Hacker News Reader

Sorry to be a pessimist here, but is there any evidence that you've increased your intelligence in anything that can't be trained? Dual-N-Back benefits from training, IQ tests benefit from training, and fluid intelligence is really such a subjective term its hard to tell anything based on that. Can you elaborate on the "minor issues" that it has helped with, how your "fluid intelligence" has gone up, and what your mental exercise routine is? I don't mean to be nasty, but I do have a healthy dose of skepticism about many of these topics.

Why would I consider your response pessimistic? It seems to be a totally valid remark to me.

No, there is no evidence at all. However, the medication I have been taking, is known to improve the ability to focus in people with a certain DNA marker. And I have that DNA marker and I take this medication. The same goes with tDCS, over and over it is proven to improve certain brain functions, I have been using this device for the last 3 years now, the device has built in checks that show me that the current is actually going through my skull, I've seen the studies that show the flow of the electrons and I know where the electrodes are placed. I think we can make some assertions on the effects this has had on my brain?

Regarding the minor issues, I sometimes have small bouts of depression, nothing too bad really, I never contemplate suicide for example, but still, it is nice that after a tDCS session these depressions tend to disappear. It could be coincidence, but there are research papers http://www.tmslab.org/publications/165.pdf that also seem to imply that tDCS helps with depressions.

The mental exercise consisted mainly of no longer using my episodic memory (I have very limited time related memory storage, it's really pathetic in some sense) and reading hundreds of audiobooks on the following topics:

Psychology, Early Roman Civilization, Early Christian Religion, General History, Battle Tactics, Modern Warfare, Late Christian Religions, Philosophy, Story Telling, Programming (well, I just learned that on the computer, not with an audio book).

As a result of doing that for a long time (over 10 years), 5 hours per day, I am now a theoretical subject matter expert on a wide range of topics.

> DNA marker

Can you expand on this? What is the medication you have been taking? With Dual N Back, do you think it improves WM on a temporary basis or is the increase permanent?

The drug in question is the widely known Modafinil, which I get in generic form from India. The gene is CYP2D6 [1], which I had checked by 23andme [2].

If you have the gene, when taken during the day, Modafinil allows you to focus for up to 12 hours straight, on the subject of your choosing (but you should choose something, or your attention span is wasted). With that focus, it is much easier to learn new things.

[1] http://youscript.com/healthcare-professionals/why-youscript/...

[2] https://www.23andme.com/

What's the % of humans with CYP2D6? I couldn't find any stats online. Is this something that not all humans have?

From memory, there are two gene markers associated with it and 70% of the population has one of the two.

Which SNP should I be looking at on the CYP2D6 gene in my 23andme?

Rs4680: http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs4680

Over 10 years! I am extremely impressed with your dedication. You must've spent maybe 20,000 hours listening to audiobooks, which is kind of astonishing. I would almost be more impressed if you emerged from such a regimen without being a subject matter expert.

In my experience, trying to assess the effects of a medication or technique on yourself is an exercise in frustration. Although you can do legitimate double-blind experiments on yourself, it's usually impossible to properly control the variables which can affect the outcome (diet, exercise, sleep, work, stress, relationships, etc. all have an impact).

So, I'm a big fan of the "assume it works because the studies say it should" approach that you describe. It's not clean or certain but it's eminently practical, and it has the fringe benefit of giving you a lot of opportunities to benefit from placebo :)

Thanks, you're one of the few that gets the implications of what I am doing and why I am doing it in this way.

One of the problems I ran into while studying is the decay of the information. It takes quite some time to store all this information (and even more if you try to do some hypothesizing or brain storming with multiple aspects of the information), that by the time I had a decent amount of knowledge, I started noticing that parts of it had already gone bad (proven partly or completely false after I read it) and needed maintenance.

From my perspective it didn't require much dedication. I like reading, all I had to do is make sure I read almost only non-fiction and that the knowledge maps of the subject fields overlap enough so I can get maximal understanding on the first reading. It's just an entertaining puzzle that doesn't have a predetermined outcome.

Regarding information decay, have you looked into spaced repetition? If not, I strongly suggest it, it's an effective approach to this very problem. Also, the memory palace can be very useful.

