The Politics of Neuromania: The Impotence of Vision‏

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

In a previous posting I considered the difference between science and engineering as a difference between theory and practicality. In considering the work of military contractors developing neural wave technology the issue of distinguishing between invention and engineering came up. The military engineers have been handed the task of devising an electronic gadget with the capacity to alter the thought patterns of a target individual. Are they inventing the machine or are they engineering it? What is the basic difference between the two activities?

Invention of a device has very strict legal implications. Once the device has been invented the inventor has no control over how it is subsequently used. The best she can hope for is material compensation for her "genius" in crafting the prototype. Two individuals working independently can craft the same device but only one of them will be recognized as the lawful inventor with intellectual property rights. The other inventor receives no compensation for her efforts and may lose further in the legal proceedings that ultimately determine the disposition of the intellectual property rights.

An American or British entrepreneur may have the vision to create a gadget that alters or restricts the thought patterns of an individual but that vision is powerless without a team of engineers who are ready, willing, and able to implement the vision. Once they come up with a prototype device the cat is out of the bag. The original visionary has no way to rein in how or where her invention is subsequently used. Other entrepreneurs will take the ball and run with it in completely unexpected directions. If the technique can control a mind, it can also de-control a mind. Anglo-American monopoly cannot be guaranteed outside of Anglo-American jurisprudence. An inexpensive Chinese version is inevitable.

Do you see the limits on intellectual property rights as a benefit or a hindrance to human progress? With whom do your sympathies lie: with the inventor or with the engineer?

Links: Claude Crampes and Corinne Languinier on patent enforcement issues.

Comments

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

It's hard to comment on intellectual property rights of things that only exist theoretically.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

"Theoretically" implies that somewhere out there is an equivalent to Einstein's Zur Quantentheorie der Strahlung for Sophia's constant references to "neural wave machines". But it has been at least a year and half since she told me flat out that her "sources have not been published yet" even though here she is outright saying there are military engineers who have been "handed the task of devising an electronic gadget with the capacity to alter the thought patterns of a target individual."

So rather than such a device being theoretical at this point, I'd say the more apt terms of art are "hokum", "balderdash" and "bull plop".

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

It is important that a significant number of people stick with a skeptical position. There are still people around who insist that the Earth cannot possibly move. Life without them would be that much less interesting.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Giving up on you ever explaining what the fuck you are talking about is not skepticism.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Theoretical was a poor choice of words, I agree. I should've said it only exists through gossip.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

A more accurate statement is that your own personal experience with the technology is limited to what others have said.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

That's not an experience. I have not experienced seeing the moon because someone else described it to me. I have not experienced pregnancy because someone else described it to me.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

If you were blind and someone told you about the moon, you would probably call that gossip.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Onto insults, eh? I don't lack the faculties to experience what you claim, your analogy is completely wrong.

Unless one of those faculties is faith in the divine Creator of the immobile Earth, since you expect me to take this on your word just like the church expects you to take their dogma on theirs.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I was not the individual who used the term "gossip" to refer to things that others have said. If you think it insulting for me to point out the snooty way you have approached the topic, so be it.

I have worked with neural wave technology personally. I do not ask you to "believe" my observations nor do I expect you to understand the technology. This is a far cry from promoting the existence of some human-like entity that supposedly created matter and that damns people to eternal torment for failing to kowtow to it. You choose to denigrate my work in a glib manner and accuse me of insulting you for calling you on it.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Nope, the one who turned this personal was you.

Don't do that again, or you'll be in trouble. Again.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

If you actually worked on something that was so secret that you couldn't provide a source, you wouldn't be talking about it so much. That's a pretty basic breach of confidentiality.

If it's not a secret, you've yet to provide any evidence of its existence other than your word which, again, is exactly what religions do.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I have provided sources to related technology in previous postings. Nothing has been published on the project I have worked with because it is under development. I seriously doubt that anyone in our organization will be the ones to make a public presentation of the technology when it is ready for a thorough public unveiling. There are plenty of spin-off technologies that will be spotlighted in future work. The breach of confidentiality would be for me to divulge specifics on the network design or the people involved in the work. Those are things I will not do. Military contractors stuck their noses into our development environment and showed their hand without any non-disclosure agreement. That was their mistake. They got what they need from us, though. It is up to them to use it.

We do not ask you to subscribe to any creed or make any financial commitment. If you were ready, willing and able, you could conduct experiments in neural wave effects on your own or with a group of collaborative investigators. The field is wide open for scientific inquiry. The same cannot be said for religious doctrine.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

That is a nice hypothesis. How would you suggest we test it?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I can't provide feedback for things whose existence I can't confirm scientifically. The onus of evidence is on you, I can't just take your word for it.

For thousands of years people just took the church's word that the world was flat.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

This reminds me of the way that the Internet existed for decades before most people had access to it. I could see you sitting there saying that you would not accept its existence until that existence was demonstrated to you personally. For thousands of years people said that humans could not possibly fly because they were not conferred wings by a divine gift.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying 'it could not possibly exist' I am asking for proof that it exists. Again, I can't make a judgement call on something that I have to take your word for.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Nobody is asking you to make a judgement call just as nobody asked the inexperienced public to make a judgement call on the Internet before it became popular.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Nice attempt at diversion. Don't bother replying to me if you're not going to prove that what you claim actually exists.

Unless you want to proselytize more.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

You will simply have to wait until the technology matures to the point that you can connect with it or wait until you have achieved enough of a position in society that you qualify to observe a demonstration.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

What an arrogant thing to say.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

How is that arrogant?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

That's exactly what a Scientologist would say.

Next step is you offering me a free e-reader test.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I hope that my failure to promote membership in our organization and my lack of offering a promotional test will help to reassure you that we have nothing to do with L. Ron Hubbard's people.