Scientists have built artificial neurons that fully mimic human brain cells

[Lunatic Cake 1,618]

I love the idea. Dealing with somebody who's been having Parkinson for over 20 years (So basically before I was born) and the disease becoming so bad it's difficult to watch, knowing there's nothing you can do. At least people can be helped in the future.

[TopQuark 409]

If that is true, it could expand the life cycle of a human by decades probably. This is incredible.

 

 

That would be wonderful considering that my ultimate wish in life is to be able to live up to at least 200 years old (I do not think that's asking for much) via some form of medical assistance that I could only hope would come available in my lifetime.

 

This news has made my day.

 

While easily replacable brain matter is a step in the right direction, more is definitly required to extend avarage lifespan. Dying of "old age" usually consists of major organ faliure. This is not just completely natural, but pre-progemmed into our DNA; it's designed to shut down the organism after its normal lifespan. By the nature of cell replication, each cell generation becomes progressively more mutated, making it more difficult for the system to operate, exacerbated by accumulated damage from the environment, such as radiation and smoke inhalation. If the body let itself get as old as possible, it would literally be asking to become a carrier of cancer and disease, as the mutated immune system would barely be able to function.

 

So if you want to live to be two hundred, cell rejuvenation would probably be the way, along with a few other theoretical processes. Always nice to be better able to repair our brains, though.

[Shanks 10,816]

So if you want to live to be two hundred, cell rejuvenation would probably be the way, along with a few other theoretical processes. Always nice to be better able to repair our brains, though.

This kind of technology could possibly also be used to repair cells and organ tissue as well, the current lifespan of people living in industrialized nations is the highest it has ever been though there are also increasing problems with morbidity ie age related diseases. Much of this though is due to increased toxins in the environment, food, water ect... which people are waking up to and demanding change. I can see the argument of longer not always being better though it seems both may be possible sometime in the future.

[Lilly14 8]

It will make sense once you start converging neurology and physics together...

 

Don't worry, it hasn't been made public yet, so I can't blame you.

[yeet 2,027]

 

 

Ummm how? God forbid someone steal some of these neurons to . . . give his autistic brother a fighting chance at school.

I think what the guy means, is that if scientists can make that, all it takes is one of them to rework them to control peoples thoughts, and basically make them mindless slaves/zombies. And if these become a thing, everyone will be using them in say 50-70 years time. If they are for people in the future to use I don't see how someone is gonna steal them for their brother  

Also being autistic doesn't mean you're gonna fail school. 

[Steel Accord 6,660]

It will make sense once you start converging neurology and physics together...

 

Don't worry, it hasn't been made public yet, so I can't blame you.

 

I can't tell if you are joking or not, but I strongly suspect that you are.

I think what the guy means, is that if scientists can make that, all it takes is one of them to rework them to control peoples thoughts, and basically make them mindless slaves/zombies. And if these become a thing, everyone will be using them in say 50-70 years time. If they are for people in the future to use I don't see how someone is gonna steal them for their brother

Also being autistic doesn't mean you're gonna fail school. 

 

 

That doesn't make any sense though. The only way it could influence behavior is if more than half the brain was replaced and by then the person is pretty much already dead as far as their individual consciousness is concerned. Again, these are meant to repair damage to the brain or correct birth defects to it.

 

We really, desperately, honestly, need to get over the stupid, tired, cliched Skynet narrative and get back to the days when science was pronounced with the Royal Capslock and hailed as the ultimate net gain and true good humanity has going for it. Hence my frustration at all those proposing this technology built for the purpose of helping people would instead be used for a bad SyFy b-movie plot.

 

(I know it doesn't, I was thinking of some kind of foil to the nightmare scenario proposed.)

Edited July 8, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Lilly14 8]

My father is a psychologist and chemical engineer. I can tell you're not quite there yet. But this is way into the future. Don't worry, my friend. Don't worry...

[Steel Accord 6,660]

My father is a psychologist and chemical engineer. I can tell you're not quite there yet. But this is way into the future. Don't worry, my friend. Don't worry...

 

Again, I can't tell if you are joking, and now I can't even tell if you are trying to insult me. (And my Dad's a doctor who does medical research by the by.)

[Lilly14 8]

Joking?? Did you just say joking? Why would I be joking, dear sir?

