Biological Arbitrary Code Execution

It'd probably require some heavy drugging to fuck up nerve signals or something.

Fundamentally, ACE on a living being would just be brainwashing. Break down the target's mental fortifications and reconstruct them to your desires. As much as the brain is described as an organic computer, it's not a completely accurate statement, and stuff like this doesn't have clear cut equivalents outside the realm of science fiction. You can't just Basilisk your way into the "bytecode" of the mind, not unless you're writing a book where that's the case.

Though, if you want something to think about, consider a case where you can control the flow of information a person is able to consume. By manipulating what they are exposed to, don't you think perhaps you can get them to arrive to a conclusion of your choosing?

The use of permitted inputs to achieve unintended but permissible outputs, even if it doesn't mean running your own neuron signals on the target brain.

Maybe that's just Zersetzung though.

>>59131848
>Maybe that's just decomposition though.
?

If you're looking for arbitrary organic machines peep Synthetic Biology.

Programming life is the future.

>>59131964
Old German trolling technique, probably most famously used by the Stasi way back in the Cold War days.

Check one of the videos big think uploaded today, might be relevant.

>>59131848
This is what I'm thinking and I know it goes on to an extent already today.

>Though, if you want something to think about, consider a case where you can control the flow of information a person is able to consume. By manipulating what they are exposed to, don't you think perhaps you can get them to arrive to a conclusion of your choosing?
That's how they do it.

But what about something IMMEDIATE and undeniable? Not a long-term coercion but a rapid flash of stimuli and BOOM 'brainwashed'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLIT_(short_story)

Nothing because the brain doesn't exist and you can't manipulate the soul

>>59131217
We call them SSRIs, a kind of antidepressant.
We call it epilepsy, an electrochemical imbalance caused by exposure in some cases to external stimuli.
We call them virii and prions, chemicals that have structural impacts on cells in the body.

>>59135302
Not the same thing.

>>59135067
This is exactly what I'm talking about

>>59135358
How are they not the same? I'm not saying you're wrong, but more info would help to narrow it down.

If you like blit, look up the McCollough effect

>>59135092

There is easily verifiable evidence of the existence of the brain, and we know rather well that it can be manipulated. There is no evidence of the existence of a soul.

>>59135395
I think the closest thing you listed would be an epileptic seizure in response to flashing lights.

But I'm imagining encoding data in an image that when looked at downloaded a thought directly into your brain. You could put an entire book in one of these images and instantly "read" it.

>>59131217
>>59131848
>>59131848
The proper analogy for a brain isn't a processor but rather a general IC.
Thus you can't run "arbitrary code" because it's not really running code at all.
But you can feed it unexpected or malformed input and get unusual and interesting results. Or a crash.

>>59135521

>The proper analogy for a brain isn't a processor but rather a general IC.
I think you'll find it's a self-modifying FPGA

>>59135480
Read snow crash, which another poster here alluded to. No such thing exists in real life, though. The brain doesn't really execute code.

Typically, encoding thoughts into copyable and parsable tokens we call art. Writing and diagrams tend to be precise ways of encoding thoughts of processes and objects, music and other arts tend to evoke emotions as well.

It's not as sexy, but that's only because it's common. It's slow speed and effort is because encoding thought is hard and slow to parse. But it really is the closest thing, except if you want to really force the computer analogy, it's being interpreted by software (our consciousness) rather than hardware (the brain)

>>59135565
>Typically, encoding thoughts into copyable and parsable tokens we call art
That's too high level though.

I want 'low level' art. No interpretation needed. Just *poof* 'I know kung fu'

>>59135593
The brain doesnt operate at such a high level. Hacking the cells that make up the brain will probably never allow you to learn new skills.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is the current cutting edge of this sort of research, and even then it's been found only to help with speeding up those conscious processes. It allows you to learn faster and better, but you still need to put in the conscious effort to learn.

>>59131848
There probably is.

I mean we already do propaganda/mindcontrol on mass of people. Those subject under propaganda believe what opinion they hold is their own. They will defend those propaganda as if it was just another view they hold.

Look at China. Decades of propaganda has created a very strong nationalism.

Look at US, constituents believe their parties hold interest in them, when they go against what they need.

Look at advertisement companies and their methods. Its very effective.