6 ms·
I'll let other blind people go first, but I'm definitely some one that would love, love, love to be able to see. Driving, knowing body language, playing any and
by devinprater 1y ago
I'll let other blind people go first, but I'm definitely some one that would love, love, love to be able to see. Driving, knowing body language, playing any and every video game out there, shoot yeah!
- jesterswilde 1y agoThe exact same comment I would write. Waitin for generation two of any of this kind of tech.
- BrandoElFollito 1y agoWhy would you not go first? If you are blind it cannot be worse (well it can, but there are always risks). My wife went through semi-expetimental therapy (at that time) for her MS. It was tough but ultimately a net benefit. It all depends on what is at stake - I would consider Ozempic for some weight loss but prefer, for now, go for no sugar and moderate portions. This is not life changing for me so I indeed prefer people who will benefit way more from it to go first.
- ecshafer 1y agowhat therapy did your wife go through?
- BrandoElFollito 1y agoThe very early form of TYSABRI
- anthk 1y agoThat's funny because Ozempic can blind you.
- loeg 1y agoIt’s associated, not causal, and likely explained by diabetes as a 3rd variable. (Diabetes can blind you and glp-1 drugs are treatments for diabetes.)
- tptacek 1y agoSuper uncertain, and, if the effect exists, it's tiny --- huge numbers of people have been taking these drugs for many years. Meanwhile, we know with certainty that T2D can blind you, and we know mechanistically why that happens. If you're at T2D risk, NAION would be a really dumb reason to avoid GLP-1s.
- malfist 1y agoThe blindness is linked to rapidly changing A1C in diabetics and is a small increase in overall risk. If you're just using it for weight loss and aren't diabetic, you have no increase in risk. This is also why your weight loss should be monitored by a doctor.
- crote 1y agoIt's a brain chip. How do you feel about being blind and paralyzed? Or comatose? Or dead? How about never-ending pain or constant bright flashes? What if they go bankrupt, and something happens to the implant? Brain surgery isn't exactly an industry where "move fast and break things" is an acceptable approach - especially when you are the patient. Considering Neuralink's historical record, going first sounds like a horrible idea to me.
- myhf 1y agoCounterpoint: the main motivation for installing brain chips is to be able to do those things to subordinates.
- snerbles 1y agoIt's important that no one can accidentally sideload misinformation. No different than checking an ID at the airport, really.
- snerbles 1y agoAlso seizures, personality changes and myriad forms of cognitive impairment. The 20 years of US adventures in Iraq & Afghanistan led to many traumatic brain injury cases analyzed by modern medicine, and the chronic symptoms are worse than one might think.
- jdminhbg 1y ago> Considering Neuralink's historical record What historical record? This article is about their first human participant.
- jdiff 1y agoThey had a rocky path to that first human patient, and even the first human participant has had a rocky journey with it, with many electrodes failing soon after implanted.
- 1y ago
- justin66 1y ago> If you are blind it cannot be worse Holy moly.
- fracus 1y agoI think it was obvious they meant the condition of blindness cant't be worse.
- account42 1y agoBut then it's also obvious that this is an irrelevant argument because other things very much can get worse. It's not like becoming blind would be the primary concern of a non-blind person getting a brain implant.
- jibal 1y agoNo, that's obviously not obvious, since the person you responded to thought otherwise.
- fracus 1y ago"I" think was obvious
- jibal 1y agoAnd you are wrong, as noted. If you mean "it was obvious to me", that's a different matter ... but it's also irrelevant.
- fracus 1y agoIt isn't always pragmatic to account for the 5% of people who misinterpret what is being said or who aren't able to contextualize because they are stupid. We've all misinterpreted obvious things before. It isn't that big of a deal.
- BrandoElFollito 1y ago
- mathiaspoint 1y agoFrom a game theory perspective it's very rare for it to make sense to be the first to try new medical interventions.
- NoPicklez 1y agoI guess I don't have a similar thought process as someone who thinks going no sugar is the right way to achieve weight loss. The reason you might think twice about going first is for that exact reason, there are risks. Plenty of blind people would prefer to stay as they are than be left worse off to a greater degree after undergoing the implant.
