Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Friday July 24 2015, @07:28AM   Printer-friendly
from the inside-my-head-is-a-scary-place dept.

The death penalty is one of America's most contentious issues. Critics complain that capital punishment is inhumane, pointing out how some executions have failed to quickly kill criminals (and instead tortured them). Supporters of the death penalty fire back saying capital punishment deters violent crime in society and serves justice to wronged victims. Complicating the matter is that political, ethnic, and religious lines don't easily distinguish death penalty advocates from its critics. In fact, only 31 states even allow capital punishment, so America is largely divided on the issue.

Regardless of the debate, technology will change the entire conversation in the next 10 to 20 years, rendering many of the most potent issues obsolete. For example, it's likely we will have cranial implants in two decades time that will be able to send signals to our brains that manipulate our behaviors. Those implants will be able to control out-of-control tempers and violent actions—and maybe even unsavory thoughts. This type of tech raises the obvious question: Instead of killing someone who has committed a terrible crime, should we instead alter their brain and the way it functions to make them a better person?

Recently, the commercially available Thync device made headlines for being able to alter our moods. Additionally, nearly a half million people already have implants in their heads, most to overcome deafness, but some to help with Alzheimer's or epilepsy. So the technology to change behavior and alter the brain isn't science fiction. The science, in some ways, is already here—and certainly poised to grow, especially with Obama's $3 billion dollar BRAIN initiative, of which $70 million went to DARPA, partially for cranial implant research.

Vice.com is the home of the original article.

[Company Website]: THYNC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @09:58AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @09:58AM (#213091)

    This sort of artificial behavior control (oh, sorry, "modification") is exactly what the tin foil hat brigade and sci-fi writers have warned us about.

    If we go down this road, we as a species may consider ourselves an epic failure.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @10:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @10:47AM (#213097)

    Dodo simulator 2015... You too can experience the thrill of being a Dodo...

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @11:33AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @11:33AM (#213101)

    They aren't tinfoil if it becomes reality.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @12:54PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @12:54PM (#213122)

    why? not trolling, I just want to see your reasoning.

    what is this set of values that you're using to judge an entire species?
    objectively speaking, the species is only a failure if it dies off (in the sense that none of the members of the species have live descendants).
    unless you bring religion into the discussion.

    I could agree that we would be failing our ideals of free choice etc, but that's subjective (and future generations may simply laugh at us for grabbing onto old fashioned ideas).

    think about it: most ants are slaves. are you repulsed by the idea that most of them live only to serve the queen, and they are compelled to do it via chemical conditioning? are ant species failures because of it?

    please note that personally I am frightened at the thought that such devices exist, and I honestly have no idea how to react. that's why I feel the need for some context.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @02:13PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @02:13PM (#213151)

      think about it: most ants are slaves.

      No, they aren't. They don't have the brain capacity to make complex decisions, but it's not as if the queen decides where they go and what they do. Indeed, if there's a slave in the ant colony, it's the queen. It sits there and can do literally nothing but lay eggs. It's nothing but a living egg factory.

    • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Friday July 24 2015, @08:31PM

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Friday July 24 2015, @08:31PM (#213325)

      Think about what they did to Alan Turing, this is no different. The only thing he did wrong was be homosexual.

      Even if it was moral or ethical to do this thing, the people with the power to wield it would not use it so. They would use it against everyone that dared speak out against them.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh