Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Defiant_Swann OP t1_ise8pok wrote

We could live 1.5 times longer if we could use technology to reduce our sleep requirements. Sleeping is a natural part of life, but we have the power to change that.

2

Rogermcfarley t1_ise9u8o wrote

Replying to Defiant_Swann (#108,578)

First Science needs to understand sleep far better than it does already. It seems absurd to try and vastly reduce sleep when it's not fully understood. So you're talking about something that is many decades away unless huge biochemical research breakthroughs are made.

https://www.spring.org.uk/2013/11/hidden-caves-in-the-brain-open-up-during-sleep-to-wash-away-toxins.php

We don't yet have the power to reduce sleep requirement to just 2 or 3 hours. We don't understand all the mechanisms behind sleep and all of its purpose.

18

wx_wxt t1_isebb7f wrote

If this ever becomes possible you can bet your ass your work hours will increase lol.

94

Remetincaa1 t1_isec5gi wrote

Replying to Rogermcfarley (#108,617)

We have the power. We don't yet have the power. But we have the power. Having the power is still great. The idea is more feasible than any other I've heard of when it comes to increasing our lifespan.

−2

itszwee t1_ised8qw wrote

Absolutely the fuck not. The only way I could see modifying the brain’s ability to sleep being beneficial would be to treat insomnia by essentially forcing the brain to sleep for a healthy amount of time. But of COURSE the first point is some trite productivity bullshit. That’s how we push ourselves into a cyberpunk dystopia where working 20 hours a day is normalized and expected. I imagine that condensing sleep into something like two hours would probably cause long term brain damage, too.

74

[deleted] t1_isedccg wrote

This would be helpful for a head in a jar but the rest of the body needs sleep for many reasons also.

Unless they're trying to dream up new and better disorders to sell medication for. In which case just tell me where to invest!

1

HighMont t1_isedmn2 wrote

Replying to wx_wxt (#108,663)

And your pay will too..at first.. and everyone will be really excited to take on those extra hours!

Then inflation will rise...and wages will stagnate.

In a decade we would be working 18 hour days to achieve the same quality of life we have at 8 hour days.

14

Sanjalis t1_iseexct wrote

Any benefit gained from such technology will be lost as employers increase work loads/hours. I mean, you don’t need as much sleep, right? So what’s the big deal?

2

OKAGAKAMI t1_isefa6e wrote

Replying to SnowyNW (#108,755)

If that’s what you want who am I to deny 🤷

But other people want to do other things, I don’t see an issue with this if people willingly chose to do it. But I feel like it would become the “norm” and become a necessity in the workplace. Sort of like working holidays or working overtime etc. no one wants to do it, but we have to.

2

LovinLoveLeigh t1_isefsov wrote

This...sounds...like someone trying to sell me a bridge.

​

Everyone is different...who's to say what is right for each individual person?

​

This sounds like a fever dream... no me gusta...nada. no me gusta nada.

​

I don't like this trend of trying to transform man into machines. You might not see that in this story, but I do.

I feel like the easiest way to improve the sleep of man is to reduce the stress loaded upon the shoulders of man...

....not this.

​

I feel like if man were to embrace this...it would lead to the further enslavement of man.

​

fuck this shit.

​

The future of technology is a grand delight, but this ain't it.

3

Lor1an t1_iseglmt wrote

Replying to Rogermcfarley (#108,617)

I don't like this kind of argument because it completely dismisses incremental progress, which is pretty much how science works.

In the process of attempting to modify sleep requirements, scientists will most likely learn more about how sleep works. I think people often forget that the beginning of a research program is typically some goal, and then the testing and methodology is constructed around that goal.

Most people doing cancer research have the goal of treating or curing cancer, not just learning more about it. But they end up learning more about cancer along the way, because that's how you achieve the goal of curing or treating it.

5

KreagerStein t1_isegm48 wrote

Oh I remember this... from one of the many horror short stories I read.

1

Rogermcfarley t1_isegqpu wrote

Replying to Lor1an (#108,880)

Read the article it doesn't give any data on how this could be realistically done. It's fine to suggest this but it doesn't show any detailed research on how reduction of sleep could be achieved.

1

SilviusWolf t1_iseiklb wrote

Terrible scientists, I have a newborn baby and already sleep 3hrs a night. Nothing new here.

10

chsch98 t1_iselk9i wrote

I just want technology that basically shuts off my brain for 8 hours, so I stop waking up 2-4 times per night and get full sleep.

6

kreamygoo t1_isewf08 wrote

Replying to wx_wxt (#108,663)

I feel you're overthinking. Even if this becomes possible there would definitely be health consequences by replacing 8 hours of sleep with 4 hours or less. What such technology holds promise is in helping people who have trouble sleeping get good sleep.

2

Rauleigh t1_isewlaj wrote

Replying to LovinLoveLeigh (#108,842)

Yeah! My instinct seeing a lot of these r/futurology articles has been that technology is advancing to the point where we are no longer adapting our environment to us anymore we are creating an environment that we must adapt to. That environment is overwhelmingly economic/systematic in a way that is unsustainable and linear rather than circular. Humans are becoming the most adaptable element of an increasingly inflexible world, so we will continue to be squeezed tighter and tighter between the gears of progress.

3

mli t1_isfdpiz wrote

what they need to study is how to improve sleep quality, i want to one day wake up refreshed.

