4 ms·

At the risk of appealing to authority, I have to assume that if DARPA is using it to train snipers, they know it works whether it's due to the tDCS or mental pr

At the risk of appealing to authority, I have to assume that if DARPA is using it to train snipers, they know it works whether it's due to the tDCS or mental priming as mentioned below. Obviously, from a theoretical standpoint it's important to know why it's working but from a lifehacking/making better snipers/learning Perl/selling $99 tDCS kits standpoint, it doesn't matter how it works, only that it does.

wickedchicken 15y ago
> I have to assume that if DARPA is using it to train snipers, they know it works This keeps getting thrown around but I'm having a hard time identifying a good source (other than a bunch of blogs repeating the same 'fact'). The best I can do is this set of slides which claim 'a 2.1x improvement' [1], but no confirmation that it's actually in use. The brain is very poorly understood, and throwing random electrical fields across it "because I saw it on extremetech" is a terrible idea. [1] http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008intell/kruse.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008intell/kruse.pdf
- alexyoung 15y ago
  I remember reading more detail on the snipers here: Zap your brain into the zone: Fast track to pure focus http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328501.600-zap-your-brain-into-the-zone-fast-track-to-pure-focus.html?full=true http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328501.600-zap-your-... Which references Experimental Brain Research, vol 213, p 9: http://www.mendeley.com/research/transcranial-direct-current-stimulations-effect-novice-versus-experienced-learning/ http://www.mendeley.com/research/transcranial-direct-current...
marshray 15y ago
Well DARPA is an applied research funding organization, not a sniper training organization. So their funding doesn't automatically mean it was successful. Nevertheless, they probably wouldn't have funded it without some indication that it could be useful.
DanBC 15y ago
DARPA (and other defence budgets) can fund all kinds of weird stuff. Reasons range from "it works" through "it's a safe useful placebo" through "it might work" to "it doesn't work, but it'll confuse (and scare) the communists and divert them from our real research."

wickedchicken 15y ago

> I have to assume that if DARPA is using it to train snipers, they know it works This keeps getting thrown around but I'm having a hard time identifying a good source (other than a bunch of blogs repeating the same 'fact'). The best I can do is this set of slides which claim 'a 2.1x improvement' [1], but no confirmation that it's actually in use. The brain is very poorly understood, and throwing random electrical fields across it "because I saw it on extremetech" is a terrible idea. [1] http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008intell/kruse.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008intell/kruse.pdf

alexyoung 15y ago
I remember reading more detail on the snipers here: Zap your brain into the zone: Fast track to pure focus http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328501.600-zap-your-brain-into-the-zone-fast-track-to-pure-focus.html?full=true http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328501.600-zap-your-... Which references Experimental Brain Research, vol 213, p 9: http://www.mendeley.com/research/transcranial-direct-current-stimulations-effect-novice-versus-experienced-learning/ http://www.mendeley.com/research/transcranial-direct-current...

marshray 15y ago

Well DARPA is an applied research funding organization, not a sniper training organization. So their funding doesn't automatically mean it was successful. Nevertheless, they probably wouldn't have funded it without some indication that it could be useful.

DanBC 15y ago

DARPA (and other defence budgets) can fund all kinds of weird stuff. Reasons range from "it works" through "it's a safe useful placebo" through "it might work" to "it doesn't work, but it'll confuse (and scare) the communists and divert them from our real research."