wet dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Movies that don't even involve the "analog hole"? That you couldn't even handicam if you wanted to?

    The MPAA will have a field day with this tech.

  12. Umm, why? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    If you are going to directly stimulate the brain, why bother with the 'entertainment'? We bother with that because our direct means of stimulating the appropriate brain regions are not exactly ready for prime time on health and safety grounds.

    There might be some affect states that we can't reach without both electrical and chemical stimuli; but if you are even approaching that level you certainly won't be paying much attention to your environment.

    1. Re:Umm, why? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Presumably because our brains appear to be resistant to the effects of simplistic stimulation on it's own. For example we can wire rat's brains so that the "pleasure center" can be stimulated when they press a switch - and they'll then proceed to keep pressing that switch to the exclusion of eating, sleeping, fucking, etc. Similarly wired humans reported only a sensation of mild pleasure, and no such obsessive behavior was observed (or so I recall).

      On the other hand it's not unheard of for opiate consumption to cause similar results in humans, so perhaps it's simply a matter of humans having a more distributed "pleasure center" than could be stimulated by a few electrodes.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    2. Re:Umm, why? by Elbows · · Score: 1

      Apparently a lot of the rat addiction studies are flawed, in that they keep the rats in cages without social interaction or other forms of entertainment, so whatever drug/electrical stimulation the researchers provide is their only possible source of pleasure. Rats kept in more stimulating environments are much more resistant to addiction. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...)

      I recall reading recently that a similar effect can be seen in humans. People who can get their jollies elsewhere mostly don't become addicated to drugs.

    3. Re:Umm, why? by sjames · · Score: 1

      But we have to ignore all of that because of what it implies our society and the living conditions of the junkies. We must resolutely hold the line. No 'facts' may deter us from the message that addiction is a moral failing and so the addict deserves his fate. Now, all rise and put your fingers in your ears and sing the new national anthem: "LA LA LA LA LA".

  13. How about electronic drugs? by golodh · · Score: 1
    What happens if it turns out to be possible to simulate the effect of drugs use through transcranial stimulation?

    Or an experience akin to sexual stimulation?

    I have no idea is this is possible, but if it is, will there be any realistic prospect of keeping people from indiscriminate use? And will we see significant groups of people become addicts to such stimulation? Students? Schoolchildren? The jobless?

    We already have drug addicts and porn addicts. The former seem to have difficulties (depending on the drug) to keep themselves from overdosing on it if provided access to unlimited quantities of their drug. The latter don't seem to be much of a health risk to themselves though, even if people do get fired for watching porn on the job.

    So there really do seem to be public health issues at stake here, and I'd like to know more about the whole thing before taking a position. But it looks potentially scary.

    1. Re:How about electronic drugs? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's definitely a consideration, the question is whether it's a giant downside, or the absurdly amazing upside:

      If your neurology-fu is good enough, you should be able to produce a stimulus of essentially unimaginable desirability. After all, while we (currently) have to do various things in order to experience pleasure, 'pleasure' is something that the brain does, not something we absorb from a wife, 2.5 children, and a golden retriever in the suburbs.

      If you could bring to bear all the available apparatus devoted to the experience of 'pleasure' you could skip all the grind and go right to the reward.

      Aside from the practical problems of getting people to work when they could be experiencing timeless ultimate bliss, I suspect that this prospect will strike many as somehow creepy or dishonest.

      On the other hand, what innovation could possibly contribute more to the happiness of mankind than a direct supply of dis-intermediated happiness, delivered fresh and pure right to the brain?

    2. Re:How about electronic drugs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, what innovation could possibly contribute more to the happiness of mankind than a direct supply of dis-intermediated happiness, delivered fresh and pure right to the brain?

       
      This is already available. Look into the street drug MXE

    3. Re:How about electronic drugs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >On the other hand, what innovation could possibly contribute more to the happiness of mankind than a direct supply of dis-intermediated happiness, delivered fresh and pure right to the brain?

      Except for the minor fact that that's unlikely to be possible. Directly stimulating the pleasure center in humans electrically is far more direct than this (and the same thing that will cause rats to keep activating the stimulus until they die from starvation/dehydration) and does cause visible changes in behavior in the people experimented on but nothing resembling pure pleasure. The sci-fi wirehead scenario just can't happen.