11

Undiluted36 t1_isfjmfn wrote

I can't wait to be able to record my dream's, I love dreaming

1

PMmeyourclit2 t1_isfm92q wrote

Replying to Rauleigh (#109,737)

Most people don’t. While I at work for about 8-10 hours during the week day. There’s definitely probably 3 hours a day I spend just sitting around, whether that’s waiting for code to pull shit for me, talking to coworkers about random shit, or sitting in useless meetings…. My day could be much shorter if we just had a server.

2

scarywolverine t1_isg8dyh wrote

Replying to itszwee (#108,730)

Honestly, Ill take it. Im someone that really needs 9 hours of sleep to feel normal. Its horrible. Truly horrible to live like that. Im always tired and I either have to basically make sleep the number 1 priority in my life or always be off. This sounds like a godsend

6

OKAGAKAMI t1_isgblro wrote

Replying to Rauleigh (#109,743)

I will say that if you give up caffeine, you will realize how little you actually need it to remain awake in the morning. There are plenty of alternatives, your body and brain are just essentially addicted to the caffeine, making you feel like you can’t function without it. Giving up stuff with high caffeine was one of the best things I ever did, I still eat chocolate but outside of that no energy drinks or soda or anything.

1

Rauleigh t1_isgst1o wrote

Replying to OKAGAKAMI (#112,048)

Word! Yeah I've gone back and forth on it a couple times. The thing that is of concern/interest I think is the culture that normalizes uppers like caffeine or even Adderall to either keep up with inflexible systems/schedules or to cram in extra activities. Its not necessary but easy to become dependent on substances to supplement our bodies to fit a fast paced environment that doesn't really cater to a lot of our needs.

1

Relative_Bed_770 t1_ish44hs wrote

Humans can already live off about 2 hours of sleep a day. Polyphonic sleep trains your body to immediately enter rem when you lay down for 15 minutes every 4 hours.

1

epSos-DE t1_ishlw8v wrote

Messing with sleep is more dangerous than genetic engeneering.

​

There is a pattrn to the sleep. It needs to be itself to each person. It´s a non-standard pattern for each and everyone.

3

Ark-kun t1_ishmkr8 wrote

Replying to SnowyNW (#108,755)

Life can always be/become worse. Thete is no bottom.

Mathematically: Given x>0, you han make it 2 times smaller any number of times and it would still be >0. Life can be 2x worse than your current life.

2

Lor1an t1_ishtxt6 wrote

Replying to Rogermcfarley (#108,891)

My argument has nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of the article, just with the reasoning you provided.

>It seems absurd to try and vastly reduce sleep when it's not fully understood.

This is an example of faulty reasoning. People started constructing electric generators before completely understanding electromagnetism. Most scientists would actually gladly tell you that we still don't fully understand how almost anything works... that's kind of why they have job security.

If we waited to completely understand phenomena before constructing technology that uses it... we'd often not have the tech necessary to study said phenomena. We still don't have a good understanding of tribo-electricity, and yet that phenomenon is largely responsible for our knowledge that electric charges exist, and allowed for many of the first experimental static generators that kicked off our understanding of one of the fundamental forces of nature.

Contrary to the opinion put forth in your comment, technology and science are not cleanly separated from each other. In fact, technological advancement and innovation often precedes scientific explanation.

2

A_Vespertine t1_isi6xup wrote

Can't say I'm too impressed with this article. Mostly just vague "what if we used magnets or vibrators or something?" with little to no science, and they seem to think that twelve plus two equals three. Their list for reasons to do so is fairly repetitive, and they only vaguely acknowledge the health risks without really mentioning the social problems with it, social problems which this comment section can never point out fast enough.

For my part, I'll just say that the required customizable sensory deprivation smart bed and neuromodulation for this to effectively condense 8 hours of sleep to 2 will most likely be out of reach for the working class, limiting its potential abuse to tech bro workaholics.

1

Fadamaka t1_isiioxk wrote

Replying to scarywolverine (#111,930)

I am almost the same. What suprisingly helped is sleeping less. Like 7 hours instead of 9. If I sleep more than 7 I somehow start feeling more tired and can't get myself out of bed only after the 9-10 hour mark.

2

StationEastern3891 t1_isjt0bf wrote

Replying to mli (#114,834)

LMAO okay…for sleep apnea, your options are either the mask, a neurostimulator from a company called inspire (pretty cool), or losing weight. You’re asking for research that’s already been done.

1

eldenrim t1_isshpeb wrote

Replying to chsch98 (#109,097)

You've probably already come across this information but just in case you haven't, that's a common symptom of sleep apnea or UARS. UARS is often difficult to spot outside of a sleep study, and both conditions can be treated. Might be worth looking at.

1

eldenrim t1_issi4ud wrote

Replying to StationEastern3891 (#116,771)

No they're not.

When I got my apnea diagnosis, the masks/PaP didn't work for me, sleep specialists said the implant wouldn't suit my case, and I was underweight.

I'm hoping a few surgeries combined with more typical therapies will work in the end, but if not then I'm an outlier. There's plenty of people in that position.

Regardless, they specifically said they have complex apnea. They need to treat the central apnea alongside the things you're talking about, some (like the mask) can actually make centrals more frequent. It can be a very difficult thing to treat.

1