Much like all biotech, the spectrum of use from truly (positively) transformative to the outright dystopian is very wide.

Can a similar implant be required for schoolchildren in order not to doubt what the teachers tell them to think, or feel positively whenever certain clichés are uttered? Certainly not beyond the pale in China and cannot be ruled out elsewhere. Western nations have had their bouts of indoctrination, too.

I mean, it's a bit the dilemma posed in Brave New World: what if we can create a veil that restricts our views / thoughts, but in exchange grants us happiness? When someone, for any reason, breaks out that veil, the realization that happiness only exists behind the veil and the lies is quite shocking and unacceptable for us as humans: the very realization that our happiness is built on top of lies will make us unhappy, and seeing it from the outside will often make us claim that that's a false/fake happiness.

But then, what about religion, or blind optimism, or the innocence of children? About ignorance itself? Is it acceptable to let people choose their own veils, but not to have them imposed? And if everyone accepts a certain lie, is that fair to the remaining minorities?

That's what happens when you let evolution run wild. We might have the desire to be good to others and ourselves, but we don't have the power to go all the way through.

> Western nations have had their bouts of indoctrination, too.

Does the U.S. still do that creepy Pledge of Allegiance thing at schools? From the outside that looks like straight-up youth brainwashing. :S

Is the Lord’s Prayer “straight-up youth brainwashing” too?

I went to schools in the US and UK where we said the pledge on occasion in the former and the Lord’s Prayer on occasion in the latter, and they both seemed like harmless traditions. (The UK school essentially had a religious cultural background, but turning us into observant Christians was most certainly not a goal of the faculty. Similarly I don’t think the pledge turns people into nationalists.)

Uh... yes?

If that's what both are, they don't seem to be doing what you're suggesting.

I got punished in elementary school because I didn't say "under God" when reciting the pledge of allegiance. While these means aren't 100% effective, nonparticipation is noticed, is punished, and labeling children as "problematic" for insufficient or wrong religiosity / patriotism can snowball and stick with them for life.

I’m absolutely fascinated by this debate, albeit as an amateur merely listening in.

It does feel like there’s a difference between giving someone medication that changes their mood, versus an implanted device that does the same thing. But I can’t quite put my finger on the difference. Maybe it’s just different and in a hundred years, it will be just as normal.

> Maybe it’s just different and in a hundred years, it will be just as normal.

My guess is it will be looked upon as some barbaric/stupid treatment. People are just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. The majority of it will be tossed aside when the problem is better understood.

Lobotomy used to be a valid treatment; it’s very likely this kind of brain implants will be seen in similar light.

I’m someone who needs to take such medications. Medication can be stopped voluntarily. Removing a implant, not so much.

Many people would argue people with my condition should be implanted, so we can’t go off our medication.

The pills won't get an OTA firmware update to make you think about sponsored products from our partners.

Pills can be stopped. good luck removing an implant. There is also the fact that the implant itself, competes with natural neuronal development by taking up space, and increasing intercranial pressure which is a growth stop signal. Depending on the nature of said implant, it's mode of operation can be changed at the whimsy of an external party. See the story around "Chop jobs" in System Shock/System Shock 2, where cybernetic implants are posited to be capable of automating a person's physical behaviors even against their own will. The topic is toyed with quite effectively there. It's all a matter of splicing in a bit of biocompatible chip at the right nerve endings.

Very "I have no mouth, yet I must scream."

And pills, for the record aren@t much better. Your mind and mental state are still largely dependent on access to the drug, and if you've ever tried to do anything remotely ambitious while contending with the extra restrictions placed on you w.r.t. Schedule 2 substances; good bloody luck. Though if you've got practices you@re willing to share , I'm all ears.

Taking pills is like eating, it's a think everyone does, and comes from "outside" of you. An implant is something you add to yourself. However that may be biased from what I know. Many people have hearing aids that they can't really take off, and for them it's normal. I don't know many people like that so implants seem unusual to me. On the other hand, pretty much everyone I know too pills at some point.

There was definitely a time when swallowing little round coloured artificially-produced objects was seen as weird and dangerous. It became normal when people saw enough positive side-effects. The same might happen here.

Very true, hence my mention of hearing aids.

Let me help you with the finger placement: you can stop taking pills, but I doubt you could take off implant!

> What will the world be like when we can alter our desires and patterns of thought easily?

Or worse.. what will the world be when OTHERS can alter our desires and patterns of thought so easily?

Would insurance companies "encourage" people to live a healthier lifestyle?

Would employers "encourage" people to work more or not quit?

Would governments "encourage" us to support specific policies?