Thank you for going to the trouble of arguing the case *against* brain chip implants.
What is tragic, though, is that this sort of argument is even necessary. On the face of it, brain implants sound patently absurd. After all, the blood/brain barrier exists for a reason, and common sense would suggest it's not a great idea idea to embed plastics, metals and electronic circuitry into living brain tissue.
But, in the upside down, dystopian clown world within which we currently live, apparently such an argument is necessary, after all.
I'm also wondering now how many *human* neuralink funerals will be needed before people wake up to Elon's latest mad scientist scam? After all, if "freedom of speech with without reach" is Elon's definition of "Free Speech", I shudder to think what his definition of "safe and effective" might actually be . . .
What bothers me is anyone who advocates Brain-Computer Interface systems using embedded microchips are (intentionally?) missing the entire industry of non-invasive systems. Why even have the risk of embedding something if you can build a thing that can sit outside and do a similar task?
Methinks either they intend for this to be a two-way system (the chip also controls you) or they don't like the idea of it being removable (permanent tracking, anyone?).
May I quote you on this in my "Red Pill" library, Underdog? Or would you like me to anonymize my reference to your quote by removing your name and the link to your comment?
Ever see the video of a bull that was an early guinea pig (so to speak, woof!) of brain implantation? The poor critter...
I have a really hard time understanding why so many people seem to LUV Elong Mush... He's the one putting all the spy satellites in space! The brain implant thing seems much less like a "control" device than a DEATH device to moi... Good post, Beagle-- Woof!
E-Long Mask is definitely up to no good when you look over his prior history.
I've had people arguing killing 1,500 animals is 'less than how many pharma kill'. That's odd, I only remember Pfizer conducting tests on < 21 mice. You know it's bad when Pfizer has the better animal track record.
O mai DOG. Reminds me of FAUCI and the puppies... Where psychopaths go to "work"...
But PHARMA kills thousands and thousands of people every year, and nowadays, MILLIONS...
Did you see, too, the new "vaccine schedule"??? It looks like the Nasties are getting a bit FREAKED OUT, and I mean SKEERED, because they're freaks already...
That’s really sick. Apparently abusing animals isn’t the only thing melon is involved in: From the East Bay Times - “Bay Area counties sue Tesla, claiming it illegally dumped hazardous waste from Fremont plant, other facilities.”
Well, first time I’ve been called a shill. Except for you and I few are reading this so my shilling is ineffective. My point is that animal studies are a prerequisite to human testing and is, sadly, necessary. You want evidence? I can’t supply any. I want to bring some balance to your arguments.
Yes, yes, you can try to pretend it isn't shilling.
The article isn't a criticism of animal testing, so you can put that strawman argument to bed. The article is a criticism of how deadly NeuraLink is to animals. What's the point in advocating animal testing, if you ignore the highly fatal results? Keep massacring animals until you cherry pick a set that doesn't instantly kill them?
Animal testing is subject is supposed to be subject to ethical review, and the botched jobs tells me this wasn't the case.
1) Per the article you did not read, many of the animal deaths were unnecessary even by NeuraLinks own admission. 1,500 is excessive even by clinical trial standards; not even Pfizer have a track record that bad.
2) The proclaimed results - a monkey playing pong - was, if you read carefully, already achieved 15 years ago in humans via non-invasive BCI systems. Being able to play pong, a game with a single joystick control, is not justification for killing one animal, let alone 1,500. Video games are non-essential. It also required two implants, which is overkill, given you only need one non-invasive BCI system to get joystick control (reflective eye interface).
3) No amount of testing is going to change the fact implants will always get rejected and cause cells to turn cancerous. It's like perpetually testing asbestos and hoping that doesn't cause cancer. This is nothing more than brute force, mass testing until you can cherry pick the results you want. 1,500 animals died, only one got to play pong. What's that tell you on human safety values?
4) The lack of evidence of benefits demonstrates why the risks are unnecessary. How many animals must you pointlessly slaughter before you classify the device as fatal? Do you know how many are meant to survive? No. Because it wasn't a properly designed safety test.
5) Non-invasive BCI is already a thing. We've had externally moveable robotic arms since the 2000s. You know why you never see anybody with them? Cost.
This comment section skips all the good that is possible with this research. Pain management, spinal cord trauma, sight , hearing , brain trauma, epileptic censure, etc. All I’m reading here is an unbalanced personal attack.
There is no evidence of that. Mass killing animals to implant a product with plausible evidence showing cancer harms is sufficient to invoke objections. Your attempt to water it down as a 'unbalanced personal attack' reeks of shilling, giving you're making unsubstantiated grandiose claims on performance that have not been demonstrated, and will not be demonstrated (because that isn't how pain, spinal cords, sight, hearing or brain trauma works).
Thank you for going to the trouble of arguing the case *against* brain chip implants.
What is tragic, though, is that this sort of argument is even necessary. On the face of it, brain implants sound patently absurd. After all, the blood/brain barrier exists for a reason, and common sense would suggest it's not a great idea idea to embed plastics, metals and electronic circuitry into living brain tissue.
But, in the upside down, dystopian clown world within which we currently live, apparently such an argument is necessary, after all.
I'm also wondering now how many *human* neuralink funerals will be needed before people wake up to Elon's latest mad scientist scam? After all, if "freedom of speech with without reach" is Elon's definition of "Free Speech", I shudder to think what his definition of "safe and effective" might actually be . . .