>I've combined that with my own nootropics stack and mental exercise regime, which further enhanced my intelligence, now pushing me into genius territory. It's a blessing, that's for sure, I can now much better strategize my life, but there are also some downsides, like an uptick in neurotic behavior.

That's amazing. As someone who dabbles in nootropics and casually follows tDCS, that looks fantastic and I wish you the best in the future. We're not far from something utterly fantastical in terms of human augmentation and people like you are on the forefront.

That said: What have you won with this? What have you been able to do as a near-genius that you could not have done otherwise? What about the practical correlates of intelligence, like income or social status?

I think a major flaw in many of these self-experiments is that it uses tests that seem to have decent validity, but don't cross-validate that with real-world results.

I would definitely read whatever you published; I've bookmarked your website and will extract anything I can from it.

Income wise I've reached the point where I can now spend some time trying out some new things. I won't be able to do it for years, but that is because I buy things like new Makerbots, that's really eating into my budget.

In other aspects of life, well, that's a hard one. I consider myself one of the world's first cyborgs, with several implants (I have both magnetic sensory perception and RFID implant to computer authentication to give you some examples).

The plans I'm working on now in my leisure time are full of self indulgence. I'm working on art pieces that I'll be using for my performance art work, where I'm integrating my implants with my clothing and transportation. I have all the parts and materials, it's mainly a matter of giving each aspect of the project the time it needs to complete.

So has the rate of your income growth changed after beginning these experiments?

Are the implants your projects? Would you not have been able to do them before you started with nootropes and tDCS?

Do you feel like your art is better or more refined?

I hope these questions aren't invasive; feel free to not answer any of them; I just thought it valuable to ask because there are very few people that seem to have gone as far into this as you have, you claim to have strong results, and I'd honestly really, really like to have additional motivation to continue doing them myself.

it's really noticeable and I now also score significantly higher on IQ tests

Are these current, professionally published, individually administered IQ tests? There are only so many brands of those. "IQ tests" on the Internet are completely bogus and are not validated.

The statement you make, even if observed under the most rigorous conditions with proper tests, may just mean that you are enjoying a training effect after taking so many IQ tests. Most people don't take many IQ tests over the course of a whole lifetime, and are taken by surprise by the item content of any given IQ test. Some kinds of IQ test items have HUGE training effects (also known as practice effects), and you only get one shot at using those to estimate your IQ. (The Wechsler Block Design subtest is an outstanding example of IQ test items with strong practice effects.)

How much carry-over from all this do you get in the rest of your daily life activities outside the testing room? That's always the relevant question for any intervention that is supposed to increase IQ. Does anyone else comment that you are smarter now than you used to be?

Was your experiment double blind? Have you isolated which out of your tDCS, nootropics and mental exercises are responsible for the benefits you think you are seeing? The whole thing sounds rather unscientific thus not something I would be comfortable drawing any conclusions from.

Evidence can be unscientific and yet convincing. Very little legal evidence is scientific, but is very convincing. Humans are successful as brains because we generalize very quickly from small examples, enabling us to learn quickly and adapt quickly.

Further, academia is corrupt. Very little of the work academics do is interesting. The academic process is intensely political and the probability of something getting published is as much a function of who reviews it as it is of the quality of the work, if not more. I say this as someone exposed to academia currently.

Never limit what you can draw conclusions from! Draw conclusions from anything you can observe; but do moderate the strength of your conclusion, and the degree to which you integrate that conclusion, by the strength of the process used to produce that evidence.

Given that I am constantly deeply tempted to try such experiments myself, I can say - yes, there would be much value to me. Although it's perhaps likely I won't actually try, following along is still very interesting.

Alright, that's good to hear. Is there any specific kind of information you'd be most interested in? Side effects? Actual changes in lifestyle? Should I give it a psychological focus or write it very informal?

Previously, when I've researched this myself casually, I've found the technical information to be too vague, in terms of both building the devices and specifically where to place them, why - and how it all fits in to the reviewed literature - if at all.

But I certainly wouldn't expect the sort of rigor others are asking for in this thread - obviously this is more hobby than science, and I'd consider personal reports interesting despite being anecdotal.

Hi, I would be delighted to talk to you. Please put some contact information into your profile.

Thanks. I've updated my information and I've sent you an email.

hi winfred, really interested in your project, and would like to discuss it in further detail. can you email me? ryljlly at gmail dot com