When considering its purpose, does anyone else find something distasteful (to put it much too politely) about the whole idea of this experiment?
And then there's this. https://www.wired.com/story/neuralink-uc-davis-monkey-photos...
back
3 comments
Do you mind being more precise about what you find distasteful about it? The paper writes that the larynges came from animals that were deceased due to illness:
The larynges were harvested from animals that had to be euthanised due to terminal disease unrelated to the respiratory tract in veterinary clinics in Vienna, Austria. The animals’ owners gave their explicit consent for the larynges to be investigated postmortem.
No, this is 'science', following decent ethics - deceased animals that were donated to science by their owners.
Perhaps discovering the source of purring isn't the deepest mystery cats could unlock via donation, but it's ethical, and might give us some insights into how the 'healing properties' observed by cat purrs works, or how to mimic it, either for vetinarian, or human medical purposes.
Whereas neuralink is just killing healthy animals for eventual profit.
In this case it was done in Austria, and on excised larynges of postmortem pets.
> The animals’ owners gave their explicit consent for the larynges to be investigated postmortem.