 

Don't you trust me?

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Joking?? Did you just say joking? Why would I be joking, dear sir?

 

Don't you trust me?

 

Okay, now I've almost confirmed that you are joking. To answer your question, not really. I don't distrust you but I don't know you so how can I say either way?

[yeet 2,027]

@@Steel Accord, It's because it could happen. What's to stop someone from doing that? Certainly not people saying it wont happen

Also if they are used to repair the brain, that wont solve birth defects, it may solve some, but not many. We shouldn't really be making this stuff yet really, the world is over populated in many countries, and with this it would make it even worse. 

[Steel Accord 6,660]

@@Steel Accord, It's because it could happen. What's to stop someone from doing that? Certainly not people saying it wont happen

Also if they are used to repair the brain, that wont solve birth defects, it may solve some, but not many. We shouldn't really be making this stuff yet really, the world is over populated in many countries, and with this it would make it even worse. 

 

Not saying it won't happen won't keep abuse from happening no, but two things will A ) people not abusing it and stopping those that would and B ) abusing this kind of tech is like abusing vaccine so not much mileage for criminal use beyond stealing and selling it on the black market.

 

You're right, this technology won't solve all the degenerative brain problems or malformations, but it is a start. Are you suggesting the scientists shouldn't invent or restrict life saving medical developments? Until when the population has dropped? The point of these advances is to save lives not wait till "the right amount" are there to be saved!

[yeet 2,027]

Not saying it won't happen won't keep abuse from happening no, but two things will A ) people not abusing it and stopping those that would and B ) abusing this kind of tech is like abusing vaccine so not much mileage for criminal use beyond stealing and selling it on the black market.

 

You're right, this technology won't solve all the degenerative brain problems or malformations, but it is a start. Are you suggesting the scientists shouldn't invent or restrict life saving medical developments? Until when the population has dropped? The point of these advances is to save lives not wait till "the right amount" are there to be saved!

I'm not saying that, but we've made a lot of medical discoveries, and people are living much longer. This will only add to it.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I'm not saying that, but we've made a lot of medical discoveries, and people are living much longer. This will only add to it.

 

And . . . you see that as a bad thing? 

Edited July 9, 2015 by Steel Accord

[yeet 2,027]

And . . . you see that as a bad thing? 

Well yeah to be honest. England for instance has enough people in it already, without having people living longer. it's not a "humanity is shit" thing, it's a "humanity needs to get it's shit together before it makes people live even longer," thing.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Well yeah to be honest. England for instance has enough people in it already, without having people living longer. it's not a "humanity is shit" thing, it's a "humanity needs to get it's shit together before it makes people live even longer," thing.

 

So you suggest that we let people die because they represent a harmful population statistic?

[yeet 2,027]

So you suggest that we let people die because they represent a harmful population statistic?

The statistic isn't harmful, if the world is over populated, even more so with that, think how fast we will run out of food, fossil fuels, etc. And we wouldn't have enough other types of electricity to last us. And thousands of people die each day, why are people in first world countries so different

[Steel Accord 6,660]

The statistic isn't harmful, if the world is over populated, even more so with that, think how fast we will run out of food, fossil fuels, etc. And we wouldn't have enough other types of electricity to last us. And thousands of people die each day, why are people in first world countries so different

 

When did that come into play? I've never said the nationality of lives saved, I've said it doesn't matter what country or it's population. No viable medical advancement should be restricted or held back. Thousands of people do die each day, it's sad, but we shouldn't actively contribute to a person's death if the potential exists to save them!

Edited July 9, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Lilly14 8]

Man you are very weird. I wouldn't joke on this

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Man you are very weird. I wouldn't joke on this

 

Nor would I. This technology is a great boon to humanity and should be welcomed for what it can do, not feared for what it can't.

[yeet 2,027]

When did that come into play? I've never said the nationality of lives saved, I've said it doesn't matter what country or it's population. No viable medical advancement should be restricted or held back. Thousands of people do die each day, it's sad, but we shouldn't actively contribute to a person's death if the potential exists to save them!

We kinda do already, we have plenty of food and running water, yet people in third world countries die from lack of food and water and we have cures for many diseases people contract, yet we don't really do much. 

