Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Trust in a Bottle

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the better-than-beer dept.

Biotech 658

flosofl writes "The BBC has a report on oxytocin and its ability to skew our trust levels. 'The participants in the study played a game, in which they were split into "investors" and "trustees." The investors were then given credits and told they could chose whether to hand over zero, four, eight or 12 credits to their assigned trustee.' Some of the investors were given oxytocin via nasal spray. The results were surprising: 'Of 29 investors who were given oxytocin, 13 (45%) displayed "maximal trust" by choosing to invest highly, compared to six (21%) of the 29 investors who were given the dummy spray.' When the trustee was a computer, there was no difference between the two test groups."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Nothing for you to see here.... (-1)

Invalid Character (788952) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710416)

What you don't trust me?

Re:Nothing for you to see here.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710510)

Now I can get my [fake mail order] University Degree /and/ real [bacterial] culture diversity all on the same certificate.... just like if I had gone to Univeristy and dorm-hopped, or eaten cafeteria food.

FROBAG (0, Troll)

Eusebio Kidjo (889048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710420)

Once FROBAG gets this trust in bottle, we will be free.

We wish to tell you of the pains we suffer. Visit us here [] to read about our cause.

FROBAG needs your help, even if you are a kalbie yourself.

"Control" group? (4, Funny)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710422)

When the trustee was a computer, there was no difference between the two test groups."

Except they were *way* cooler....

Nah, the computers sent their money to Nigeria (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710449)

In response to an email solicitation for help in getting $20 million dollars...

Re:"Control" group? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710589)

I like the novel application of existing technologies. He's using agarose medium, pipetting, and casting into a photolithographic mold.

One thing in the article that is a bit deceptive is that the article says that one can print with details as small as one micrometer . . . the size of a single bacterium. This may technically be true, but I doubt that controlling which individual bacterium are transferred (printed) or not is possible. And the neither the technique of pipetting bacteria nor regrowing bacteria on the agarose media is likely to have a resolution of one micrometer. Though the postulated one micrometer resolution may be possible, it is for all practical purposes impossible.

It's a BS experiment. (0)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710613)

First, real trust has nothing to do with gambling or business. You don't have to trust in situations like that, you just have to make decisions based on previous knowledge.

Example, if I lend you money and you pay it back on time, keep your word, etc, your word gains worth and value, and I'll be more likely to lend you money in the future. This is not trust, this is simply tracking a persons reputation. You can invent a pill to help people trust but theres no pill on earth which will make a person stupid. If this is an attempt at making a sucker pill, well its a nice attempt and I'm sure a few people will buy the sucker pill and start trusting strangers. Myself, I won't trust anyone who hasnt earned it, and earning it isnt easy, takes time, effort, and a proven track record.

Great. Just great. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710424)

Now, we're going to be inundated with junk mail drenched in pheromones.

Re:Great. Just great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710452)

I trust you're correct.

Now we know why.... (1)

quickbasicguru (886035) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710425)

I see that stuff alot in police departments, now I know why!

Re:Now we know why.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710584)

I am currently reading Gitta Sereny's biography of Albert Speer (Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth), who was Hitler's architect, then armaments minister during WW2.

He claims to have stopped the scientists from developing the bomb any further - not because he was opposed to the concept if such a weapon (he certainly wasn't). The reason was that it was clear it would need much more time than was available in order to complete the work.

What was considered feasible was the idea of an "energy producing Uranium motor" for use in vehicles, and research was switched in that direction around 1944.

Antony Beevor's excellent book on the fall of Berlin also makes it clear that the Germans' nuclear research facilities were well known to the Russian's and were a major influence on Stalin's tactical decisions regarding Berlin. He was determined to obtain the fruits of this research.

The book also makes clear that Heisenburg did not try to sabotage the programme but was eager to succeed. This view is also backed up by the famous meeting between Heisenburg and Nils Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941 and Hesinburg's views at that time.

