Sure, it could have an emotional effect - same as loudspeakers, only more intimate. But proposing that someone would "mistake the experience for some sort of divine intervention or a deteriorating mental condition" is a statement about a person's view of the factual reality you live in, which tends to remain intact even in stressful situations.

My issue is not with the funding of this project or with its use in counterinsurgency operations; it's with journalism that paints (mostly Muslim) terrorists as superstitious primitives, when in fact they are thoroughly products of modern society.

Typical members of modern society wouldn't assume that voices in their heads are being beamed in by the government. It's much more rational to think you have a deteriorating mental condition. If you believe in a personal god that communicates directly with people, that's also a viable option. That's a very common belief in the US.

> Typical members of modern society wouldn't assume that voices in their heads are being beamed in by the government.

Of course they would, if a) it was common, factual knowledge that the government actively uses such technology, and b) if they were a target for such government. a) and b) will immediately be true for terrorists, if this tech gets deployed.

The original complaint was about Muslims being depicted as superstitious primitives. Your current complaint is about Muslims being depicted as typical members of modern society rather than typical members of a future in which this type of weapon is common knowledge.

I think that even in such a future, mental deterioration and religious experience would remain viable potential explanations for hearing voices in your head. Even if you were 90% sure that it was the US government, that 10% chance that you're losing your mind or getting instructions from God is powerful.

You'd probably also be psychologically motivated to come up with an explanation that doesn't involve a large well-funded group of trained killers who are out to get you knowing exactly where you are and having their weapons trained on you.

>> Typical members of modern society wouldn't assume that voices in their heads are being beamed in by the government.

> Of course they would, if a) it was common, factual knowledge that the government actively uses such technology, and b) if they were a target for such government. a) and b) will immediately be true for terrorists, if this tech gets deployed.

Governments use propaganda, sure, but "beaming voices into people's head", without their knowledge? I haven't heard of it, definitely not common knowledge. Do you have a source?

I believe the source is this article.

Yes. My reading comprehension failed. I read it as something that had been going on.

>voices in their head are being beamed in by the government.

Good point! Maybe they should also work on a lizard-person suit, or the technology to actually replace all of someone's family with robots, to help those "paranoid delusions" along.

You are right. Once technology is known, people don't see magic. Nobody interprets airstrikes as fire from the gods.

>a person's view of the factual reality you live in, which tends to remain intact even in stressful situations.

if youre forced to stay awake for a week straight your view of reality will entirely dissolve.

For which loudspeakers will do just fine, if you know where someone is with enough precision to pull this off.

But something more immersive, more discreet like this, works even better

The laser allows you to achieve that to no detriment towards your own soldiers

This reminded me of Grubber's review of the "digital touch" feature of Apple watch. It's probably similarly accurate :D

https://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch

> a disembodied voice gently beckons you to surrender

And then I'll remember this article and dismiss it / Get even more entrenched in my conviction that my "do anything to win" enemy must be destroyed.