  14. Tasp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Conveniently, we already have a name for it.

    Larry Niven Wiki

  15. In the Year 3000 by sexconker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For $9.99 per month, you can add the sensation of flavor to your government-supplied gruel.
    A higher quality version of that memory you are trying to access may be available. Rent for $5.99, buy for $19.99.
    Pay $5 to climax. Supersize your orgasm for $3 more.
    In the Year 3000!
    In the Year 3000!

  16. Already Doable Through Other Methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can already enhance the movie using hypnosis. Hypnosis yourself to be and feel everything from the perspective of one character and become part of the story yourself. Almost no one does this and it's far, far safer than shocking your brain or using focused magnetic fields. We'll have fully automated cars before any commercial brain stimulation devices. The liability is way higher: "I've been having headaches since I started using this" etc...

    1. Re:Already Doable Through Other Methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you already managed to hypnotize yourself and make yourself believe that hypnosis is a verb.

  17. Futurama totally called it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recall Bender's electricity addiction in "Hell is Other Robots".

  18. For the Larry Niven fans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leaglize Wireheading!!!!!

  19. OK by jgotts · · Score: 1

    The brain is a living organ far more complex than any supercomputer, with a larger and faster storage device, that we've ever created.

    We have not even once created either life or intelligence from scratch.

    Knowing that, let's do the equivalent of banging on the brain with a hammer and see what happens.

    1. Re:OK by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      That's actually one of the impressive things about the brain: despite its complexity it is resilient enough that the medical literature is full of (sometimes literal) banging on the brain with a hammer that ends up being nonlethal and having some sort of interesting effect.

    2. Re:OK by Immerman · · Score: 2

      Actually, no. The brain is unclocked, making "speed" (frequency) analysis difficult, but as I recall neurons are only able to fire somewhere on the order of a few hundred Hz to a few kHz. The incredible data processing capacities likely originate from the the massively interconnected parallel design, rather than raw speed. In terms of total "switch" transitions per second I believe we hit human-brain-comparable supercomputers almost a decade ago. To the limits of our feeble understanding of the brain, of course.

      As for "banging on the brain with a hammer" - I'm inclined to agree with your description, but that's hardly slowed humans from doing just that with alcohol and other drugs for millenia - to say nothing of the booming market for prescription psycho-pharmaceuticals, many of which are recognized to have potentially serious but poorly understood side effects..

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  20. hey y'all watch this... by turkeydance · · Score: 2

    here, hold my transcranial magnetic stimulator.

  21. xcom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep thinking of Alien Entertainment from XCom, Alien Unknown.

  22. Supernormal Stimuli & The Pleasure Trap by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
    "Harvard psychologist Deirdre Barrett argues that supernormal stimulation govern the behavior of humans as powerfully as that of animals. In her 2010 book, Supernormal Stimuli: How Primal Urges Overran Their Evolutionary Purpose,[9] she examines the impact of supernormal stimuli on the diversion of impulses for nurturing, sexuality, romance, territoriality, defense, and the entertainment industry's hijacking of our social instincts. In the earlier book, Waistland,[2] she explains junk food as an exaggerated stimulus to cravings for salt, sugar, and fats and television as an exaggeration of social cues of laughter, smiling faces and attention-grabbing action. Modern artifacts may activate instinctive responses which evolved in a world without magazine centerfolds or double cheeseburgers, where breast development was a sign of health and fertility in a prospective mate, and fat was a rare and vital nutrient. ..."