Of course even though one new where Heisenburg was in 1941 you could never tell what direction he was taking at that time.

Quagmire... (1)

blueadept1 (844312) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710432)


Too Small of a Test (4, Informative)

rhino_badlands (449954) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710435)

For this to really be worked out you need to do multiple test on a much larger scale. The people in the one group could have just been suckers.

Re:Too Small of a Test (1)

Lucas Membrane (524640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710464)

Agree. I'm guessing that 6 is just about 1 std deviation below the mean and 13 is just about 1 std deviation above the mean. Not a compelling result at all, particularly if this is a two-tailed test.

Re:Too Small of a Test (5, Funny)

Joe Random (777564) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710509)

For this to really be worked out you need to do multiple test on a much larger scale.
Trust me, 29 people is more than enough to obtain statistically-significant results. Now where's my Oxytocin....

Re:Too Small of a Test (1)

rhino_badlands (449954) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710541)

The next hip bar drug, Oxytocin ... hey ladies I swear if you take this you will trust my every word.

Bwaaaaaa, Chicha, Bwaaaaaaa, Bwaaaaaa

"Slap" - You told me you had a huge wang, damn girl take a little more i think your trust in my word is wearing off.

Re:Too Small of a Test (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710565)

Well, over 1/3 of bombs dropped during the Warsaw Insurrection on Warsaw by Nazis didn't explode, and that was perfectly intentional. Not intentional by Nazis though - bombs manufactured in Czech factories, by people forced to work there, were frequently sabotaged to be duds. Then the rebels would take them apart and build grenades from the explosives, using them against Germans - these "home-made" grenades were the most basic weapons for that fight, as thanks to constant supply of explosives from Czech they were more far more accessible than ammunition. It seems the bombings brought more losses than profits for Germans - deep cellars and sewers of central Warsaw were quite efficient shelters against bombs that did explode, and without supply of such weaponry the insurrection would die out much faster.

Re:Too Small of a Test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710578)

Let's just ask Rush Limbaugh. He knows everything, right?

Re:Too Small of a Test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710590)

it could just be showing that trust levels between people are wildly unpredictable while the same people have a generally similar trust level of a machine.

But what is trust? (2, Insightful)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710436)

Websters defines trust as the act of trusting.

How many people are led down the primrose path to Hell by some friend or lover who we trusted completely? Whether it be some sort of suddent infidelity or a constant wearing down of trust, that person eventually broke our trust.

Now, in the light of our experience, we look at all of our future relationships through the darkened glass of failed trust. Is it any wonder that half of all marriages end in divorce now? We can't open our hearts to those we love 100% because it means that we may have our trust abused again.

The problem isn't lack of trust. The problem is, and always has been, the lack of trustworthiness.

+1 Offtopic (1)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710511)

Well said. You can't even trust the people who love you to not stab you in the back repeatedly...sorry, I'm just a little bitter.

Re:+1 Offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710574)

Since the link in your post goes the website of a fictional organisation that Doctor Who belongs to [] , perhaps the moderation of your post as 'informative' was a little misplaced?

Re:But what is trust? (1)

jay-be-em (664602) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710529)

so what was her name?

Re:But what is trust? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710539)

so what was her name?


Re:But what is trust? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710562)

First, if you look at the diagram [] for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.

Re:But what is trust? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710592)

This is great! There might be hope after all! Maybe in 60 years the US will find diagrams of WMD in Iraq!

Re:But what is trust? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710582)

Actually, if Hitler had nukes, he would most likely nuke himself.
They overestimated the amount of material needed, by at least an order of magnitude.
If this thing detonated near some observation bunker, all the audience would most likely evaporate. And even if they didn't, Hitler would try to lug the bombs by trains to Russia and by seaships (not u-boots) to US coasts. They would be far too big for a plane.

Politicians... (1)

Hogwash McFly (678207) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710443)

But one expert warned it could be misused by politicians who want to persuade more people to back them.

