>>12989143Well that is where a team of analysts would basically identify the cut-off points for how people rate and rank their experiences in order to provide maximum user engagement and minimize conflict.
Even though a specific experience might be incompatible (which opens up the economy to more R&D) they wouldn't be incompatible with ALL chemical experiences.
>Also what can you do against contracting some kind of mental computer virus type of disease? After all what if you take some experience from somebody who doesn't have an internal dialogue and loose yours or something similar?That's where we can essentially take a chemical snapshot or provide mindfulness training so people develop the ability to return to some prior known recognition of self. In catastrophic cases (which wouldn't be hidden or obfuscated) we would simply restore memories and behavior pathways and ensure that key requirements or a preferential restore point. All living things experience change both rapidly and languidly so it would be more considered like going back to university or something. The core part of this being that resource constraints wouldn't really exist because the key requirement for chemical experience and exchange is physical action and output, but with the experience and exchange part ensured everyone could basically be housed and fed because the chemicals associated with enjoying the downfall or suffering of others could be removed as requirements. Most people would just opt for bliss as they build houses and farm food for all mankind.
It is essentially gaming the reward function and behavior of humanity away from thinking they need riches to experience high quality chemistry and normalizing labor output so an intelligent approach to the distribution of labor can be applied.
I fail to see how experiencing data through purely digital means is achievable for organic beings and what you describe is direct chemical creation stimulation from circuitry.
>Chemical robotics 