    http://www.healthpromoting.com...
    https://www.drfuhrman.com/libr...
    "An abundance of food, by itself, is not a cause of health problems. But modern technology has done more than to simply make food perpetually abundant. Food also has been made artificially tastier. Food is often more stimulating than ever before--as the particular chemicals in foods that cause pleasure reactions have been isolated--and artificially concentrated. These chemicals include fats (including oils), refined carbohydrates (such as refined sugar and flour), and salt. Meats were once consumed mostly in the form of wild game--typically about 15% fat. Today's meat is a much different product. Chemically and hormonally engineered, it can be as high as 50% fat or more. Ice cream is an extraordinary invention for intensifying taste pleasure--an artificial concoction of pure fat and refined sugar. Once an expensive delicacy, it is now a daily ritual for many people. French fries and potato chips, laden with artificially-concentrated fats, are currently the most commonly consumed "vegetable" in our society. As Dr. Fuhrman reports in his excellent volume Eat to Live, these artificial products, and others like them, comprise a whopping 93% American diet. Our teenage population, for example, consumes up to 25% of their calories in the form of soda pop!
        Most of our citizenry can't imagine how it could be any other way. To remove (or dramatically reduce) such products from America's daily diet seems intolerable--even absurd. Most people believe that if they were to do so, they would enjoy their food--and their lives--much less. Indeed, most people believe that they would literally suffer if they consumed a health-promoting diet devoid of such indulgences. But, it is here that their perception is greatly in error. The reality is that humans are well designed to fully enjoy the subtler tastes of whole natural foods, but are poorly equipped to realize this fact. And like a frog sitting in dangerously hot water, most people are being slowly destroyed by the limitations of their awareness. ..."

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re: Supernormal Stimuli & The Pleasure Trap by sirspiraalcat · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

    2. Re:Supernormal Stimuli & The Pleasure Trap by ranton · · Score: 1

      Indeed, most people believe that they would literally suffer if they consumed a health-promoting diet devoid of such indulgences. But, it is here that their perception is greatly in error. The reality is that humans are well designed to fully enjoy the subtler tastes of whole natural foods, but are poorly equipped to realize this fact.

      Humans are well designed to fully enjoy life without electricity, refrigeration, air conditioning, toilet paper, non-bipedal locomotion, and any number of other modern indulgences. Just saying people can live happy lives without modern technology does not necessarily mean they don't live happier lives with them. While I agree with your basic premise that our lives would be happier if we ate better, I think that is because of other benefits of being healthy (more energy, less chronic health problems, etc). I have lived long periods of my life in both healthy and unhealthy diets, and I never enjoyed the healthier foods more (even when almost exclusively eating healthy foods for periods of a few years).

      From what I can tell, because of how our bodies are designed, foods with high levels of fat, sugar, and salt really do taste better and those who give them up really are missing out. Regardless of the benefits they gain from being healthier. Technology that allows us to be perfectly healthy while eating all the junk food we want is obviously the best solution. And I don't just mean eating anything we want without gaining weight, because there are plenty of other health issues with junk food other than weight gain. We aren't there yet, but I am optimistic that we are getting close and may get there in my lifetime.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    3. Re:Supernormal Stimuli & The Pleasure Trap by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2

      "Neuroadaptation" is the key issue of what stronger stuff does not taste better in the long term. We just can't always have the rush of the first taste of the potato chip (salt, fat, crunch) if we start eating them all the time. Our tastes just start to expect that level regularly and if we go back to food with less, we feel bad for a time until our tastes readjust again. The same thing might be true of direct brain stimulation?

      From the Pleasure Trap article: "Like our other sensory nerves, our taste buds also will "get used to" a given level of stimulation -- and this can have dangerous consequences. The taste buds of the vast majority of people in industrialized societies are currently neuroadapted to artificially high-fat, high-sugar, and high-salt animal and processed foods. These foods are ultimately no more enjoyable than more healthful fare, but few people will ever see that this is true. This is because they consistently consume highly stimulating foods, and have "gotten used to" them. If they were to eat a less stimulating, health-promoting diet, they soon would enjoy such fare every bit as much. Unfortunately, very few people will ever realize this critically important fact. Instead, nearly all of these people will die prematurely of strokes, heart attacks, congestive heart failure, diabetes, and cancer as a result of self-destructive dietary choices."

      Still, you said your experience differed. So I wonder what else might have been different. You used the word "almost". One issue is how frequently people eat junk food. Even a couple times a week might be a problem?

      Also, there is a certain style to cooking good healthy foods so they taste good. For example vegetables should not be overcooked... Dr. Fuhrman and his wife have some good cooking tips in various videos.

      Medically-supervised fasting is another way to reset taste buds (in about a week). That may be why most religions include fasting as part of their traditions (watered down these days). When I fasted for more than a week, afterwards stuff with salt and sugar tasted offensively strong. Simple soups and plain vegetables tasted great, with various flavor nuances. Sadly, over the last few years I've become readapted to stronger less-healthy stuff (living in a family with other people eating other stuff).