For some reason I picture Honor Blackman flying over the electorate on election day, spraying this 'trust potion' from light aircraft.

Re:Politicians... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710514)

I can't possibly be the only one who immediately thought "game of life" ... can I?

Too bad it'd never work - not unless you could find some REALLY weird bacteria, anyway.

Re:Politicians... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710583)

It's no secret that Heisenberg []

umm... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710444)

exactly how do you give oxycontin to a computer?

Re:umm... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710491)

i'd say for about $20 a pill

**NEW** From RONCO! (4, Funny)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710445)

Oxytocin scented heavy duty condoms; sold at truck stops everywhere!

Political ads and Smellovision (1)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710450)

A match made in Heaven. Nevermind the uses in schools, stores, and indoctrination centers like national political and Amway conventions

The question on all our minds... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710451)

So will this help me finally get laid?

Re:The question on all our minds... (1)

HermanAB (661181) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710500)

No, but if you would shower daily, your luck would probably improve. ;-)

Re:The question on all our minds... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710570)

He takes a tip from the silicon chip makers and uses the same type of technology to etch a pattern in a wafer. Then he creates a mold (like a mask, not like the stuff growing in the crotches of slashbots) which he can use repeatedly as a printing template.

Since a lot of bacteria grow resistant to antibiotics, it makes sense to use this kind of "printing press" to study how they create their protective biofilm. As a species, we are slowly succumbing to our own success at killing off bacteria. However the rise of super-bacteria that are immune to our medicines is a huge worry. If this type of research can shine some light on why these bacteria are so resistant and how we can control them to be less dangerous to us, then we will be able to hold off our extinction for a few more years.

When the trustee was a pregnant lady, however ... (1)

gonerill (139660) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710453)

Re:When the trustee was a pregnant lady, however . (1)

figurewmeat (800120) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710538)

"Oxytocin is the most commonly used labor-stimulating agent. Other methods of stimulating labor include nipple stimulation..."

Suddenly, my mind is making way too many connections.

Effects of virtual trustee? (4, Interesting)

Sv-Manowar (772313) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710455)

Its interesting that when a computer was the trustee, there was no measured effect from the oxytocin. If this effect is replicated for all non-human interaction, then the use of this on a larger scale would seem to be limited. However, there are interesting repercussions for the use of this kind of thing in business negotiations, where there can be control over the environment and a degree of trust could have a vital swing in decisions made

Being able to 'over-ride the fear of being betrayed', as it is put in the article could be a powerful factor in swaying decisions, and I would hope that by the time of any mass-market availability or application that ways and means of testing would be available for those environments that require 100% impartiality.

Re:Effects of virtual trustee? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710552)

Agreed, it looks more like someone's fantasy about what a 1940s era atomic weapon should look like than a real one.

Is it possible it was a design "speculated" from spy reports from the allies? It does capture two crucial design decisions (gun assembly and plutonium core), but manages to mix them up in a single entity. Which would be an easy mistake to make if one was relying on shaky intelligence from someone close to the Manhattan project, but not too close.

The design still looks approximated though, and does not take into account the scale or space requirements of a v2-type rocket.

Re:Effects of virtual trustee? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710586)

Yes, and it is widely thought that Heisenberg delibertly made the "mistake" in the calculations to impeed Nazi efforts to create the bomb. If he did, it was a brilliant move. It made the concept of a bomb far more difficult in the design, the amount of material apparently required (Ten times as much as the US needed for Little Boy) and deployment (A Nazi bomb would have been huge, if it had ever worked. The US Little Boy wasn't exactly small as it was.)

I bet they sprayed some on their research paper (2, Funny)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710456)

The lengths some people will go to to get published.

Number of participants (2, Insightful)

sH4RD (749216) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710462)

29 huh? Doesn't that seem a little low for good experimental results? I mean, 13 to 6 isin't really that signifigant of a number in the long run. I'll wait to judge until this study is repeated.