You guys are just seeing this as it "we can save people with this" and not looking past it. Yeah we can save people, we'll save them to live in poverty once the world has become massively over populated. I ain't being pessimistic or anything, it's the truth. And i'm not joking either @@Lilly14.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

We kinda do already, we have plenty of food and running water, yet people in third world countries die from lack of food and water and we have cures for many diseases people contract, yet we don't really do much. 

You guys are just seeing this as it "we can save people with this" and not looking past it. Yeah we can save people, we'll save them to live in poverty once the world has become massively over populated. I ain't being pessimistic or anything, it's the truth. And i'm not joking either @@Lilly14.

 

One problem at a time. Yes, poverty in the third world is a problem, but I don't think the Peace Corps., Doctors without borders, the Red Cross, and hundreds of private international charities (including a few this fandom has) would appreciate your dismissal that the first world is somehow universally neglecting the third.

 

People alive to live in poor conditions are still alive to try and get out of them, to provide what little they can for those that depend on them. Should a father who's working three shifts to pay for his wife and newborn child just to eat each day be allowed to drop dead just because he's poor? So that then his wife and child will die and they'll be less mouths to feed and more to go around? If you're so keen on reducing population, what's your suggestion? Nuke parts of the world for the death toll and sterilization that will follow?

 

If this technology can heal people it should be allowed to function for it's intended purpose. It and the scientists who invented it's job isn't to reduce population, it's to help people with problems in their brains.

 

(And you know for someone who claims he doesn't take this as a joke, you use a lot of emoticons that would indicate such.)

Edited July 9, 2015 by Steel Accord

[yeet 2,027]

One problem at a time. Yes, poverty in the third world is a problem, but I don't think the Peace Corps., Doctors without borders, the Red Cross, and hundreds of private international charities (including a few this fandom has) would appreciate your dismissal that the first world is somehow universally neglecting the third.

 

People alive to live in poor conditions are still alive to try and get out of them, to provide what little they can for those that depend on them. Should a father who's working three shifts to pay for his wife and newborn child just to eat each day be allowed to drop dead just because he's poor? So that then his wife and child will die and they'll be less mouths to feed and more to go around? If you're so keen on reducing population, what's your suggestion? Nuke parts of the world for the death toll and sterilization that will follow?

 

If this technology can heal people it should be allowed to function for it's intended purpose. It and the scientists who invented it's job isn't to reduce population, it's to help people with problems in their brains.

 

(And you know for someone who claims he doesn't take this as a joke, you use a lot of emoticons that would indicate such.)

You're kinda exaggerating what i'm saying. No we shouldn't nuke countries to reduce the population, you wouldn't even be able to use the land if for ages if you nuked it too. Meaning you'd be back at square one. And I didn't say poor people should die, I also didn't say it's the first world countries fault that the third world countries are pretty bad. It's just what we are doing isn't helping that much. 

This technology will help a minority of people in the short term, but in the long term the human race (the planet too) will suffer unless we can provide for absolutely everyone. I don't see the point in using this if it's gonna do more bad than good. Because it would do more bad. If it's used on a few people then it's not really that bad, but if it's used on everyone, then no it's terrible.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

You're kinda exaggerating what i'm saying. No we shouldn't nuke countries to reduce the population, you wouldn't even be able to use the land if for ages if you nuked it too. Meaning you'd be back at square one. And I didn't say poor people should die, I also didn't say it's the first world countries fault that the third world countries are pretty bad. It's just what we are doing isn't helping that much. 

This technology will help a minority of people in the short term, but in the long term the human race (the planet too) will suffer unless we can provide for absolutely everyone. I don't see the point in using this if it's gonna do more bad than good. Because it would do more bad. If it's used on a few people then it's not really that bad, but if it's used on everyone, then no it's terrible.

 

You weren't really protesting every time I mentioned letting people die, so such exaggeration seemed appropriate.

 

That's not how technological proliferation works. You know what the poorest countries in the world have? Ipods. Not as many may have need for computers for business but everyone likes to listen to music and I've talked with people from third world countries on other brony forums so they apparently get cable as well as internet access. As technology progresses and becomes more advance, it becomes cheaper and more widespread, not more exclusive.

 

On that last part though, if two people with Parkinson's are saved that's good but if hundreds are that's bad?!

[Lilly14 8]

That is exactly what I thought