NC State plays GOD with roaches.

enterthemadness

The Triumvirate
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
28,544
Reaction score
19
Points
58
:cmad: DAMN IT NC STATE! STOP PLAYING GOD. SON OF A ****ING BLEE BOB.

http://www.examiner.com/article/remote-control-cockroaches-developed-at-nc-state


On Thursday, Phys.org reported that researchers at North Carolina State University have developed an electronic interface that can be used to remotely control cockroaches.
356gdt.jpg
 
I don't know. This seems like it would make for a huge seller with Halloween coming up. Just think of the fun you could have!
 
Uhm, this--->"Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should" --The Wise Jeff Goldblum
 
It's roaches. They are the demon spawn. They deserve this.

Maybe now we can control all the roaches and guide them into a vat of acid.
 
Good. I am one step closer to amassing my roach army.
 
God seems to be willing to tolerate free will, so in that way (and many others) this isn't "playing God", which typically amounts to making decisions over life and death.

I don't see this as being anything of any real practical use at any rate.

That wasn't deep, and never EVER was.
 
I don't see this as being anything of any real practical use at any rate.
I disagree. Until we can advance our ability to engineer robots at this scale which are effective in these types of recovery missions, this seems to be the best possible option. I'm amazed at the simplicity of the mechanisms involved. This could prove extremely useful in the near future (though its utility may be limited in time with the advance of nanotechnology), not to mention cost-effective.

With respect to those questioning the ethical merit of this technology: what is the problem, exactly?
 
Because it sets off my ******** detector too much? Is skeptism yet another thing I need to defend where others have the option not to?
 
Why do you think it's ********?
 
Last edited:
I'm assuming that it won't.
How are you defining, "work," in this case? There are two ways your statement can be interpreted:

1) You're saying that they can't control the motion of the cockroaches to begin with.

OR

2) You're saying that even if they do manage to control the motion of the cockroaches that the application will fail.


Given your first statement (that you don't see this as being of any practical use), the first interpretation doesn't make any sense. The second is the only one I can see as being congruent with your first statement (and even then, if we're supposed to take the initial comment at face-value, that's a stretch).

So what exactly do you mean?
 
Last edited:
Because it sets off my ******** detector too much? Is skeptism yet another thing I need to defend where others have the option not to?
You don't need to do anything. They're just asking the question. It's not unreasonable to assume that you might have some more concrete reasoning than, "Just a hunch," when you present opposition to a given idea. So I don't understand why you're getting so defensive.
 
Can't they make some kind of world wide device to control all roaches & make them travel to a Volcano or something like that & burn ?
 
You don't need to do anything. They're just asking the question. It's not unreasonable to assume that you might have some more concrete reasoning than, "Just a hunch," when you present opposition to a given idea. So I don't understand why you're getting so defensive.

1. "Just a hunch" is enough.
2. In a ****** mood, sorry about bringing it here.
 
Can't they make some kind of world wide device to control all roaches & make them travel to a Volcano or something like that & burn ?


Have you heard of the butterfly effect?

One small change...is all it takes..

:o got that **** from b movie A SOUND OF THUNDER.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"