Re:Number of participants (1)

l3prador (700532) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710534)

Yah, 29 is a pretty ridiculously small test sample. It doesn't seem nearly high enough to be statistically significant. Also, did the "trustees" know if the "investors" had been given oxytocin? Their confidence in the oxytocin could have easily affected their ability to convince.

Crap... (1)

rel4x (783238) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710467)

This may sound like a joke, but it's not intended as such. Is it possible we could see this as the next form of date-rape drug? It seems like it would be much harder to tell if someone had injested it (they wouldn't pass out or be too tipsy)...this could be bad...

Re:Crap... (0)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710478)

What's the difference between something like this and naturally occurring pheremones?

Re:Crap... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710502)

>> then we will be able to hold off our extinction for a few more years.

We're not in danger of becoming extinct from bacteria resistance. We adapt too.

Re:Crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710516)

considering that it's not possible to rape the willing... well, you do the math. interesting moral questions aside, this is pragmatically some really bad shit, potentially. every time i hear about this kind of thing i keep thinking that getting rebuilt into cold unfeeling silicon can't possibly come fast enough. i hate being a black box.

Sniffy Goodness (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710471)

Whatever happened to that "smell-o-vision"-type odiferous computer add-on from a few years back? Is this the trick that Bill will use to keep us using Windows?

Seriously though, odours *are* powerful memory triggers. "Deja-Pew", sort of.

Re:Sniffy Goodness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710503)

It seems a lot of interesting science happens at the spatial/topological/geometrical level.

E.g. those bioplaques can be real killers. Models of bacteria that assume they are all evenly distributed in 2-space or 3-space really don't cut it.

Same thing with blood vessels. They aren't solid tubes, like the plumbing in your house. There's all sorts of transverse stuff happening that doctors fail to model and take into consideration.

Or materials science -- all the "edge effects" that people like to ignore, because they are necessarily messy.

If this advance allows them to study different geometries of bacteria cheaply, that will be a big step -- they'll be able to run big batches of simulations of different layouts. Hopefully they'll get their models right and do better work.

I will wait awhile (1)

823723423 (826403) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710479)

I'll trust the researchers when I try it out myself.

Re:I will wait awhile (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710506)

Just remember not to use anti-bacterial soap on your bacterial printer. Otherwise, you will void the warrantry.

Re:I will wait awhile (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710606)

Maybe not a classic atomic bomb. But I remember reading somewhere that the Nazi bomb would have been something closer to a "dirty bomb". Which spreads radioactive material with conventional explosives.

In 1945 the Germans put their supply of uranium on a submarine, with the intention of delivering it to the Japanese. I imagine a dirty bomb would have been the most likely purpose. More information here [] .

'Trust in a bottle' (1)

wall0159 (881759) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710483)

Perhaps this is a bad reflection on me, but my immediate reaction was:

'heh - I've oftentimes placed my trust in a bottle...'

but I've been known to drink rather heavily, I guess ;-)

Re:'Trust in a bottle' (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710505)

This sounds like a good way to study computational properties of bacterial colonies. By printing them like this, perhaps they would be able to get them to behave in ways that would perform useful information processing. It might also end up acting as some sort of "interface" to DNA computation.

Whether we'd be able to get them to behave in reproducible ways would be the question.

Here are some links. The first has some interesting photos of bacterial colonies-- similar to cellular automata, because hey! They are! And the second is a link to an article on bacterial colony computation. Or maybe they're both to Goatse. You won't know until you click. []

Re:'Trust in a bottle' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710603)

It may be too difficult to read given the poor-quality reproduction on the BBC article, but if possible could somebody translate the labels on that diagram?

From what I can tell, it looks to be a straightforward version of the "gun design" used in the Hiroshima bomb, which a) is so obvious that I think even I could have figured out the basic concept, and b) won't work with real plutonium as Pu-240 contamination will cause the weapon to blow itself to bits before enough of the plutonium has fissioned. So, even if it was true, they had a very long way to go before they could have made a bomb.

