[extropy-chat] TMS

[Samantha Atkins]

On Jan 12, 2005, at 10:30 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>> http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/mindnet/mn165.htm
>
> Puh-leeze!  Among the rather obvious issues:
>
> 1. How to generate a worldwide electromagnetic wave
> of any reasonable coherence?

HAARP perhaps.   This area of inquiry has such a fun mix of science, 
paranoia and perhaps not being paranoid enough.  It is difficult to 
separate firm ground from swamp.

>   (Sorry, the world's
> satellite networks *AREN'T* up to the task.  Neither
> are more conventional broadcast networks.  And that's
> assuming either one could be coopted by one central
> organization, and assumption that is easily shown
> false if you take a look at the wide range of
> organizations that actually operate the various
> satellites and transmitters.)
>
> 1a. Specifically, how to do the above with the
> exceedingly high precision necessary for neural
> induction?
>
> 2. How to manipulate even one single brain through
> induction in precise ways, as opposed to the vague
> "induce a feeling of spiritual presence" that seems to
> be about as far as anyone's gotten?

Not quite.  There may have been work done in this area as part of 
MKULTRA and other projects that came out due to FOIA.

http://educate-yourself.org/mc/listofmcsymptoms05jun03.shtml
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/anti-personal-electromagnet-weapons.htm

>
> 3 and most importantly. Even if this were feasable, it
> would be a rather unextropian act.  The ends do not
> justify the means; eradicating all who oppose us (say,
> by reprogramming them away) is very unlikely to
> actually lead to the society that we desire, as
> demonstrated by the results of comparable approaches
> (genocide, eugenics) in the past.  (A case could be
> made that it's theoretically possible to achieve what
> we want by these methods, if one studies why the
> previous attempts failed.  But that is irrelevant
> here, since this just proposes a new method of
> controlling people without addressing why trying to
> control people - regardless of exact method - has
> failed.)
>
> My initial take is that stuff like this has no place
> on the extropy-chat list...though I might be wrong.
>

It would be advisable to be aware of such things.   We could easily 
become victims of such otherwise.

Question:  If you had a friend about to commit suicide and you have 
exhausted all means of persuasion, are you justified in stopping them, 
against their will,  from taking their live?    Are you justified if 
you know that later they will  sincerely thank you if you successfully 
intervene?

Not an easy question to answer, is it?   Or is it?

Now suppose that it wasn't a friend about to commit suicide but 
humanity itself willfully headed for almost certain destruction?     If 
you thought you could do something, even if against what all the world 
said it wanted, even against your own principles of the boundaries 
ruled by respect for the free will of others,  would you?

I hope that is an easier question.   But it is a question.

- samantha