Getting closer. At some point there will be a non-invasive nerve (or neuron) stimulator system that will replace opioids as the drug of choice. When that happens it will profoundly affect our society as people "get high" without any of the ancillary ecosystem of manufacturers, distributors, and money management firms. I expected us to be there by now with much of the deep brain stimulation research, but I also tend to be optimistic in my estimation of time to market for many technologies.
> When that happens it will profoundly affect our society as people "get high" without any of the ancillary ecosystem of manufacturers, distributors, and money management firms.
Why do you think these industries will evaporate? Who will make, distribute, and manage the demand for these devices?
You think "addicted to Facebook" means something now? Just wait until they literally have a direct line into your brain!
In all seriousness though, it's far more likely tech like this will emerge from... You guessed it, the tech sector. Large nontech companies have historically shown an unwillingness to innovate in tech, and if they get out innovated by a tech company, it's impossible to catch up. Example - amazon vs big retailers, amazon vs book sellers, etc. (I would be curious to hear counter examples)
It's hard for a big company from a predominantly nontech environment to suddenly catch up to an agile tech company years ahead in R&D and HR.
> It's hard for a big company from a predominantly nontech environment to suddenly catch up to an agile tech company years ahead in R&D and HR.
In the same way it should be hard for the "agile tech" companies to play in a highly regulated and, I would say, high responsibility market. F*cking up with your users when they are watching cat videos isn't quite the same than doing it when their health is at stake.
I don't think we (tech industry) are fast because we're "years ahead in R&D and HR", nor because we're "agile". We are fast because we are reckless and we completely overlook many, many factors (and many of them, scientifically relevant and known). Look at how the Soylent guys claim their meals are nutritionally complete. Were they able to do this because they were "agile" and "years ahead" than other companies that already play in that field? No: they are able to say (not "do") this because they're highly overlooking what nutritionally complete means - mostly, overlooking the fact that we don't know yet what exactly "nutritionally complete" means.
> Why do you think these industries will evaporate?
The primary ingredient in a 'hit' will be energy, and there is already a very well established system for delivering energy to individuals in the economy. The devices themselves will essentially be consumer electronic type devices so that demand will be filled by various factories that produce gadgets. Just as heroin use doesn't really change the spoon or syringe markets as those markets are already so large that carrying along the heroin users doesn't really impact them in any meaningful way.
> Who will make, distribute, and manage the demand
> for these devices?
Those folks will still be around, look at your typical smoke shop for a good corollary. But it is a smaller part of the drug industry than the production and distribution of the product.
If you combine that with the pain stim version into one device and give me the remote, I'll have you barking like a dog whenever I lift my little finger.
The good news is that schools don't have to drug unruly boys anymore...