An implosion design, by contrast, would be a much bigger deal, though as I understand it just having the idea is a very long way from making it work.

Two final things: one of the reasons why the Nazis never got very far on their nuclear weapons project is that they could never get a reactor working; one of the key reasons for that was their supply of heavy water was kept from them by Norwegian partisans working with British SOE. Their story is a pretty amazing one [] .

And finally, while it's not possible to make a plutonium gun bomb now; it should be possible in the very distant future. Pu-240 (the contaminant) has a much shorter half-life (about 6500 years) than Pu-239 (about 24,100 years). So, over (lots of) time, the proportion of the Pu-240 should gradually reduce. So maybe these Germans were just a little ahead of their time.../p

Shower == Trust Worthyness (1)

HermanAB (661181) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710484)

Well, duh... The 'unwashed masses' have never been trust worthy... Who will you trust better: A doctor smelling of ether, or a doctor smelling of cheap wine?

Such Hogwash (0)

carn1fex (613593) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710488)

WOW, you give people heroin (which is what Oxycontin is) and they suddenly form bonds and empathy with one another quite easily! Shocking! Isnt this amazing 'trust' part of the collage of emotions surrounding why we all like to get drunk and high around one another in the first place? I'd like to see this study repeated with the subjects having 4 shots of whiskey first or if you wanted to see a remarkable 100%, give them ecstacy.

Re:Such Hogwash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710519)

Stanislaw Lem predicts it about 20-30 years ago in some of his novel.

Re:Such Hogwash (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710525)

That's oxycontin -- we're talking about oxytocin.

Different thing altogether.

Although with a jar of both I imagine you could have a heck of a party.

At the end of which, (wait for it), you'll probably need some OxyClean.

Re:Such Hogwash (1)

2ms (232331) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710526)

Oxytocin not Oxycontin

Re:Such Hogwash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710564)

Well, ten times or not, the draft designs of "hopefully workable" bomb were devices weighting about 200 ton. NOT transportable by plane. At best by a ship/train (but if by train, then in parts, to be assembled at the detonation site.)

By all accounts Nazis were closer to developing a working flying saucer [] than a working nuclear bomb...

Re:Such Hogwash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710531)

It's OxyTOCIN, not OxyCONTIN.

Re:Such Hogwash (1)

VistaBoy (570995) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710546)

It's the hormone Oxytocin, not the narcotic Oxycontin.

Re:Such Hogwash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710557)

Wow, not only are you incapable of proper punctuation, you can't read!

Re:Such Hogwash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710566)

RTFA, it isn't oxycontin, it's oxytocin. Big difference.

Re:Such Hogwash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710571)

Neither of which would have been terribly impressive, since they would be ground-bursts and not much different from a few tons of dynamite.

If dynamite caused radiation sickness and cancer, this would be exactly right. As it stands, however, even a Nazi dirty bomb would have had at least a huge psychological effect, if not a very large military one.

It might have opened our eyes to the true dangers of radiation sooner, but I don't think so. It could be an interesting jumping-off point for an alternative history story: What if it gave other groups the idea to make their own dirty bombs in the unsettled postwar years?/p

Re:Such Hogwash (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710596)

You are not correct. OXYCONTIN indeed is an opioid, considered to have strong potential for abuse, but used medically for pain management. OXYTOCIN is a hormone naturally occuring in the human body. It has a broad range of effects, and is used medically for induction of labor in certain situations. The two are completely different substances. In the future, please considrer to RTFA and, for that matter, to google the **actual** subject of discussion before posting!

that reminds me... (1)

Paladin144 (676391) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710489)

I know about a great investment opportunity in Nigerian gold which involves extremely complex financial transactions to offshore accounts! It's certainly not a pyramid scheme and it comes with a free nasal spray!

