inconspicuouscolon

joined 11 months ago
[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Do you think we'll get to that advanced level of use without experiments? And do you think that this is wrong despite consent to the procedure?

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 13 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Can you take a moment and imagine some possibilities of taking input directly from someone's mind and applying it without needing to use your body? I know moving a mouse doesn't seem impressive, but it demonstrates success at a technological concept that still seems impossible. I can't speak for the ethics because I don't know how voluntary the subjects are for the research, but this is very exciting for me, because it will inevitably become more sophisticated.

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

I have a question. Do you truly think it's more likely that something extraordinary is occurring, rather than concluding humans aren't built perfect? Or is it more exciting to believe that something cool and magical is happening, and you perhaps choose to pursue that possibility?

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

And I think it's a result of our evolutionary trait of being very sensitive to people looking at us. If we see someone out of the corner of our eye looking at us it alerts us. And if we truly can't see them, we can't tell at all, but checking to see if they're looking at you makes them feel stared at, so they'll look at you back. Is that confusing?

Wikipedia sums it up well. In proper scientific tests, it's fruitless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_staring_effect

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Hey cool! I'm native and I still don't always know if the way I'm talking is correct, but nobody really cares. If they do and take issue with it, it's not worth worrying about.

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Unrelated, but I've never seen someone use the word "assume" that way before. It technically works, I think?

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 1 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Combined with the human hyper sensitivity of being looked at, probably.

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

They're both toddlers, about a year apart. The littler one is still into the younger target audience content and she is very picky! Thank you for the suggestion <3

The words we let her mispronounce because it's so cute is balloon (Babloon!) and Restaurant (Resternot!!)

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 1 points 2 months ago

The outcome is yours to decide

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 3 points 2 months ago

That's a really amazing story

[–] inconspicuouscolon@lemy.lol 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

LMAO It's better left alone but you can't help but need to make sure it's complete. I'm the same about my music, if anything is improperly tagged or named inconsistent I fix it- it's compulsory I swear.

view more: ‹ prev next ›