Except it's confined to sterile cage in a research institute and has no control over the operations performed on it.
While I understand the need for primate testing for such a device before doing implant testing in humans, it's disingenuous to say that this monkey isn't unhappy.
Is this device worth doing this to primates for? Are the benefits worth it?
Is it so risky that we couldn't do it on volunteers?
Deep brain stuff has been tested on primates since the 80s, if we haven't made much progress since then is it okay to keep using primates?
Personally I don't think we should use primates for testing at all, except in very limited circumstances where there is a great medical. Nuralink doesn't seem that important.
We hadn't made much progress on desirable electric cars until Tesla changed the game. We hadn't made much progress on reusable rockets and getting the cost of space flight down until SpaceX. So the fact that we "haven't made much progress" on "deep brain stuff" does not carry much weight with me. Neuralink is similarly trying to take direct brain interfacing to a whole new level, with orders of magnitude more connections than any previous device, and if they succeed, it could be huge. I guess you don't have
So what evidence do you have that these tests on primates are necessary (can't be done any other way) and that the chances of them leading to useful results are high?
Musk has a long line of failed and abandoned ideas, almost as bad as Google. Just because he occasionally gets it right isn't reason enough to put primates through this, especially as a lot of research has already been done in this area and his results so far are not particularly spectacular. We have had primates playing games and completing simple tasks this way for a while now.
It's not an unhappy monkey (Score:3)
Except it's confined to sterile cage in a research institute and has no control over the operations performed on it.
While I understand the need for primate testing for such a device before doing implant testing in humans, it's disingenuous to say that this monkey isn't unhappy.
Re: (Score:3)
Do we need primate testing for this thing?
Is this device worth doing this to primates for? Are the benefits worth it?
Is it so risky that we couldn't do it on volunteers?
Deep brain stuff has been tested on primates since the 80s, if we haven't made much progress since then is it okay to keep using primates?
Personally I don't think we should use primates for testing at all, except in very limited circumstances where there is a great medical. Nuralink doesn't seem that important.
Re: (Score:2)
We hadn't made much progress on desirable electric cars until Tesla changed the game. We hadn't made much progress on reusable rockets and getting the cost of space flight down until SpaceX. So the fact that we "haven't made much progress" on "deep brain stuff" does not carry much weight with me. Neuralink is similarly trying to take direct brain interfacing to a whole new level, with orders of magnitude more connections than any previous device, and if they succeed, it could be huge. I guess you don't have
Re:It's not an unhappy monkey (Score:3)
So what evidence do you have that these tests on primates are necessary (can't be done any other way) and that the chances of them leading to useful results are high?
Musk has a long line of failed and abandoned ideas, almost as bad as Google. Just because he occasionally gets it right isn't reason enough to put primates through this, especially as a lot of research has already been done in this area and his results so far are not particularly spectacular. We have had primates playing games and completing simple tasks this way for a while now.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever considered it's the technology that's being improved instead of the activity?