
[BOR]
0: Safe
1: Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive.
2: Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed.
3: Be civil, No violations of [TOS](https://mastodon.world/about).
4: No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments.
5: Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
6: No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban.

[EOR]
[BOC]
Sure there are!  You can implant a recording electrode into the brain.  I do it with rats.

Thing is, they won't let us do it to people.

Also, fMRI is dumb.  Its temporal resolution is utter shit.  Advances in EEG or MEG (magnetoencephalography, which is basically like EEG but picks up on magnetic signals due to electrical current flow instead of electric fields) are more likely to provide useful non-invasive neuroimaging than fMRI.  Temporal resolution is just too important.  If EEG/MEG is like listening to a conversation through a wall, then fMRI is like periodically checking the room for whether anyone has visited the room today.

[Here](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.22784/epdf) is an MEG paper that will *blow your fucking mind* if you know anything about neuroscience.

[edit]

I should point out that in fairness, MEG isn't that much better than MRI in terms of needing the subject to sit still.  It's just orders of magnitude more useful than MRI for assessing neural activity.  EEG is still better than fMRI for that, although it doesn't have as much spatial resolution as MEG, and EEG can be done while the subject moves around.
[EOC]