Humor impaired moderators: the preceding was an attempt at humor.

Re:that reminds me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710569)

dirty bombs are completly ineffective though. the us military has looked into their use. the radiation from one is confined to too small an area. ensuring, with a large enough explosion that a larger area is covered just lessens the amount of radioactive material in a given area, lessening the effect. either way it is a simple cleanup operation.

Re:that reminds me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710605)

Nobody knew about those properties of radioactive materials in WWII. That is one of the reasons the US decided to use nuclear bombs on Japan. You have to remember that bombing was amazingly imprecise back then. If you wanted to take out military bases and industrial production in a city you pretty much leveled the city trying to do so. Bombing strategy was to drop a whole mess of bombs in the general area (we are talking like quare mile here) of your target. By chance some of them would hit it.

So the appeal of the atomic bomb wasn't it's additonal features, those were unknown. It was just thought to be a really big bomb. Rather than needing to send hundreds of bombers and dropping tens of thousands of bombs, you could send in just one bomber and drop one bomb. You'd risk a lot less assets, eliminate targets much faster, and save lives (yours at least) and money.

You also have to remember that, even had it been known what a direty bomb was, nobody would have been impressed. For one thing direty bombs are pretty fucking worthless militarily. Most radio active elements, but particularly the ones we are tlaking about here (uraunium and plutonium) are very, very heavy materials. This means their airborne time is very low. Well if you just spread them around, you really aren't going to cause a lot of effect. They need to get inside people to do real damage, or people need prolonged exposure. Just being externally exposed to a little uranium lying somewhere near you won't do much.

Also you have to remember this was a very, very dirty war. It was pretty much no holds barred. Gas attacks of various kinds, of example, were used. Civilians died all the time just due to the nature of war. As I said, you'd take out an entire city to try and take out it's infastructure. So if you managed to make a few hundred people sick with radation poisining, oh well, big deal, people were dying all the time from the war.

Oh, for a second there.... (1)

LoRdTAW (99712) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710490)

For a second there I thought they were talking about oxycontin. High on that you might trust anyone.

Re:Oh, for a second there.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710504)

it's a neat process. before i read the article i'd pictured an inkjet-esque approach. probably a good thing they didn't go that way --- can you imagine how much consumables would cost? to say nothing of issues related to poor quality drivers...

Re:Oh, for a second there.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710507)

Trying or not (and some certainly were) there's little doubt that Nazi scientists were a long way from the bomb. Indeed, due to a widely circulated (and accepted) mistake in a calculation about the mass of Uranium required for a chain reaction, many believed it impossible.

There are transcripts and tapes of British debriefings at Farm Hall [] after captured German scientists were informed about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and most express complete incredulity that the US scientists had succeeded.

If memory serves me correctly... (1)

Tuxedo Jack (648130) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710492)

Isn't this a hormone supposedly released during the female orgasm?

Re:If memory serves me correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710508)

remain unexploded for a long period, then detonate

Like land mines in Vietnam and Cambodia?/p

Re:If memory serves me correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710527)

"Lisa, look -- I'm really sorry I've been sleeping with my secretary at work. I never thought you'd come looking for me in the janitorial closet at 2am on a Sunday morning."

"Harold -- there's no excuse for this -- I want a divorce, and I'm taking EVERYTHING! INCLUDING THE DOG!"

"But, Lisa -- I really want to apologize -- this card says it all..."

"Card? What? How pathetic...oh...wait...what a wonderful photo from our wedding, Harold..."

"Yeah -- I made it myself with a new printer we got at the labs at the office..."

[wife reads card -- eyes tear up -- lip trembles]

"Oh, Harold...I love you so much...I accept your apology..."

[wife tries to kiss husband]

"Wait -- I'm not worthy of that kind of love just yet...give it you know it's real again..."

"You're right, Harold. I'll read this card over and over and remember that you're going to make an effort to be better and more faithful..."

