←back to thread

Messages that can only be understood under the influence of psychedelics

(qri.org)
637 points robinhouston | 4 comments | 05 Jun 23 07:27 UTC | HN request time: 0.894s | source
Show context
codeflo ◴[06 Jun 23 10:39 UTC] No.36210706[source]▶
All the people in this thread who decoded it used long exposure or faster playback. Using the latter, for me, it starts to become readable at 2.5x and is essentially a clear static image at 4x. (I had to download the video and play it back using VLC.)

Which for me, makes this claim a bit absurd:

> At a theoretical level, this confirmation is significant because it is the first clear demonstration of a real perceptual computational advantage of psychedelic states of consciousness.

LSD fans might hate this conclusion, but there's no "computational advantage" to having a 2.5x to 4x slower processing speed, which his the only thing actually being shown here.

replies(19): >>36210873 #>>36210971 #>>36210993 #>>36210999 #>>36211120 #>>36211178 #>>36211258 #>>36211287 #>>36212135 #>>36212182 #>>36212720 #>>36212742 #>>36212981 #>>36213222 #>>36213716 #>>36214681 #>>36215612 #>>36216288 #>>36216510 #
elif ◴[06 Jun 23 11:15 UTC] No.36210971[source]▶
Being able to see that which our perception actively suppresses because it is hyper-focused on a certain cadence is indeed a gift.

If you believe that our perceptive filters, evolved over millennia of survival requirements, is the only or even best way to perceive our reality, I would invite you to consider that hummingbirds will never enjoy Mozart, and you will never be as relaxed as a sloth.

replies(1): >>36211297 #
1. jabbany ◴[06 Jun 23 11:55 UTC] No.36211297[source]▶
Isn't the parent's point that, you don't necessarily need to use psychedelics but can use other technology to simulate the perception of different cadence or scale...? (E.g. A similar experiment https://xkcd.com/941/)

> and you will never be as relaxed as a sloth.

Also FWIW, does the sloth also consider itself to be relaxed or rather just "normal" ;-)

Isn't the perception of being relaxed itself exactly reflective of how artificial* the experience actually is.

*: With the context that I have no intention of prescribing whether it is positive or enjoyable.

replies(1): >>36215349 #
2. fnordpiglet ◴[06 Jun 23 16:33 UTC] No.36215349[source]▶
I’d note that the technological filter only works on captured stuff. Filtering reality like this isn’t technically feasible with external devices alone. Whether that’s useful or not seems fairly subjective, though. People find utility in all sorts of things I don’t.
replies(1): >>36216009 #
3. jabbany ◴[06 Jun 23 17:13 UTC] No.36216009[source]▶
Of course.

I'm assuming this discussion is all within the context of the original article "Messages that can only be understood under the influence of psychedelics" --- in which case understanding these specific messages actually don't require psychedelics.

Not implying psychedelics have no utility, just that whatever utility they have probably doesn't lie in interpreting these "slowed down scan" animations.

replies(1): >>36216148 #
4. fnordpiglet ◴[06 Jun 23 17:24 UTC] No.36216148{3}[source]▶
Sure - unless the fnords can only be seen in slowed down scan time.