Merge proposal for Neurohacking and Biohacking? <\/p>\n
Wiki already cover biohacking, and the methods, technology and ontology are identical. ARAlexramonsky (talk) 10:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC) <\/p>\n
There three articles seem incredibly similar and they are also in need of clean-up \/ expansion. Why not combine them and explain all the specific techniques within one article. I did a popularity check via google on the three terms and their variants: <\/p>\n
From this view of things, I would suggest that we merge everything into neurohacking. What does everyone else think? --Ben Houston 22:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC) <\/p>\n
I respect your idea, especially after reviewing your user page. I hope that mine will reflect a similar contribution some day. Having said that, I would like to defend the wetware hacker article. It is more developed then neurohacking, and I think that it is interlinked with the definition of wetware that I revised recently. I would like to assit with your goal of Improving the Cybernetic End of Human-Computer Interaction. Bocaj 02:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC) <\/p>\n
No, dont merge. there is a clear difference. Wetware hacking is modifying the existing brain. Neurohacking includes the hacking of a simulation of a brain (which exists after mind uploading). There is a difference. Also, wireheading only involves the hacking of the existing brain - and only in one specific way. Crippled Sloth 23:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC) <\/p>\n
Rather than merging it might make more sense to further narrow and separate the definitions. Wetware hacking being more along the lines of social engineering based upon communicating via normal spoken, written, and imaging routes, done by individuals or groups, targeting individuals or groups. With nothing done to augment that, no drugs, no physical coercion, no devices, beyond devices used to transmit normal human communications, done in much the same manner as computer hacking but in a human communication sense. So humans seeking to alter the nature of humanity via the effective use of memory memes, would be a prime example of wetware hacking. So the logic follows, hardware hacking (computer hardware), software hacking(computer software running on computer hardware), wetware hacking(those things that use computer hardware and software). Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:23C:6D00:F44B:E181:2429:15F0 (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC) <\/p>\n
I believe that a merger would not necessarily be helpful and may actually confuse the issue further. Remember that 'neurohacking' is not just about the brain; it is about neurons. You can neurohack your leg or your finger if you want to. Interrupting the signal of a nerve in order to stop pain anywhere is neurohacking. There is also a problem that serious practitioners are finding that people relate N-hacking more to the sci-fi\/horror movies than the real life therapy or research [there used to be a similar problem in cryonics], and if we are aiming to be clear and informative here it's helpful to use terms such as DBS [deep brain stimulation] instead of 'wireheading'. AJ Ramonsky <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See the article here:<\/p>\n
Talk:Neurohacking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Merge proposal for Neurohacking and Biohacking? Wiki already cover biohacking, and the methods, technology and ontology are identical. ARAlexramonsky (talk) 10:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC) There three articles seem incredibly similar and they are also in need of clean-up \/ expansion Continue reading