[28 days later]

"Well, Harold -- it's the weirdest thing..."

"What's that, doc?"

"I have no idea how your wife got a case of bubonic plague. Did you guys have rats in your house?"

"Nope. Really odd. Oh, well."

"It's a mystery to me, Harold. She died such a painful death."

"Yes...she did... Well, I'm off for an appointment. Gotta pick up my secretary. See ya doc!"


Re:If memory serves me correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710573)

Third, it is undated, and unnamed, from an unknown source. Not worth even reading.

Not worth reading, yes, but for the weak minded, it will suffice. Am I the only foil-hatted one to suspect this piece of yellow journalism was timed to sow some additional fear/causus belli over the Iranian bomb program?

When I heard the soundbite over ABC Radio, there was absolutely no question by the news people as to its veracity, only a verbatim repeat of whatever the original source was. Thanks for nothing, press.

And to reiterate, the Nazi bomb program never got past a quite preliminary phase before more pressing matters, such as Germany's deteriorating strategic situation, as well as their own misallocation of resources among hundreds of competing defense programs, caused them to abandon the atom bomb./p

Re:If memory serves me correctly... (1)

merreborn (853723) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710585)

Isn't this a hormone supposedly released during the female orgasm?
Google brings up a couple sites calling it "the touch hormone", released by physical contact, as well as orgasm.

So you trust people who touch you. Interesting.

Re:If memory serves me correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710602)

Is there an inverse Godwin's Law? "Any discussion of the Nazis will inexorably tend towards a discussion of Godwin's Law"


UberGeekEdward (857976) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710494)

I can see the main motivator of the next election. Just imagine the possibilities, a new date rape drug, a new advertising method, and a court ordered "trust" session to get at "the truth"

Say good bye to tin foil hats! (1)

kryogen1x (838672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710497)

Unless you want a tinfoil gas mask or water purifier.

Re:Say good bye to tin foil hats! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710568)

I actually did RTFA. This basically seems like a neater way to make a Petri dish.

He uses bacteria as 'ink', and presses the bacterial mold onto a sheet to produce a bacteria pattern.

I'm not exactly sure why this is better or worse than simply pipetting bacteria into a large petri dish, though.

Re:Say good bye to tin foil hats! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710607)

Germany invested a lot in rocketry research, and the V2 wasn't the only thing the had designed.

Ballistic missiles are known by everyone because of the cold war hype, but with that era's technology and bearing in mind that they didn't need to go all the way to america with it, a cruise missile is where it's at. I.e., a rocket with wings. You don't have to launch the thing upwards with a rocket to hit Britain from France, you can just as well launch it horizontally or on a flat arc and use wings to provide the needed lift. Like the V-1 did, for example.

And they did research and build just that too: rockets with wings.

The Me-163 Komet for example was an interceptor aircraft with a liquid-fuel rocket (not turbojet) engine. It reached a speed of approximately 600 mph (almost 1000 km/h) and had a maximum range of about 80 km.

Nasty thing and more dangerous for the pilot than for the enemy, but to chuck a small bomb without a pilot across the channel it would have worked outstandingly.

And I have no doubt that, if they absolutely needed to chuck a 4 ton bomb (the weight of the hiroshima bomb), they could have slapped 2, 3 or 4 of those engines on an airframe with bigger wings.

It's a lot easier to design such a one-shot contraption, when you don't have to worry about being able to land safely, or about structural damage during flight. It can, for all you care, come apart at the end, as long as it does it on the other side of the channel.

duh (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710513)

opiates lower inhibitions.

err Re:duh (1)

vena (318873) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710560)

i believe you're thinking of oxycontin. it seems lots of people posting are making the same mistake. this isn't the pain killer oxycontin, this is oxytocin which is used to induce labour and breastfeeding.

