MIT Researchers Implant False Memories In Mice

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

"They say great science is built on the shoulders of giants - not here. At Aperture MIT we do all our science from scratch; no hand holding."

Comocat:

Hagi:
...

Fair points, but the subtlety I believe is that the mice are not aware of the manipulation. They do not know they are being zapped with light, because the cellular manipulation is happening internally. So really what the researchers are doing is controlling a memory (or behavior) at the cellular level with light. At that point I believe it becomes a semantics game where this is either "conditioned response" or an "actual memory."

Regardless, even if it is just a conditioned response they have essentially bypassed the traditional routes of classical conditioning (our senses) by manipulating the brain itself.

This still has implications in eye witness testimony, for example, because there are certainly environment cues that influence (or condition) are ability to form memories.

Eye Witness testimonies are already pretty much proven to be very unreliable. Any laws that remain which do not recognize this fact do not exist because of lack of evidence but rather because of a ponderous and slow lawmaking system.

And, as I've said, this certainly is very impressive. But the impressive part is that they've essentially given these mouses an additional sense rather than false memories. Whilst any memories produced by this new sense can't be mistaken for memories from another sense they aren't fake. That's ( part of ) what makes something a fake, that it can potentially be mistaken for something it's not.

Only when the memories created by this new sense can be mistaken for memories from another sense do they become fakes.

KOMega:

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

"They say great science is built on the shoulders of giants - not here. At Aperture MIT we do all our science from scratch; no hand holding."

Science isn't about why, it's about why not! WHY put optic fiber into a mouse's head and then shock it? WHY NOT marry non-surgical science if you love it so much! In fact, WHY NOT invent a special safety door that won't hit you on the butt on the way out up because you are EXPELLED! YES! YOU! BOX YOUR STUFF! OUT THE FRONT DOOR! PARKING LOT, CAR, GOODBYE!

shirkbot:

Hunter Creed:
-snip-

Two points on which I have strong feelings:
1) And I hate myself even as I type this just because it sounds so cruel: I do not support replacing traumatizing memories from wars or other conflicts. Period. Those are the consequences of your actions and you have to live with them. You should have free access to therapy or virtually any other treatment, but those mental scars are yours to keep until you die. I refuse to have the consequences of war diminished.

The people who are responsible for war are never, ever the people who suffer for it.

Deshara:
The people who are responsible for war are never, ever the people who suffer for it.

No, but in a democracy those responsible are elected by the families of those who suffer. Either way, that's another issue entirely and we probably shouldn't put too large a pothole in the thread. Feel free to send me a message though if you'd like to discuss further.

shirkbot:

Deshara:
The people who are responsible for war are never, ever the people who suffer for it.

No, but in a democracy those responsible are elected by the families of those who suffer. Either way, that's another issue entirely and we probably shouldn't put too large a pothole in the thread. Feel free to send me a message though if you'd like to discuss further.

Meh, this comment thread isn't too hot anyhow.
The people who actually put government officials in power wouldn't have family that gets killed in a war, since those people are, by the very fact that they can affect the election, wealthy and powerful enough that any kids they might have would be too high-ranking to be on the front lines of any coflict.

Deshara:
Meh, this comment thread isn't too hot anyhow.
The people who actually put government officials in power wouldn't have family that gets killed in a war, since those people are, by the very fact that they can affect the election, wealthy and powerful enough that any kids they might have would be too high-ranking to be on the front lines of any coflict.

Fair enough. You point out a valid concern, and it's one I share. It's the reason I maintain that every federal level politician and everyone that makes over $X per year (We'll say $500,000 for this discussion) should have their children on mandatory, front-line, active duty military service in the event of any military action. No exceptions for any reason. If they want to declare a war then they'd best be prepared to let their family be on the front lines.

seydaman:
Hm, neat steps forward, now where's my invisibility cloak?

As with jetpack, Science will tell you "Try down the road, that's where Engineering lives." ^^

Had to say that.

On topic...welp. Will it be possible in a few decades for example, to implant different memories into the minds of the types that are currently considered "undesirables" and locked away from the society, so that they can get jobs and contribute to the economy instead of living on state budget?

GoaThief:

Hunter Creed:

GoaThief:
snip

snippity

snip

well they deal with pain because its the easiest kind of stimuli. they know how to easily induce it and can be induced at anytime. also it is easily remembered . quickly think of the sensation you have when you touch some say fabric. now think of the pain when someone punched you in the jaw. yeah the pain is way more easily remembered. and it can be used in anyway. why not use sight or sound you may ask. well because sight can not be always used. what if the mouse shuts it's eyes? and sound is not remembered easily at all. also im sure it wasn't like to shock them with say 100k kilowatts. it was just a little shock to make sure the mice remembered.

this might sound really selfish but the purpose of these animals is to be tested. they are special bred they are specially cared for and they live in special environment.

OT: its just the first steps but im already excited for this. yeah its highly abuse-able. but its really good! now we can only make them react to the light. tomorrow we can produce complete fake memories and a month later we have complete control over memories! a criminal was caught? delete everything about his hard life and make him a pacifist budhist monk. we would have no more prisons. no more rehabs. the future is really bright!

EDIT: if i have any grammatical or spelling errors im sorry. im fasting and right now im too thirsty and hungry to focus.
(also google chrome's spell check refuses to work properly

shirkbot:

Deshara:
Meh, this comment thread isn't too hot anyhow.
The people who actually put government officials in power wouldn't have family that gets killed in a war, since those people are, by the very fact that they can affect the election, wealthy and powerful enough that any kids they might have would be too high-ranking to be on the front lines of any coflict.

