[HN Gopher] DARPA developing new cognitive science tool to ident...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DARPA developing new cognitive science tool to identify those at
       risk of suicide
        
       Author : hdivider
       Score  : 24 points
       Date   : 2022-03-10 20:39 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (federallabs.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (federallabs.org)
        
       | 79843758 wrote:
       | That's horrifying.
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | As along as identifying them as at-risk doesn't equate to
       | labeling/condemning them as at-risk or suicidal without
       | protections and more traditional steps/measures (not that those
       | are fool proof either).
        
       | cf141q5325 wrote:
       | As likely to be used for suicide prevention in the end as older
       | drone projects were for "delivering aid during disaster
       | scenarios" with the required capability to identify individuals.
       | I would say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but
       | it turns out giving research some transparent lie to tell
       | themselves is more then enough.
        
         | jodrellblank wrote:
         | https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/africas-drone-...
         | 
         | >" _In Africa, doctors are also placing orders remotely, but
         | for a rather different kind of sustenance: blood._ "
         | 
         | > " _The plasma is delivered by drones to far-flung communities
         | in Rwanda and Ghana within minutes of the order being placed by
         | text message, often in a context of life-and-death like
         | childbirth gone wrong. They are the world's first national-
         | scale solution for the healthcare and emergency needs of people
         | living in places not served or hard to reach by land transport.
         | What started with blood supplies and vaccines now also includes
         | medicine, contraceptives and personal protective equipment
         | (PPE)._ "
         | 
         | ZipLine have been doing this since 2016, and are now doing it
         | in the USA too.
        
           | zigzaggy wrote:
           | I think this is a valuable contribution to this conversation.
           | You have shown how drones are definitely being used in
           | critical situations. I can't see why you're being downvoted.
           | I always try to support comments that are being downvoted for
           | the wrong reasons (in terms of the HN rules).
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | Maybe not for directly delivering aid, but drones have been
         | pretty successful in being useful for search/rescue/mapping
         | disaster areas.
         | 
         | Sometimes technology isn't immediately useful in the exact way
         | we think it will be.
         | 
         | Sent from my DARPA nuclear-war tolerant communication terminal.
        
         | wnkrshm wrote:
         | You mean like using the tool to systematically identify the
         | small changes in suicide likelihood due to parameter variation
         | of a subject's interactions/environment and then maximizing the
         | likelihood? A suicide inductor.
        
         | ChrisKnott wrote:
         | Where are you quoting from? Why would DARPA have any need to
         | conceal that it's research had a military purpose?
         | 
         | I can't find anything that says drone projects were originally
         | pitched for aid delivery.
        
         | kjgkjhfkjf wrote:
         | "NEAT would identify psychological and behavioral changes
         | before they impact military readiness."
         | 
         | I think the idea is to identify soldiers and other personnel
         | who are at risk of becoming suicidal during a military
         | operation. This seems like a good idea to me, given the extent
         | that the safety of soldiers depends on the mental acuity of
         | their colleagues.
        
       | after_care wrote:
       | This is such a moonshot. Right now, give all warning signs we
       | know if, if you could identified the 100 most likely people in
       | America to attempt suicide in the next 24 hours that haven't had
       | a previous suicide attempt or previously announced intentions of
       | self harming you might successfully identify 5 people. Answering
       | the question "who will attempt suicide" is a lot like "who will
       | have a fatal car accident ". There's a handful of obvious warning
       | signs (drunk drivers), but even those aren't strong enough to
       | allow any certainty.
        
         | polski-g wrote:
         | Suicidality is 47% heritable. So just get the blood of people
         | who have committed suicide & do some GWAS studies. Then you can
         | look for predictive genetic markers in 23andme data.
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | Ugh.. that's none of their damn business? If a person needs help
       | they can reach out and you can make remove any barriers
       | preventing them but having your mental disorder identified
       | against your will sounds horrific. Ends don't justify means!
        
         | cscurmudgeon wrote:
         | Where does it say it will be against someone's will?
        
         | unfocussed_mike wrote:
         | *sigh* HN comments are entirely predictable.
         | 
         |  _Tools_ that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour
         | could also help refine an understanding that _people_ can use
         | to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they
         | love.
         | 
         | You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach
         | out for help at all, right? And may in the days before their
         | suicide appear to be dramatically better, serene, even
         | peaceful?
         | 
         | There are likely other common patterns of pre-suicidal
         | behaviour (unusual secrecy for example), and a tool that can
         | help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might
         | stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we?
         | 
         | In DARPA's case, if those people are in the service, it _is_
         | their damn business; they have a duty of care.
         | 
         | Away from DARPA, better processes might have stopped a horrific
         | airline disaster in recent years. There are some people in
         | highly significant, routinely stressful roles who are regularly
         | psych-screened anyway. Those screenings need better tools to be
         | more useful.
        
       | newaccount2021 wrote:
        
       | api wrote:
       | DARPA (war department) works on life-saving applications of AI,
       | while private social media works on addictive engagement
       | algorithms to make people miserable and enslave them to dopamine
       | loops.
       | 
       | This strike anyone as a bit off?
        
       | Impassionata wrote:
        
       | Starlevel001 wrote:
       | Now this cuts out the annoying governmental process of having to
       | find your future suicide bombers. You can just look them up in a
       | database and assign an agent immediately!
        
         | kahrl wrote:
         | This 2022 remake of Minority Report is really a snooze.
        
       | oneplane wrote:
       | But then what? Ditch the people to avoid responsibility? Jail
       | them to prevent suicide? (and with that, avoid responsibility) Or
       | actually get to the root cause and fix that, even if the root
       | cause is society in one way or another...?
        
