This is novel, but maybe not as novel as it seems. EEG will show if you are looking left or right in the raw signal, and the technology for making a rat move in certain directions with implanted electrodes is not new. I still think that the motto ‘just because we can, doesn’t mean we should’ applies here, and I’m a bit surprised there hasn’t been more ethical pushback; having one mind control another, even with relatively crude technology and outcomes, feels like an ethical stepping stone that should be more carefully examined before proceeding.<p>also, just looking now at the date, it is a relatively old paper
It's a bit odd to combine the idea of this post with the one on paralyzed people sending texts with their minds. Paralyzed people controlling other creatures via their minds. Sort of a cyberpunk familiar / spirit animal.
Journals should enforce non-clickbait titles. "Mind control" and "cyborgs" are not scientific terms. Just as how "sentience when embodied" is new age mumbo jumbo. I am certain that the reviewers asked for a title change, but some authors love the clickbait. Maybe it gets them more refs?
Being in the "shoes" of that rat, it should be no fun at all to "command" going left, while your body goes right.
What do you think?