      In general, it is a good question what aspects of modern technology have overall made us happier or less happy over the long term. Aspects of today's fancy computers (including 24X7 social media) may in some ways be increasing stress for people more than they make us happier? Too many choices can also be stressful. Anyway, a complex topic.

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  23. Get your ass too mars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is all

  24. Oh the CIA will just love that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Enhanced unpleasant experiences for interviewees.

    Filed under, "What could possible go wrong."

  25. Old Fashioned Frequency Following by Baldrson · · Score: 2

    In a college course called "Physics for Artists" at the U of IA back in 1974, I pursued the frequency following effect of strobe lights as an adjunct to art displays to induce the desired state of consciousness. Fortunately the EEG technology was too expensive to complete the project for my college sophomore budget -- fortunately because it is the kind of thing that if shown in a public exhibit could definitely cause seizures. Milder forms are already probably being used in theater with rhythmic light and sound, but attenuated in a studied manner.

    1. Re:Old Fashioned Frequency Following by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Photic sensitive epileptics are rare, around 1% of all epileptics, who, themselves aren't all that rare at around 1% of the total population.

      So, if you've got a good, intense, stroboscopic show, you can get about 1/10,000 people to seize. Thing is, these people know their vulnerability and aren't likely to stick around for your shenanigians.

      And, it's not going to do anything to the vast majority of people.

  26. Norman Spinrad was right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I however will be Jack, just need to find me a Cyber Sally and then i'm set!

  27. I believe it'll go more like this: by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    hey y'all, watch this... gimme my transcranial magnetic stimulator -- you can have my beer.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  28. I thought Astroglide was expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't wait to get my kicks from liquid helium cooled superconductors!

  29. Brain stimulation for entertainment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it's called LSD.

  30. Wirehaeds by koan · · Score: 1

    Just another addiction.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  31. "Safety hurdles" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...in the form of waiting for it to be mass-produced in a country that gives about as much of a damn as the market for such hardware. (You know the one.)

  32. Hasleton = the perfect test subject ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's start with 440,000 volts and 10,000 amps.

  33. Cordwainer Smith - Golden the Ship Was-Oh! Oh! Oh by damas · · Score: 3, Informative

    "When the message came, it found Tedesco in his usual character. He was lying on the air-draft with his brain pleasure centers plugged into the triggering current. So deeply lost in pleasure was he that the food, the women, the clothing, the books of his apartments were completely neglected and forgotten. All pleasure save the pleasure of electricity acting on the brain was forgotten."

  34. The body of the subject is missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drugs sex and rock and roll is all the stimulation besides electroshock therapy that I can handle. Well, OK, sometimes Slashdot, a good book, or the bible ; )

  35. Not Happening by vix86 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've participated in some TCS experiments back in college. Unless they discover some new way to do TCS there is no way anyone is ever going to find the technology usable in an entertainment environment. Remember that in order to cause the neurons to discharge magnetically you have to send a strong enough magnetic field through the skull and through a certain amount of liquid. In addition, the field has to be changed constantly as well.

    For anyone that has never done TCS, what this effectively results in are constant static discharges on your scalp and this happens at a fairly rapid frequency. Plus, depending on the location of the magnets, the magnets might also be causing muscle neurons to discharge as well, so your face will be constantly twitching. All of this leads to a fairly tiring experience.

    1. Re:Not Happening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The story was about TMS not TCS. There are no magnets used for transcranial magnetic stimulation. Insulated coils are placed on the head and energized with current pulses. There is nothing to cause electrical discharges on the scalp unless the insulation on the coils is damaged or cut.

  36. Perfect Advertising by Graydyn+Young · · Score: 1

    That's a bit scary. You could literally program the masses with this tech. Somebody on screen drinks a Pepsi and the viewer gets a pleasant sensation. Or somebody drinks a Coke and the view feels slightly nauseated.

  37. No Thanks by robstout · · Score: 1

    I read Spider Robinson and Larry Niven. Direct stimulation of th epleasure center of the brain is a really bad idea, ok?

  38. Cautionary Tale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Make it stop", "Make it stop", "Make it stop".
    The Terminal Man.