What bothers me is anyone who advocates Brain-Computer Interface systems using embedded microchips are (intentionally?) missing the entire industry of non-invasive systems. Why even have the risk of embedding something if you can build a thing that can sit outside and do a similar task?
Methinks either they intend for this to be a two-way system (the chip also controls you) or they don't like the idea of it being removable (permanent tracking, anyone?).
May I quote you on this in my "Red Pill" library, Underdog? Or would you like me to anonymize my reference to your quote by removing your name and the link to your comment?
> BeyondC19.org
FWIW, I've already included a link to your article in the library:
> https://workflowy.com/s/beyond-covid-19/SoQPdY75WJteLUYx#/f75740326d3a
Quoting me is perfectly fine. I mean, my name is already an alias so it's safe.
Great! Many thanks . . . .
100% ~ Well said!
Hopefully Klaus or Yuval will volunteer to be the first human patient in the trials.
You ville eat zee microchips und you ville be maybe happy*
*dependent on WEF renewal subscription model to 'living in zee pod'
Klown Schlob is a perfect target for testing all the new "chips" for zee braaaain.
They get Lethal Injection as their punishment!!! Poetic, I say!!!
Ever see the video of a bull that was an early guinea pig (so to speak, woof!) of brain implantation? The poor critter...
I have a really hard time understanding why so many people seem to LUV Elong Mush... He's the one putting all the spy satellites in space! The brain implant thing seems much less like a "control" device than a DEATH device to moi... Good post, Beagle-- Woof!
E-Long Mask is definitely up to no good when you look over his prior history.
I've had people arguing killing 1,500 animals is 'less than how many pharma kill'. That's odd, I only remember Pfizer conducting tests on < 21 mice. You know it's bad when Pfizer has the better animal track record.
O mai DOG. Reminds me of FAUCI and the puppies... Where psychopaths go to "work"...
But PHARMA kills thousands and thousands of people every year, and nowadays, MILLIONS...
Did you see, too, the new "vaccine schedule"??? It looks like the Nasties are getting a bit FREAKED OUT, and I mean SKEERED, because they're freaks already...
🎯 ~ Well said!
People are clueless about Elon's motives and are playing right into his hands:
> https://workflowy.com/s/beyond-covid-19/SoQPdY75WJteLUYx#/f75740326d3a
The entire pharma-chemical industry is based upon the torture and execution of living creatures.
Where are the PETA activists? Probably too busy taking their SSRIs.
Fuckin A.
That’s really sick. Apparently abusing animals isn’t the only thing melon is involved in: From the East Bay Times - “Bay Area counties sue Tesla, claiming it illegally dumped hazardous waste from Fremont plant, other facilities.”
Shilling? Wharz’ m’a’ money!
If that's all you can resort to once your flimsy strawman argument gets folded, I'm not sure I want you as part of this community.
Well, first time I’ve been called a shill. Except for you and I few are reading this so my shilling is ineffective. My point is that animal studies are a prerequisite to human testing and is, sadly, necessary. You want evidence? I can’t supply any. I want to bring some balance to your arguments.
Yes, yes, you can try to pretend it isn't shilling.
The article isn't a criticism of animal testing, so you can put that strawman argument to bed. The article is a criticism of how deadly NeuraLink is to animals. What's the point in advocating animal testing, if you ignore the highly fatal results? Keep massacring animals until you cherry pick a set that doesn't instantly kill them?
Animal testing is subject is supposed to be subject to ethical review, and the botched jobs tells me this wasn't the case.
1) Per the article you did not read, many of the animal deaths were unnecessary even by NeuraLinks own admission. 1,500 is excessive even by clinical trial standards; not even Pfizer have a track record that bad.
2) The proclaimed results - a monkey playing pong - was, if you read carefully, already achieved 15 years ago in humans via non-invasive BCI systems. Being able to play pong, a game with a single joystick control, is not justification for killing one animal, let alone 1,500. Video games are non-essential. It also required two implants, which is overkill, given you only need one non-invasive BCI system to get joystick control (reflective eye interface).
3) No amount of testing is going to change the fact implants will always get rejected and cause cells to turn cancerous. It's like perpetually testing asbestos and hoping that doesn't cause cancer. This is nothing more than brute force, mass testing until you can cherry pick the results you want. 1,500 animals died, only one got to play pong. What's that tell you on human safety values?
4) The lack of evidence of benefits demonstrates why the risks are unnecessary. How many animals must you pointlessly slaughter before you classify the device as fatal? Do you know how many are meant to survive? No. Because it wasn't a properly designed safety test.
5) Non-invasive BCI is already a thing. We've had externally moveable robotic arms since the 2000s. You know why you never see anybody with them? Cost.
This comment section skips all the good that is possible with this research. Pain management, spinal cord trauma, sight , hearing , brain trauma, epileptic censure, etc. All I’m reading here is an unbalanced personal attack.
There is no evidence of that. Mass killing animals to implant a product with plausible evidence showing cancer harms is sufficient to invoke objections. Your attempt to water it down as a 'unbalanced personal attack' reeks of shilling, giving you're making unsubstantiated grandiose claims on performance that have not been demonstrated, and will not be demonstrated (because that isn't how pain, spinal cords, sight, hearing or brain trauma works).
By falling down some stairs under totally normal, definitely not suspicious, nothing-going-on-here circumstances.
A bit like those folks who keep falling out of closed 14th storey windows.