Brilliant idea or mad scientist stuff?

[Dr Jekyll]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-2445...

The RoboRoach. Does sound good fun.

[Mr Noble]

Looks pretty cruel to me. What's the point?

[Bodo]

Mr Noble said:

What's the point?

"the backpack had been developed solely to encourage children to take an interest in neuroscience"

Personally, I think it's great that mankind found a use for cockroaches.
I'll be investing in a couple of Roboroaches, as soon as the device is able to program insects for household duties.

[HertsBiker]

Totally sick and I did a post about it months against ago.

[Ian974]

I've got two distinct opinions on this. It is fascinating that this can be done, and that it costs so little, it is technically very impressive.
However, it does seem very wrong to me to be doing something like that. Using a set of electronics to effectively overrule a creatures brain (even something as universally despised like a cockroach) and take over its body is a horrible concept.
I guess its only got this far as generally no one cares about insects really, I could imagine the uproar if this was done to a rat or sheep or something.

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

[skibum]

Ian974 said:

However, it does seem very wrong to me to be doing something like that. Using a set of electronics to effectively overrule a creatures brain (even something as universally despised like a cockroach) and take over its body is a horrible concept.
I guess its only got this far as generally no one cares about insects really, I could imagine the uproar if this was done to a rat or sheep or something.

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

I'm not disagreeing with you, it certainly raises some moral questions. But would like to know how this differs to the non-invasive ways that humans control/use animals for our purpose.

For example, the behavioural programming of guide dogs for the blind. A noble and effective purpose certainly, but is it an example of us overruling a creatures brain/body for our purposes when it could be doing normal dog stuff?

[IainT]

Ian974 said:

However, it does seem very wrong to me to be doing something like that. Using a set of electronics to effectively overrule a creatures brain (even something as universally despised like a cockroach) and take over its body is a horrible concept.

Where does one draw the line on which organisms are fair game and which aren't? At some point it's going to involve a fairly arbitrary decision point.

Bacteria - fair game
Roach - some people get squemish
Human Baby - off limits

[MiseryStreak]

After the novelty of seeing that animals are biological machines and can be controlled by simple electronics (in much the same way as our desires are controlled by advertising) then you are basically just saying to kids that it's OK to torture animals. No science is being furthered by the repetition of this cruel experiment.

The cockroaches will have the last laugh though. After our technology has outgrown us and extinguished all human life, they will enjoy feasting on our rotting, radioactive corpses.

[IainT]

MiseryStreak said:

No science is being furthered by the repetition of this cruel experiment.

Indeed BUT carrying the experiment on further does raise the possibility of fixing certain disabilities, etc.

It's difficult moral ground.

[RDMcG]

As a scientific exercise, justified if it advances knowledge. As a toy, a horrible idea, advancing the notion that living things can be tortured. My real concern is that for a child, for instance, it leaves the impression that its ok to do this to a cockroach, so why not inflict pain on the cat or dog and see what happens??