2 Lobsters Die Before AI Neurosurgery Test in San Francisco
Updated
Updated · The Atlantic · Jun 30
2 Lobsters Die Before AI Neurosurgery Test in San Francisco
1 articles · Updated · The Atlantic · Jun 30
Summary
Two lobsters bought for an April experiment died before Elliot Roth and William Joy could attempt the neurosurgery meant to let an AI bot direct their movements.
Joy said the pair may have gotten the tank’s salinity wrong; after dissecting the carcasses, he said he was having an ethical crisis over whether he should be doing the project at all.
The planned test used an off-the-shelf cockroach-control kit and OpenClaw, with the founders hoping electrical signals could steer the lobsters and possibly their claws.
Roth, 32, and Joy, 19, are part of San Francisco’s hacker-house scene, where young founders pursuing AI, biotech and longevity projects live communally amid soaring rents and intense start-up competition.
The failed lobster trial became a small emblem of that culture’s mix of ambition, improvisation and moral unease; the pair had said they would eat the animals afterward, but nobody did.
Beyond AI-controlled lobsters, what ethical lines are we crossing to merge minds with machines?
As California bans biohacking pets, who polices DIY experiments on animals like lobsters?
Are SF's hacker houses breeding the next tech revolution or just dangerous science projects?
Lobster Neurosurgery in San Francisco Hacker Houses: Innovation, Animal Welfare, and the Future of Crustacean Rights
Overview
The San Francisco lobster neurosurgery experiment, led by Dr. Anya Sharma and Mark Chen, grew out of their shared desire to accelerate scientific discovery through open-source, decentralized methods. Disillusioned with traditional academic funding, they used the collaborative and fast-paced environment of a San Francisco hacker house to attempt implanting a neural interface in a live lobster, aiming to control its motor functions and demonstrate low-cost brain-computer interface research. Their use of custom-built micro-electrodes and 3D-printed tools sparked significant debate about animal welfare and ethics in DIY science, highlighting the tension between rapid innovation and responsible research in the biohacking community.