         | chomp wrote:
         | Military readiness is organizing and preparing the military for
         | success in the field. If members are unwell, then they need to
         | be identified, and then treated.
         | 
         | Suicides are a big problem affecting unit readiness at the
         | moment, as depression not only lowers the effectiveness of
         | individual people, but the suicide also affects unit morale.
         | 
         | Not everyone is comfortable with seeking help, especially in
         | the armed forces (due to a variety of reasons such as culture),
         | so if there are more tools to visibly see these issues (like we
         | would with standard medical issues), then that makes it much
         | easier to open up dialogue with our soldiers, and begin
         | treatment.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | > Not everyone is comfortable with seeking help, especially
           | in the armed forces (due to a variety of reasons such as
           | culture), so if there are more tools to visibly see these
           | issues (like we would with standard medical issues), then
           | that makes it much easier to open up dialogue with our
           | soldiers, and begin treatment.
           | 
           | And once again, we're seeing technology being attempted to
           | use as a band-aid instead of fixing the _actual_ problems -
           | the culture of toxic masculinity that is not just in the
           | mindset of the soldiers but also in almost all
           | advertisements, the fact that many seek to join the military
           | not out of their own will (e.g. to defend the homeland) but
           | to escape poverty, or the fact that many get sent to the
           | military by their parents either because of  "tradition" or
           | because they are seen as "rebellious" and the military should
           | "fix them".
           | 
           | Humans aren't cogs in a machine, and projects such as this
           | are only one thing: another layer to make sure the cogs
           | perform as required. Dehumanizing.
        
           | oneplane wrote:
           | But if the culture makes it hard, technology is hardly going
           | to fix that, right? Culture is a human problem, not a
           | technology problem. Technology is just a tool, and perhaps a
           | force multiplier, but a change in culture?
        
             | kelseyfrog wrote:
             | That's where the real fun of it lies. Imagine you have at
             | your disposal every tool to modify individual behavior, but
             | no tools to modify social systems? What second-order
             | effects result from solely relying on individual
             | interventions? If there are ways that make people feel ok
             | with the soul-crushing weight to social ills, is it right
             | to employ them?
        
             | SllX wrote:
             | Correct; but that doesn't mean there isn't any utility in
             | new technology for improving our culture so long as the
             | people using it want to do so.
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | Ideally you use the predictive technology to enhance and check
         | the work of humans. In reality, I agree that people usually
         | just get ditched in favor of the technology that works most of
         | the time...but not all (self-driving comes to mind).
        
       | JasonFruit wrote:
       | "If it saves even one life, it will be worth it!"
       | 
       | Even if it means preemptive curtailment of their liberty,
       | privacy, and choice, whether or not they would actually have
       | committed suicide if left unmolested.
        
       | zwkrt wrote:
       | I can imagine the dystopian sci-fi work now, of someone who has
       | been tagged in the governmental credit check system as being 'at
       | risk of suicide'. They are systematically denied access, othered,
       | and subtly offered help for mental health problems (which they
       | did not perceive themselves as having previously before being
       | suggested) causing them to be pushed to the edge of sanity.
        
         | aserdf wrote:
         | worse yet - that individual has incurred healthcare costs at a
         | greater rate than their "peer group" and the nudges turn away
         | from mental health assistance to subtle suicide encouragement
         | for the "common good" (lowering aggregate healthcare costs).
        
         | jcadam wrote:
         | Or you find yourself repeatedly thrown in the looney bin for a
         | 72 hour suicide watch. And sent the bill (see Baker Act and
         | other constitutionally-dubious state laws).
        
       | bumby wrote:
       | If I'm understanding this correctly, it essentially tries to tell
       | if someone agrees with a statement ("I want to end my life") by
       | looking at "preconscious" brain signals, regardless of what the
       | interviewee answers consciously. So is it like an MRI for lie
       | detectors? I wonder how it compares to the faults of traditional
       | lie detectors.
       | 
       | Besides the weird "precog" minority report vibes, it makes for an
       | interesting validation problem.
        
       | jrapdx3 wrote:
       | From the brief overview provided by DARPA it's not entirely clear
       | what methods or system is envisioned to do the "preconscious"
       | screening. Presumably some kind of measurement of brain waves,
       | but that seems way ahead of where the science is at.
       | 
       | In any case I wonder if this approach is really the right target.
       | It's true, the suicide rate in military (active duty and veteran)
       | is tragic, but also elevated in the general population. I'd
       | venture a guess that the issue with suicide reflects a tremendous
       | stigma attached to behavioral disorders such that sufferers are
       | dissuaded from seeking evaluation and treatment until conditions
       | reach disabling proportions or maybe not even then.
       | 
       | I have serious doubt that technological methodologies alone will
       | be an adequate solution. Of course it's possible that new tools
       | will move the ball downfield and play a role in extinguishing
       | long-standing prejudices but it remains to be seen if that will
       | happen.
        
         | bumby wrote:
         | I hate to be a cynic, but my feeling is that it's more
         | applicable to lie detection and the suicide prevention is a
         | good application (but probably far from the main goal). Cut out
         | all the suicide-specific wording, and it sounds like generic
         | lie detection that military or law enforcement would have a lot
         | of interest in.
         | 
         |  _" The screening process envisioned could involve presenting
         | various statement stimuli...or intentions (e.g., I want to [do
         | this bad thing]) to measure preconscious responses. "_
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-10 23:01 UTC)