3 ms·

Just think about how much easier it will be for high income parents to get their kids into Ivys by boosting their SAT math skills using this technology. Unethic

by darien 15y ago

Just think about how much easier it will be for high income parents to get their kids into Ivys by boosting their SAT math skills using this technology. Unethical?

thinkdevcode 15y ago
Why would it be unethical? It's not like it'll divide us any more than we already are ( at least here in the states). This technology would be an awesome startup idea to try and get it down to a reasonable price range for almost all people to utilize.
- mindcrime 15y ago
  In the previous HN thread on this topic[1], a HN member pointed out that he had built a device for doing this for around $30.00. [1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3525744 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3525744
  - thinkdevcode 15y ago
    Im sure as hackers we could figure out how to make a device such as this, but the idea I was alluding to would be to make a device that is very cheap and very easy to use (like a hat you put on for 30 minutes and turn on by pushing a button, with an auto off after the time is up)
    - mindcrime 15y ago
      Sure, I was just pointing out that the actual technology is something that already isn't terribly expensive or hard to build. That doesn't mean there isn't an opportunity for somebody though. If anything, the bigger problem than the price to build the device would probably be the regulatory stuff. I mean, you just know that the government will immediately declare something like this to be a "medical device" and insist on an elaborate, byzantine, corrupt, kafkaesque, bureaucratic nightmare of a regulatory process to get something like this approved.
      - scarmig 15y ago
        I'm guessing that the HN community would think supporting a lot of safety and regulatory hoops for this is meddling statism? I can't help but imagine all the cranks who'd sell smartness treatments and do permanent damage to the brain... homeopathy but with a chance of actual damage.
burke 15y ago
No more unethical than private tutoring, in my opinion. People understandably like to draw parallels between mental enhancement and physical enhancement in the context of sports. The difference is that sports are a purposefully-created level playing field, where any sort of enhancement creates an unfair advantage, eliminating the point of the game. In the real world, there's no intentionally level playing field for entertainment's sake. It's up to everyone to get ahead as best they can. Nobody would complain if their mover were using steroids.
- onemoreact 15y ago
  The the difference between the top 0.001% and 0.002% is in most sports the difference between making millions and working at Wendy's. As long as everyone is dealing with the limits of biology there is a huge incentive to avoid injury and promote general heath. But, once you start artificially altering basic pathways you can trade huge long term downsides for a tiny performance gain. And due to the competitiveness nature you basically force everyone to do the same. In other words it's a zero sum rule so why not chose rules that keep people healthy over time. But, outside of Med school there is simply less competitive pressure so I don't think we are going to see the same sort's of banning unless there is significant long term damage. On second thought people often take a fair amount of drugs to get though Med school as it is.
- darien 15y ago
  My main concern is the use of technology as a crutch for self improvement. I can appreciate the use of thought enhancing technology coupled with a strong will and determination to accomplish a certain goal - for I think that is a human ideal. But the moment I reconsider is when technology becomes the symbol for self improvement instead of a means to an end. We see this with diabetics who take insulin but never change their eating habits, people who purchase gym memberships but never attend, people who buy books but don't read them, or people who ride a helicopter up to the summit of Mount Everest, etc. Sometimes technology demeans the human experience and the significance of accomplishment... and I think people who struggle regularly feel cheated by advantages that are afforded to people who have privileged access to things of all measure.

by darien 15y ago

Just think about how much easier it will be for high income parents to get their kids into Ivys by boosting their SAT math skills using this technology. Unethical?

thinkdevcode 15y ago

Why would it be unethical? It's not like it'll divide us any more than we already are ( at least here in the states). This technology would be an awesome startup idea to try and get it down to a reasonable price range for almost all people to utilize.

mindcrime 15y ago
In the previous HN thread on this topic[1], a HN member pointed out that he had built a device for doing this for around $30.00. [1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3525744 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3525744
- thinkdevcode 15y ago
  Im sure as hackers we could figure out how to make a device such as this, but the idea I was alluding to would be to make a device that is very cheap and very easy to use (like a hat you put on for 30 minutes and turn on by pushing a button, with an auto off after the time is up)
  - mindcrime 15y ago
    Sure, I was just pointing out that the actual technology is something that already isn't terribly expensive or hard to build. That doesn't mean there isn't an opportunity for somebody though. If anything, the bigger problem than the price to build the device would probably be the regulatory stuff. I mean, you just know that the government will immediately declare something like this to be a "medical device" and insist on an elaborate, byzantine, corrupt, kafkaesque, bureaucratic nightmare of a regulatory process to get something like this approved.
    - scarmig 15y ago
      I'm guessing that the HN community would think supporting a lot of safety and regulatory hoops for this is meddling statism? I can't help but imagine all the cranks who'd sell smartness treatments and do permanent damage to the brain... homeopathy but with a chance of actual damage.

burke 15y ago

No more unethical than private tutoring, in my opinion. People understandably like to draw parallels between mental enhancement and physical enhancement in the context of sports. The difference is that sports are a purposefully-created level playing field, where any sort of enhancement creates an unfair advantage, eliminating the point of the game. In the real world, there's no intentionally level playing field for entertainment's sake. It's up to everyone to get ahead as best they can. Nobody would complain if their mover were using steroids.

onemoreact 15y ago
The the difference between the top 0.001% and 0.002% is in most sports the difference between making millions and working at Wendy's. As long as everyone is dealing with the limits of biology there is a huge incentive to avoid injury and promote general heath. But, once you start artificially altering basic pathways you can trade huge long term downsides for a tiny performance gain. And due to the competitiveness nature you basically force everyone to do the same. In other words it's a zero sum rule so why not chose rules that keep people healthy over time. But, outside of Med school there is simply less competitive pressure so I don't think we are going to see the same sort's of banning unless there is significant long term damage. On second thought people often take a fair amount of drugs to get though Med school as it is.
darien 15y ago
My main concern is the use of technology as a crutch for self improvement. I can appreciate the use of thought enhancing technology coupled with a strong will and determination to accomplish a certain goal - for I think that is a human ideal. But the moment I reconsider is when technology becomes the symbol for self improvement instead of a means to an end. We see this with diabetics who take insulin but never change their eating habits, people who purchase gym memberships but never attend, people who buy books but don't read them, or people who ride a helicopter up to the summit of Mount Everest, etc. Sometimes technology demeans the human experience and the significance of accomplishment... and I think people who struggle regularly feel cheated by advantages that are afforded to people who have privileged access to things of all measure.