- BrandoElFollito 1y agoHow would you go for weight loss then? This is calories in - calories out. And as for which state one wants to be in, this is a matter of personal choice. I know that I will commit suicide right after I get a diagnosis of, say, Alzheimer's (after cleaning up my stuff). If I went blind and had a reasonable chance to get back to sight, then I would also go for it, weighing the risks. It all boils down to what someone perceives as "better"
- NoPicklez 1y agoFor weight loss I go via a calorie deficit, but still consume all macronutrients, I wouldn't cut out sugar as I would feel pretty rubbish. I'd go less on the sweets like chocolate and lollies but I wouldn't completely cut out sugar as its important.
- jibal 1y agoOne cannot measure calories out (other than deducing it from calories in and weight change), which is a complex function of diet, metabolism, and a host of other factors. As for the rest--your other posts implicitly assume that everyone else shares your choices and priorities--and if not then they aren't relevant. (BTW, there is strong evidence showing neither you nor anyone else knows what they would do after receiving such diagnoses.)
- BrandoElFollito 1y ago> One cannot measure calories out (other than deducing it from calories in and weight change), which is a complex function of diet, metabolism, and a host of other factors. Sure, but when you eat sugar in several forms and overeat generally, you statistically get fatter. This works the other way round too. There are myriads of specific cases on the sides of the bell curve but the solution for the everyday Joe is to eat less, more healthily. Practicing sports helps too, but not so much (it is important for other health reasons) > As for the rest--your other posts implicitly assume that everyone else shares your choices and priorities--and if not then they aren't relevant. Wow, where do you get that from? The main point of asking questions here is not to be a troll and wait for internet fights but to get interesting insights from others. You may want to slow down with the pitchforks and such statements. > (BTW, there is strong evidence showing neither you nor anyone else knows what they would do after receiving such diagnoses.) Or not. You also have people who prepare for that in advance, with a clear decision path. I have, and have no doubts taht I will go for that having evidenced suffering in other people. Not everyone contacts a company such as Dignitas to make sure things are organized. Not everyone discusses with the funeral house details about their death at 45, not everyone has a "what to do when I die" booklet with key information (financial and how to de-smart the house :)). Not everyone gave a deeper thought about designing a kill-switch device that would poison them in case they are incapacitated. Not everyone is like you so I would not be that fast in making such radical statements.
- Levitz 1y agoIt's a lifelong change and whatever the state of the first release is, chances are in 5 years time there'll be a better version and everything is safer.
- fracus 1y agoFrom what I've read, if you are blind from birth, but visual signals were suddenly restored, your brain wouldn't know how to process them. Blind from birth = blind forever. I'm not certain though.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y agoI think the brain would adapt. It may take a while but the brain is very flexible and adaptable.
- qayxc 1y agoAccording to research impaired structural brain development due to visual deprivation from birth is not fully reversible and limits functional recovery. So even if eye sight is fully restored, cortical function will not be able to fully take advantage of that. Experiments and studies have shown that this might be due to the fact that the visual cortex will take over a similar role in blind people as it does for people with intact eye sight. The brain uses different sensory inputs in that case and the visual brain structure is not restored after eye sight recovery. This is still an ongoing field of research of course, but so far congenital blindless seems to be incurable, regardless of whether the sensory apparatus could be restored or replaced. Note that this only means seeing like a non-blind person. Some limited visual perception is still possible, just not "normal" sight.
- mekoka 1y agoDo you have some links handy? I'd be very much interested in the description of experience from people that have gained sight after congenital blindness.
- DetroitThrow 1y agoYou might be interested in searching up "strong critical periods" in brain development - this phenomenon has been studied for decades and has interesting implications for lots of aspects of brain development: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period
- xyst 1y ago> I'll let other desperate people go first FTFY.
- cameroncarlg 1y agoCalling them desperate seems rude. Why judge the participants? Not everyone has access to other SOTA solutions and if this is the next best thing for them, why not.
- lynx97 1y agoThe rhetoric in this thread is generally laden with patronisation. I know that phenomenon as a person with a disability. Left leaning people are quick to speak for me and try to patronize on my situation. It is, frankly, plain virtue signaling. I could do without that, thank you very much.
- ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y agoI hope that you get that opportunity one day.