Okay, this is creepy: Scientist controls colleague's hand in first human brain-to-brain interface
Scientist controls colleague's hand in first human brain-to-brain interfaceUniversity of Washington researcher Rajesh Rao sends a brain signal to Andrea Stocco via the Internet, causing Stocco's right hand to move on a keyboard.
by Dan Farber
August 27, 2013 12:09 PM PDT
University of Washington researcher Rajesh Rao, left, plays a computer game with his mind, while across campus, researcher Andrea Stocco wears a magnetic stimulation coil over the left motor cortex region of his brain.
(Credit: University of Washington)
The telepathic cyborg lives, sort of. University of Washington scientists Rajesh Rao and Andrea Stocco claim that they are the first to demonstrate human brain-to-brain communication. Rao sent a signal into a Stocco's brain via the Internet that caused him to move his right hand. Brain-to-brain communication has previously been demonstrated between rats and from humans to rats.
"The experiment is a proof in concept. We have tech to reverse engineer the brain signal and transmit it from one brain to another via computer," said Chantel Prat, an assistant professor of psychology who worked on the project.
In a press release, the experiment was described as follows:
The mind-meld between the researchers wasn't seamless. Rao spent time training his mind, with feedback from the computer, to emit the brainwave for moving the right hand so that it could be detected by the computer. "The intention can be as detectable as the movement itself," Prat said. "Brain-computer interfaces have been capturing this with increasing accuracy over the last decade."
When the software sees the right signal it is sent via the Internet to a computer connected to a transcranial magnetic stimulation device, which is positioned on the exact spot of the brain that controls the right hand. "It uses simple physics," Prat said. "When the magnetic field changes, it induces an electrical current, so a signal is sent through the cortex of the brain and excites the neurons, simulating what happens naturally."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57600284-76/scientist-controls-colleagues-hand-in-first-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
= new reply since forum marked as read
The Legion of Madfellows had it right. 
Response to FourScore (Original post)
The problem is knowing exactly what to wish for, and then knowing exactly how to wish for it.
The dilemma has been unsolvable so far because no one has the clarity of omniscience. Trying to stop "evil" telepathically and telekinetically may result in something opposite the desired effect because of unknown/unseen factors.
How do we bring coordinated collective focused "thought" and "will" that is conceptually close to identical into alignment with universal patterns in order to manifest completely positive results? How do we "above all, do no harm"? It's something like the idea of not altering future reality by changing the past when considering what would happen if someone figured out how to travel back in time.
Any manifestation of significant power is potentially deadly if it is not tempered by extreme caution, and with exhaustive forethought and great wisdom.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, most especially in the manifestation of power. We, almost all of us, as individuals play god by making decisions that affect others every day. Leaders of government generally do this to a much greater extent and effect. All too often disingenuously, with deliberate malice, resulting in disastrous, catastrophic, deadly effect. Almost always for the sake of greed and power.
So the question here is:
Do we have the right to play god and neutralize the power of world leaders, corporate greeders, and other destructive entities, and manipulate events for our vision of what is good for human beings and the planet itself, when we figure out how to focus/align telekinetic/telepathic power in order to do so with minimal chance of unforeseen negative and destructive consequences?
Would this be generally preferable to most people to the extinction of all or most life on the planet, which is now the inevitable result of the current, unalterable trajectory of patterns of human endeavor?
Or would it be better to let the insane fuckers just eventually destroy it all?
When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will they realize that they cannot eat money.
~ Paraphrased from the words of Alanis Obomsawin