ITT literally like 1 person read the article, the rest just complain.
To be fair half of the article was about Frankenstein. Now all these people have pitchforks.
Yeah no wonder. I'm one of those that read half of it, just because some titles are misleading. Well it's clearly not one of those.
If those scientists tried stuff on themselves, I wouldn't object.
Doing these stuff to other creatures and also trying to justify them... NO. JUST NO.
Truly, truly disgusting.
What did they do with their brain after they were done with their bullshit experiment?
Or did they just leave it alive as long as possible, letting it die in panic?
Well for one, I doubt it was panicking since it was asleep.
For two, I'd imagine they reconnected the blood vessels and then the pig was perfectly fine aside from scarring.
Had you read the article, as previously mentioned, you would know point 1 and be able to imply point 2
Edit: article was possibly edited, I'm 95% sure it stated the pig was unconscious. As commented below, there is reason to believe they did not bother to fix the pigs afterwards.
The way the article said they disconnected it after 5 hours, having already shut off all natural blood flow to the brain, and considering that it seems that the brain was completely disconnected from all bodily input as one of the variables of the experiment, I honestly believe all of those pigs died at the end.
They did not say the pigs were asleep in the article, they said that brain function was seen to be mostly normal. I hope that means that, disconnected from all input, the brain was unable to experience conscious panic, but my spidey sense tells me that probably isn’t the case.
Horrific experiment that hopefully yields very useful results and doesn’t need to be repeated. With any luck, one of the benefits of AI may be modeling things like this so we don’t have to do it for real.
Where did they say the pig was asleep?
Where did they say that the pig was fine after the experiment?
What makes you think those 2 things?
You're assuming things that aren't explicitly stated. For me, even if your conditions are met, the experiment is still disgusting. Would you allow them to do it to you? No? Why not? So why is it acceptable to pull that shit on a other sentient being?
I'm convinced the article was edited, I definitely remember it saying they were asleep when I read it previously.
They didn't state the pig was fine, but they did state that the experiment could've continued. And since all they did was remove natural blood flow, all they would have to do is restore natural blood flow. Hence why I thought that.
As for your final point, no, in it's current state I would not accept this procedure, however now that it has been tested and confirmed to work I don't see any harm in allowing them to do it to me. I also plan to sign up for neuralink as soon as it's commercially available.
Do I think they should be doing this? No. Do I think that hooking a pig up to an artificial heart is as horrific as people are making it out be? No.
ITT literally like 1 person read the article, the rest just complain.
To be fair half of the article was about Frankenstein. Now all these people have pitchforks.
Yeah no wonder. I'm one of those that read half of it, just because some titles are misleading. Well it's clearly not one of those.
If those scientists tried stuff on themselves, I wouldn't object.
Doing these stuff to other creatures and also trying to justify them... NO. JUST NO.
Truly, truly disgusting.
What did they do with their brain after they were done with their bullshit experiment?
Or did they just leave it alive as long as possible, letting it die in panic?
Well for one, I doubt it was panicking since it was asleep.For two, I'd imagine they reconnected the blood vessels and then the pig was perfectly fine aside from scarring.Had you read the article, as previously mentioned, you would know point 1 and be able to imply point 2Edit: article was possibly edited, I'm 95% sure it stated the pig was unconscious. As commented below, there is reason to believe they did not bother to fix the pigs afterwards.
The way the article said they disconnected it after 5 hours, having already shut off all natural blood flow to the brain, and considering that it seems that the brain was completely disconnected from all bodily input as one of the variables of the experiment, I honestly believe all of those pigs died at the end.
They did not say the pigs were asleep in the article, they said that brain function was seen to be mostly normal. I hope that means that, disconnected from all input, the brain was unable to experience conscious panic, but my spidey sense tells me that probably isn’t the case.
Horrific experiment that hopefully yields very useful results and doesn’t need to be repeated. With any luck, one of the benefits of AI may be modeling things like this so we don’t have to do it for real.
Where did they say the pig was asleep?
Where did they say that the pig was fine after the experiment?
What makes you think those 2 things?
You're assuming things that aren't explicitly stated. For me, even if your conditions are met, the experiment is still disgusting. Would you allow them to do it to you? No? Why not? So why is it acceptable to pull that shit on a other sentient being?
I'm convinced the article was edited, I definitely remember it saying they were asleep when I read it previously.
They didn't state the pig was fine, but they did state that the experiment could've continued. And since all they did was remove natural blood flow, all they would have to do is restore natural blood flow. Hence why I thought that.
As for your final point, no, in it's current state I would not accept this procedure, however now that it has been tested and confirmed to work I don't see any harm in allowing them to do it to me. I also plan to sign up for neuralink as soon as it's commercially available.
Do I think they should be doing this? No. Do I think that hooking a pig up to an artificial heart is as horrific as people are making it out be? No.