News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by phkahler on Tuesday July 12, 2016 @03:16PM (#12081615)
>> Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups.

So really, someone experimenting on their own could be considered more ethical than researchers doing it to other people ;-) This is really an area where having all the data is critical and that publication bias we keep reading about at HN can actually be harmful to people relying on published results. One could say "they shouldn't be doing that", but don't researchers want their results to be used for something, or is it just about publication?

Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by patall on Tuesday July 12, 2016 @03:35PM (#12081725)
On the risk that I may sound to much like from the ivory tower but doing something out of the blue is not more ethical (why should it?). But you may end paralyzed and need help by other people, very clever. And the amount people at home can contribute to science is negleable. How much do all the at home car tuners contribute to new cars?! Is it ethical to built new superfast cars on your own ground so you one day can build a faster ambulance? Right, it is not. Just because this kind of research is somewhat new, it does not mean it is easy or you just have to invest sometime to revolutionize the world.

Somewhat parallel, people also critize WebMD. Obvoiusly, scientists want their finding to be used but in a reasonable matter, not without context and into the blue. And publications are (among scientists) are rendered not that important (and everyone knows that). It is just that you get judged by them, so you do them and as good as you can. As a software engineer you also at some point finish your project, although you could obtimize on it for ever.

Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by 2close4comfort on Tuesday July 12, 2016 @08:53PM (#12083308)
No I think that medical research can now be preformed by anyone. I think that there are going to be great advances that come from this amateur research in the next 5 years and I think it is the next evolution of hacking. People in general are capable of the kind of science required to achieve reproducible results. Most of this "research" is driven by a personal motivation (personal or some one close) where traditional medicine is unable to help. Research is driven by what can be sold afterwards and not the reward of knowledge gained from the results. And even then if knowledge was captured it often be inaccessible to those whom could turn that into a practical application of that science. So really this comes off as questioning the Doctors' absolute authority as masters in their field, and someone with out credentials coming up with just as meaningful results being tossed aside as amateurs not having a full understanding of what they are doing. I would say that in my personal experience that medicine is largely more art than science you rarely find Doctors that are interested in solving the unusual.
Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by collyw on Wednesday July 13, 2016 @08:12AM (#12085492)
"No I think that medical research can now be preformed by anyone."

They should have at least some knowledge of how research works. Whats the point in experimenting if you aren't adding a control group for example?

Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by phkahler on Thursday July 14, 2016 @12:25PM (#12095167)
Some people just want to make themselves better. They don't care about a control group. They only care to see if they can produce a positive effect on the one subject that matters to them. Most of them would probably go to a doctor for this if it were readily accessible.
Re:Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers by throwaway7767 on Wednesday July 13, 2016 @07:19AM (#12085308)
I don't see any ethical problem with people doing experiments on themselves. That said, they should know what they're getting themselves in for, so I applaud these researchers for highlighting the dangers.

> One could say "they shouldn't be doing that", but don't researchers want their results to be used for something, or is it just about publication?

I imagine they would like their results to be used for positive purposes. If people are misapplying the methods and permanently damaging themselves, I doubt the scientists are super happy about that just because their research got applied somewhere.