Re:err Re:duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710593)

I live in Linz, Austria, where the "Hermann-Göring-Werke" (a huge steel-producing factory) were (now known as "VOEST"), and the Allies (mostly US-American bombers) dropped an extremely high number of bombs there, a lot of them designed to explode after up to 144 hours. They still find unexploded bombs now and then, all over the city, and people still die from exploding bombs, like a few months ago, where one bomb exploded after building workers accidently hit it with an excavator, who were killed by that. And they had to barricade a huge area around that, because they found another unexploded bomb and feared the 144 hour timer could have been activated by the first explosion. Oh, that was the worst incident within the last year, but often enough, roads get blocked for several hours because they have to defuse some bomb they found somewhere, which happens about every one or two months or so. Very "nice".

I'm interested to find out... (4, Interesting)

gnovos (447128) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710521)

I'm curious how this affects the "trust level" of people who were previously burned, especially by the person you are expected to trust. Is it just automatic, or do you still have some ability to balance it... If not, this could turn out to be the holy grail for all kinds of good and evil purposes.

Re:I'm interested to find out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710563)

a thing of the past. You already have to watch out when opening hand addressed mail for anthrax and shit like that but you have just lowered the bar for spreading viri.

Now it doesn't have to come by an email either.

Send something that looks like junk mail to a congressman's home in the winter and you can just see the trail of death and destruction because the ink itself could kill you. (ebola 'flavoured' ink anyone?)

I don't think this is too smart but the cat's out of the bag now. Pretty soon we're going to need transparent exo-skins to do anything. (Think about it.)

Perfect scam combo... (1)

dotslashdot (694478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710548)

Dear Reader: Enclosed is a free sample of oxycotin. We are sending to you because we are in a bind you see. The Nigerian department of South America has $10 million dollars from the government to Rush Limbaugh's school of Churches. We need you to wire us $5000 immediately to help free this money from government oppression. thank you, Ubuntu

Who's to say (1)

vandelais (164490) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710550)

that Oxycontin skews our trust levels.

Maybe it's the abscence of oxycontin that skews our trust levels to the negative.

If you ask people, they SAY they would prefer to live in a more trusting world. To the extent we can choose our attitudes instead of having our attitudes chosen by survival instinct would be a good thing.

Wait. I'd better call my broker and ask him how that VA software stock I bought is doing.

Re:Who's to say (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710594)

They were giving nuclear material to the Japanese, or at least trying to. []

Intense (1)

mschoolbus (627182) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710567)

I don't know if anyone else here has tried it.

But the 40mg pills I had were way too crazy to be taken whole, generally a quarter to half pill. Quite a step up from your vicodin or percocet.

Re:Intense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12710591)

several? hundreds of UXB's (Unexploded bombs) have been found in east London and the old industrial areas of the UK after blanket bombing during WWII.

If you drop hundreds of thousands of various types of ordnance onto an industrialised area then as much as 20% will not explode. Even ordnance flung into Baghdad some 60 years later didn't all explode on impact.

I doubt this was intentional.

The significance of the computer? (1)

SurgeonGeneral (212572) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710575)

From the article:

When trustees were replaced by a computer, the oxytocin effect was no longer seen on the investors.

I find this fact to be of most interest.

But the question is, how was the computer being operated? was there a human typing things to the investors through a computer, or was it an AI asking various preprogrammed lines of questions and taking various approaches? The difference being, if its a human operating the computer (one of the same humans that were getting higher trust responses when in the flesh) that means a lot of what has to with trusting depends on appearances and the expressiveness of the human body, and we generally agree when rationally approaching a trust situation. On some level this holds true even if its an AI.

Trust isnt a chemical, its a lack of logic. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710577)

If you lack the ability to judge with logic then perhaps then its a chemical, but I always thought that trust is based on experience, logic, character of the people you are dealing with and a lot of other factors, and even then its never absolute.

lame on! (1)

Mr.Zong (704396) | more than 9 years ago | (#12710600)

"Civic alarm at such abuses should have started long before this study."

Bad scientist, no heaven.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>