←back to thread

637 points robinhouston | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.771s | source
Show context
codeflo ◴[] 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 #
moomoo11 ◴[] No.36212742[source]
I feel like time goes by “slower” for me ever since I did a heroic dose a few years ago. Used to be stressed the f out all the time. Now I feel like I can enjoy every full second. Crazy how much time we have in life when we just stop paying attention to the negative energies like stress and instead channel them into storage for something positive later.

I’ve always been efficient and quick at learning new things and doing work. So it’s like being given a superpower to “slow” time.

(Obviously time hasn’t slowed down only for me. It’s just how I personally perceive it now.)

replies(2): >>36214318 #>>36217890 #
LastTrain ◴[] No.36214318[source]
The problem is, of course, you have no idea if that dose is what caused the change. That change in personal outlook may have been coming your direction anyway, or you may have experienced it sooner if you hadn't been doing LSD at all.
replies(10): >>36214639 #>>36214864 #>>36215141 #>>36215550 #>>36215703 #>>36217436 #>>36217648 #>>36218709 #>>36220204 #>>36225816 #
rvcdbn ◴[] No.36215550[source]
What you seem to be after is scientific evidence. The problem is that these substances by nature cannot be double-blind trialed because blinding is impossible. So as individuals we all need to make a decision whether we would like to try them or not for ourselves and the best evidence we can ever hope to get is subjective and anecdotal. If you want to deny yourself the potential of these life changing experiences without scientific evidence then that’s your choice. In my opinion it’s your great loss too.
replies(1): >>36216087 #
1. MayeulC ◴[] No.36216087[source]
> these substances by nature cannot be double-blind trialed because blinding is impossible

That's a bold claim. You can try multiple different substances, the test subjects know they ingest a psychedelic, but don't know which, which allows you to have a control group.

Clinical trials would face other issues, but not this one.

replies(2): >>36217004 #>>36218888 #
2. p_j_w ◴[] No.36217004[source]
You run into another problem here: those other psychedelics may also cause the same changes.
replies(1): >>36217342 #
3. kadoban ◴[] No.36217342[source]
It still might be worth trying though, if it can be done ethically. It's not a perfect test, but it's halfway decent?
4. rvcdbn ◴[] No.36218888[source]
i think it would be super interesting to do a study where we compared the effects of moderate/high-dose psychedelics to some other substance that had comparable subjective effects. but (a) i don't think such a control substance actually exists and (b) i strongly suspect that you'd see the same benefits to both groups - and then what conclusion do you draw from that?