Fair enough. You point out a valid concern, and it's one I share. It's the reason I maintain that every federal level politician and everyone that makes over $X per year (We'll say $500,000 for this discussion) should have their children on mandatory, front-line, active duty military service in the event of any military action. No exceptions for any reason. If they want to declare a war then they'd best be prepared to let their family be on the front lines.

Good idea, but not just government officials-- the barely-taxed corporate officials that put them in power too.

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

I dunno, MAD science is the BEST kind of science in my opinion.

Syzygy23:

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

I dunno, MAD science is the BEST kind of science in my opinion.

I generally tend to agree...but like I implied: isn't there something better they could be doing? :P

FancyNick:
I am actually not fond of this idea at all. There are a million ways false memory could be used against us and the worst part is, we'd have no idea they did it.

I know it's way off but I want to be skeptical damn it.

I'm with you mate, this is some seriously scary shit and once fully developed could be very dangerous; our memories form the core of our personality and our identity, change them and you effectively change a person, and with the right false memories implanted you could potentially coerce someone into doing terrible acts that they wouldn't normally do.

Well, this isn't anything new exactly. We've created small false memories in people before too. It's been going on for a while.

RJ 17:

Syzygy23:

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

I dunno, MAD science is the BEST kind of science in my opinion.

I generally tend to agree...but like I implied: isn't there something better they could be doing? :P

The Question your asking is "Why?" When it should be "Why not?"

DRTJR:

RJ 17:

Syzygy23:

I dunno, MAD science is the BEST kind of science in my opinion.

I generally tend to agree...but like I implied: isn't there something better they could be doing? :P

The Question your asking is "Why?" When it should be "Why not?"

Yeah, yeah...we've already done plenty of the Aperture Science/Cave Johnson jokes earlier in the topic. In fact, I already did that one a little earlier on this page:

RJ 17:

KOMega:

RJ 17:
Well....that's not creepy at all.... >.>

Seriously, this should be MIT's new slogan: "MIT: Because Apparently We Really Don't Have Anything Better To Do."

"They say great science is built on the shoulders of giants - not here. At Aperture MIT we do all our science from scratch; no hand holding."

Science isn't about why, it's about why not! WHY put optic fiber into a mouse's head and then shock it? WHY NOT marry non-surgical science if you love it so much! In fact, WHY NOT invent a special safety door that won't hit you on the butt on the way out up because you are EXPELLED! YES! YOU! BOX YOUR STUFF! OUT THE FRONT DOOR! PARKING LOT, CAR, GOODBYE!

RJ 17:

DRTJR:

RJ 17:
I generally tend to agree...but like I implied: isn't there something better they could be doing? :P

The Question your asking is "Why?" When it should be "Why not?"

Yeah, yeah...we've already done plenty of the Aperture Science/Cave Johnson jokes earlier in the topic. In fact, I already did that one a little earlier on this page:

I forgot that was a Cave Johnson quote, what's the Over/Under on how long until MIT makes combustible lemons? I'd say a year at the earliest.

DRTJR:

RJ 17:

DRTJR:
The Question your asking is "Why?" When it should be "Why not?"

Yeah, yeah...we've already done plenty of the Aperture Science/Cave Johnson jokes earlier in the topic. In fact, I already did that one a little earlier on this page:

I forgot that was a Cave Johnson quote, what's the Over/Under on how long until MIT makes combustible lemons? I'd say a year at the earliest.

Hehehe, which brings me back to my original response to this topic: "MIT: Because apparently we really DON'T have anything better to do." :P

As for your question, my money says it's already in development, we're just waiting on the news article to pop up at this point. :3

shirkbot:

Deshara:
Meh, this comment thread isn't too hot anyhow.
The people who actually put government officials in power wouldn't have family that gets killed in a war, since those people are, by the very fact that they can affect the election, wealthy and powerful enough that any kids they might have would be too high-ranking to be on the front lines of any coflict.

Fair enough. You point out a valid concern, and it's one I share. It's the reason I maintain that every federal level politician and everyone that makes over $X per year (We'll say $500,000 for this discussion) should have their children on mandatory, front-line, active duty military service in the event of any military action. No exceptions for any reason. If they want to declare a war then they'd best be prepared to let their family be on the front lines.

You want soldier's to be responsible for what they have done, BUT you also want to force some people into military service just because of their socio-economic background?

How about no!

That's actually pretty fucking sickening to me. You're essentially turning their family into hostages owned by the government. That's twisted as hell! Not to mention it makes one hell of a slippery slope.

As for the topic, good advancements. Hopefully this'll lead to some form of technology that can make the learning of skills and abilities a process of only a few hours instead of years.

Chicago Ted:
You want soldier's to be responsible for what they have done, BUT you also want to force some people into military service just because of their socio-economic background?

How about no!

That's actually pretty fucking sickening to me. You're essentially turning their family into hostages owned by the government. That's twisted as hell! Not to mention it makes one hell of a slippery slope.

As for the topic, good advancements. Hopefully this'll lead to some form of technology that can make the learning of skills and abilities a process of only a few hours instead of years.

I openly admit that this is extremely harsh, if not outright cruel but my logic is thus: War is pretty much the worst thing humankind engages in, and often the people suggesting it aren't facing any personal consequences from doing so. People don't empathize well with the "existential other" so this is a way to make sure everyone involved will have to face the harshest possible consequences for engaging in it. If you want to describe their family as hostages, remember who's families we're talking about: Federal level politicians and the very wealthy. The former is directly responsible for making the decision to use military force, and the latter has a great deal of influence over the former. They're only hostages to their own family members who have almost complete control over the decision. This is not a perfect solution, or even a particularly ideal one. This is a solution created on the basis that no one should be willing to put another person's life at risk, unless they'd be willing to either do the same themselves or have a family member in the same situation. If you want the clearest example of why this is even an option in my mind, look to the Vietnam War and the behavior of the groups we're discussing.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.