
A neurologist who had electrodes implanted in his own brain - myztic
http://www.wired.com/2016/01/phil-kennedy-mind-control-computer/
======
ptha
Phil Kennedy continuing the grand but dangerous tradition of self-
experimentation: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-
experimentation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-experimentation) \- From
the Chemistry section _Until recently, it was common practice among synthetic
chemists to taste newly prepared compounds. The purpose was to provide an
additional characteristic for identification, taking advantage of the
selective chemical receptors that form this sense. However, as one might
guess, this practice also led to numerous fatalities and near-fatalities._

There are many examples in medicine section:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-
experimentation_in_medici...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-
experimentation_in_medicine) which also resulted in fatalities.

~~~
mikeyouse
It's pretty amazing in most chemistry textbooks that compound descriptions
contained a "Taste" field.. I get the background but I can't imagine putting
anything I synthesized in my mouth, I was usually afraid to smell them..

------
dharma1
I wonder how general purpose biological neural networks are.

If we had a perfect brain-computer-interface, could we grow 3D brain tissue in
the lab, hook it up to a computer and do arbitrary processing on it?

~~~
dekhn
Neural networks in biology are general purpose. They have all the requisite
parts: computation and memory.

Not sure what you mean about having a perfect BCI. You could grow 3D brain
tissue and do arbitrary processing on it but it wouldn't require a perfect BCI
to do that.

~~~
dharma1
well, you would need a way to get the raw data into the brain tissue, and a
way to get the results out, no?

~~~
dekhn
Our disagreement is purely about nomenclature. If you grow brain tissue in a
dish, outside of a brain, it wouldn't be a brain. I guess you'd need a "brain-
tissue-computer-interface", which would be far simpler than a BCI.

