"Digital Drugs"... a Serious News Report

[Telarus]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/digital-drugs/#ixzz0tmKAHXlH

[Jenne]

From the YouTube link of the Gates of Hades free MP3: (which sounds like shit, btw)

Conscars
30 minutes ago         Hey guys I heard of this drug that's even better than this it's called Jenkem.

[Requia ☣]

Correction: This post placed the Mustang school district in Kansas, when it's actually in Oklahoma. Kansas, the band, however might not be safe for teens, and could be a gateway band to harder, more dangerous psychedelic fare like Pink Floyd.

what the fuck?

[Jasper]

Meaning:  They're cracking wise about this, and don't take it too seriously.

[Dalek]

I actually heard teachers in our school telling students to cencetrate! Can you believe this?! Forcing them into altering states of mind. This shit has to stop 

[AFK]

So this is starting to crop up in the prevention community.  I like what is said in this article from Join Together: 

http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2010/tech-and-drugs-and-rock-and.html

Tech and Drugs and Rock and Roll
July 15, 2010

Websites are marketing music that developers claim can produce a drug-like high, Psychology Today reported July 14.

The so-called iDozer (or i-doser) tunes are based on the 19th-century discovery of "binaural beats" -- paired tones played at different frequency that have long been used to research hearing and sleep and treat anxiety. Some claim that the sounds also can increase dopamine and beta-endorphins, like drugs.

"With all the truly dangerous drugs out there accessible by your kids, I'd place Idozer on the low priority list for now," writers blogger Ron S. Doyle. "But if you happen to notice that your teenager has stopped listening to Tokyo Hotel or Timbaland and started listening to mind-numbing pink noise, perhaps it's time for a mature dialogue about the source of their motivations."

The underlined part is key.  I don't think it is necessary to freak out about the actual "digital drug".  The point of concern would be the adolescent seeking out a way to get high.  Moreover, seeking out an easily accessible and available way to get high.  It may not be a big deal, but if it seems like the adolescent has some strong motivation to find highs, it then becomes important to address that motivation and make sure it doesn't lead to experimentation with things around the home like inhalants or Rx drugs.  Particularly in the middle school or younger ages. 

[LMNO]

Good point.  However, I'd rather a kid be fucking around with two occilators than with his airplane glue.

Which reminds me, I need to generate a 1000Hz and a 1023Hz tone for the next song I'm writing. 

With any luck, I can generate some controversy.

"They's puttin' DRUGS into th' muziks!"
   \

[AFK]

Certainly, and if the conversation draws out that the kid really just likes the sounds and isn't fixated on the high, I see no reason to deprive him or her of that. 

[Template]

Good point.  However, I'd rather a kid be fucking around with two occilators than with his airplane glue.

Which reminds me, I need to generate a 1000Hz and a 1023Hz tone for the next song I'm writing. 

With any luck, I can generate some controversy.

"They's puttin' DRUGS into th' muziks!"
   \

Generating tones:
http://andyware.com/abox2/download/index.html

This program is pretty useful/fun in general, especially if you get a copy of virtual audio cable.

[Jenne]

Thing is, I think it is ok if they want to get all "wooohoooowoooo" with music, because that's still a NATURAL high to me.  It's like a runner who runs to get that endorphin rush.  It's a HEALTHY drug choice, running, isn't it?  So why isn't listening to music a healthy drug choice?  To me it's like worrying about the fatty choosing strawberries over a hamburger to indulge in.  I understand trying to not make kids into self-indulgers, but keeping them away from music because they might be iDozing seems silly...I'm the kind of parent who knows what my kids listen to and are exposed to, so it wouldn't shock me if they got into music to really get hyped up about it...I worry less about what the music LEADS to if I know WHY they are listening to it in the first place.

Chances are they are introduced to it because I make it so or allow other influences over them.  This should just be an extension of everything else in their lives.

I'd rather worry about the really REAL drugs that are out there (like the Rx ones that kids are trading around like candy, and the "street" drugs that have all sorts of shit cut into them) than music, and this lame-ass iDozing is just that:  lameass.  It's got pure placebo effect for probably 99.9% of the population (and that's probably an understatement).

[Captain Utopia]

I want to know what happens if you play one of these tracks in reverse.

[Jenne]

Sss--satan---satn--satin--sssatan--sss

Something like that

[BabylonHoruv]

So this is starting to crop up in the prevention community.  I like what is said in this article from Join Together: 

http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2010/tech-and-drugs-and-rock-and.html

Tech and Drugs and Rock and Roll
July 15, 2010

Websites are marketing music that developers claim can produce a drug-like high, Psychology Today reported July 14.

The so-called iDozer (or i-doser) tunes are based on the 19th-century discovery of "binaural beats" -- paired tones played at different frequency that have long been used to research hearing and sleep and treat anxiety. Some claim that the sounds also can increase dopamine and beta-endorphins, like drugs.

"With all the truly dangerous drugs out there accessible by your kids, I'd place Idozer on the low priority list for now," writers blogger Ron S. Doyle. "But if you happen to notice that your teenager has stopped listening to Tokyo Hotel or Timbaland and started listening to mind-numbing pink noise, perhaps it's time for a mature dialogue about the source of their motivations."

The underlined part is key.  I don't think it is necessary to freak out about the actual "digital drug".  The point of concern would be the adolescent seeking out a way to get high.  Moreover, seeking out an easily accessible and available way to get high.  It may not be a big deal, but if it seems like the adolescent has some strong motivation to find highs, it then becomes important to address that motivation and make sure it doesn't lead to experimentation with things around the home like inhalants or Rx drugs.  Particularly in the middle school or younger ages. 

Excellent point.  Digital drugs are not dangerous in themselves, and may actually be a good thing since they are an indicator.  But parents need to pay attention to the presence of that indicator otherwise the kid is going to realize that it is not getting him high and move on to something that will.

[BabylonHoruv]

Certainly, and if the conversation draws out that the kid really just likes the sounds and isn't fixated on the high, I see no reason to deprive him or her of that. 

I don't think the kid should be deprived of the sound if he is listening to it to get high either.  It's certainly a safer method than chemicals.  On the other hand it might be a good idea to also introduce other safe highs, like meditation or exercise.  I think that an urge to alter one's brain chemistry is a natural urge in some people, and finding safe ways to explore that can be much more helpful than a "just say no" approach.

[Telarus]

Interview between Klintron (technoccult.net) and the creator of the source code that got stolen and repackaged as iDoser:

http://technoccult.net/archives/2010/07/22/binaural-beats-with-sbagen-developer-jim-peters-technoccult-interview/