3 ms·

sigh HN comments are entirely predictable. Tools that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour could also help refine an understanding that people can u

*sigh* HN comments are entirely predictable. Tools that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour could also help refine an understanding that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? And may in the days before their suicide appear to be dramatically better, serene, even peaceful? There are likely other common patterns of pre-suicidal behaviour (unusual secrecy for example), and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? In DARPA's case, if those people are in the service, it is their damn business; they have a duty of care. Away from DARPA, better processes might have stopped a horrific airline disaster in recent years. There are some people in highly significant, routinely stressful roles who are regularly psych-screened anyway. Those screenings need better tools to be more useful.

_8j50 5y ago
> that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. The people they love did not obtain consent from them. > You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? Yes. First hand. Suicidal and/or mentally ill people have rights such as one for privacy just like you. > and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? We don't. Assholes who think using other peoples' death and illness to perform non-consensual medical examination is good do. By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. I concur about the predictability of HN comments. When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. Here too, someone will do a startup out of this so it is a cause for celebration. Never mind privacy, free will and self-determination. > t is their damn business; they have a duty of care. So things made by darpa never make it to public use and service members have no right to medical privacy like us HIPPA enjoying civilians? Okie... To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  We don't want to help people not kill themselves? This is depressive realism taken to a frightening new level. What DARPA is talking about need not be incompatible with some relaxation around medically-assisted suicide. But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. > By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. "By this logic" === "Here's a straw man argument" > When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. I am not in that particular "you all", thank you. > To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition. Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice.
  - _8j50 5y ago
    > We don't want to help people not kill themselves? It's not help if you are violating consent of a person that has the ability to give consent. Minors and intoxicated people are some examples of people that can't gove consent in which case their legal guardian must give consent. The shitty thing about the tech scene is the utter disregard for consent because you know better. Few things I hold higher contempt for over people that violate consent because they know what is best for someone else over that person themselves. > But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. Yes they do and they should be helped but only if they or their legal guardian provides consent and is willing to be helped. Have you actually tried to help a person in this situation? Nothing more humiliating or pushing over the edge than your private mental struggles being exposed and well meaning assholes now made your contemplations into an issue you must act on (as in kill yourself or chicken out). Ffs! It's slavery not help what you have in mind. Your intentions don't change that fact. > ...Here's a straw man argument" I can see why you would say that but both in law enforcement and tech there are plenty examples of things being done for someones best interest that end up having horrific consequences. 72 hour mental health lockup suicides is one. You lock them up for monitoring their mental health for their own good except now they are so scarred of being treated like psychiatric patient they can't recover from it. Or drunks being locked up so they don't hurt themselves except other prisoners have fun with them. > Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice. Right and if the purpose is to save the government money on dead soldiers it should be stated as such. When framed as a mental health tool, it is only natural to apply it to civilians. Also, Soldiers should also be allowed a chance to consent explicitly just like with everything else.

*sigh* HN comments are entirely predictable. Tools that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour could also help refine an understanding that people can u

_8j50 5y ago

> that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. The people they love did not obtain consent from them. > You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? Yes. First hand. Suicidal and/or mentally ill people have rights such as one for privacy just like you. > and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? We don't. Assholes who think using other peoples' death and illness to perform non-consensual medical examination is good do. By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. I concur about the predictability of HN comments. When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. Here too, someone will do a startup out of this so it is a cause for celebration. Never mind privacy, free will and self-determination. > t is their damn business; they have a duty of care. So things made by darpa never make it to public use and service members have no right to medical privacy like us HIPPA enjoying civilians? Okie... To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
We don't want to help people not kill themselves? This is depressive realism taken to a frightening new level. What DARPA is talking about need not be incompatible with some relaxation around medically-assisted suicide. But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. > By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. "By this logic" === "Here's a straw man argument" > When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. I am not in that particular "you all", thank you. > To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition. Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice.
- _8j50 5y ago
  > We don't want to help people not kill themselves? It's not help if you are violating consent of a person that has the ability to give consent. Minors and intoxicated people are some examples of people that can't gove consent in which case their legal guardian must give consent. The shitty thing about the tech scene is the utter disregard for consent because you know better. Few things I hold higher contempt for over people that violate consent because they know what is best for someone else over that person themselves. > But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. Yes they do and they should be helped but only if they or their legal guardian provides consent and is willing to be helped. Have you actually tried to help a person in this situation? Nothing more humiliating or pushing over the edge than your private mental struggles being exposed and well meaning assholes now made your contemplations into an issue you must act on (as in kill yourself or chicken out). Ffs! It's slavery not help what you have in mind. Your intentions don't change that fact. > ...Here's a straw man argument" I can see why you would say that but both in law enforcement and tech there are plenty examples of things being done for someones best interest that end up having horrific consequences. 72 hour mental health lockup suicides is one. You lock them up for monitoring their mental health for their own good except now they are so scarred of being treated like psychiatric patient they can't recover from it. Or drunks being locked up so they don't hurt themselves except other prisoners have fun with them. > Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice. Right and if the purpose is to save the government money on dead soldiers it should be stated as such. When framed as a mental health tool, it is only natural to apply it to civilians. Also, Soldiers should also be allowed a chance to consent explicitly just like with everything else.