3 ms·
But that's not the premise. It's your interpretation. I get the whole hate vs employer and capitalism, but then again - if you're after biohacking yourself for
by fraktl 7y ago
But that's not the premise. It's your interpretation. I get the whole hate vs employer and capitalism, but then again - if you're after biohacking yourself for whatever reason - overclocking machines always comes with a cost, even if it's human body. Its equilibrium exists for a reason, disrupting the equilibrium in order to "overclock" a part of it (cognition) must come with backlash of some sort.
- jacobwilliamroy 7y agoWhich makes it even more worthless in the workplace. We don't even let unpaid athletes "overclock" because of how dangerous it is.
- mdszy 7y ago"I think we are the verge of entering this brave new world of work, where enhancers are essentially mandatory." It literally is the premise.
- icandoit 7y agoI think this is a reasonable baseline for expectations: >Its equilibrium exists for a reason, disrupting the equilibrium in order to "overclock" a part of it (cognition) must come with backlash of some sort. But, maybe the reason was the limited caloric landscape of our ancestors. If I could turn a cup of olive oil into productive mental work my income and social group would approve. Where does sexual selection still favor physical strength exclusively? Doesn't income dominate among developed countries?
- scottlocklin 7y agoIt was literally stated in the IEEE article "The potential for employer-mandated enhancers should force us to reflect deeply about the importance of work, the relative value of enhancers, and illusion of choice."