Page 3 of 3

Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2004 5:01 pm
by Revan
:LOLS:

Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:49 pm
by UrLord
why make your eyesight 20/20 when you can make it 20/1? :)

I also think that a datacore full of information that I can access on a whim would have its uses...

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:43 am
by Revan
Yeah... no having to revise ever again... *Dreamy look comes over Darth*

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:30 am
by Sorus
I've made my opinions on zone implants clear on other threads; I wouldn't want any part of them. However, there are some aspects of wedding that are intriguing, datacores being high on the list.

Would I actually want one? I think I would probably go insane if I completely lost my ability to forget, but a database that could be accessed and turned off at will would certainly have appeal.

Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 12:41 pm
by Revan
But what if you could control the implants/ Would you have them then? I certainly would think on it...

Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 4:11 pm
by Variol Farseer
Nav wrote:It does indeed. Ironic that it was the Regan administration that forced the FDA to approve it.
Just because it happened under the Reagan administration doesn't mean it was the administration that did the forcing.

Actually, it was a pretty standard slugfest between two greedhead industries that don't give a damn about consumers' health. The sugar industry put heavy pressure on the FDA to ban saccharine and cyclamates, which were known to be safe when consumed in any sane quantity. If the tests on lab rats scaled up to humans — which is a dodgy guess at that, since lab rats are so inbred that they'll develop cancer if you give them a slightly rude look — then a human would have to drink something like 60 cans of saccharine-sweetened diet soda every day for 20 or 30 years to have any statistically significant chance of developing cancer from it.

Once the sugar industry got its way, the soft-drink industry panicked and desperately lobbied the FDA to approve some other sugar substitute. Result: saccharine, a fairly safe, non-toxic sweetener that could be used in small quantities with few side effects and little aftertaste, was ousted by aspartame, which is unsafe, toxic to many people, has to be used in quantity, and has a horrible aftertaste.

(Remember Sniglets? One of the new words Rich Hall introduced to the world was 'nutrasecond', defined as the length of time you can enjoy a diet soft drink before the aftertaste kicks in.)

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 4:17 am
by Sorus
Revan wrote:But what if you could control the implants/ Would you have them then? I certainly would think on it...
No, I do believe that addiction would be inevitable. As someone above mentioned, your body would become dependant on elevated levels of endorphins.

As for being in control, under what circumstances would use be acceptable? It's human nature to want to escape from pain, physical or psychological.

Yes, there are circumstances in either case where use might be acceptable. But on general principles? No thanks.