Let's all campaign for a world where our MENTAL PRIVACY is enshrined in fundamental laws.
Hey governments, politicians and media, can we finally have a discussion about what the people of the world want the next 20-50 years?
Nothing is as private, as intimate and as undeniably ours as our minds. The last decades have seen tremendous progress in decoding our brain activity, and this is accelerating with the use of Artificial Intelligence. This has many advantages for medical science, but these advances can also be used in bad ways. We do not want our thoughts and emotions to be read and manipulated, our body monitored and controlled. Therefore, we need new laws (new human rights) that explicitly protect our mental privacy.
And, very important, these new laws must also prohibit all government organizations including the military, intelligence agencies, national and local police, and their contractors, from using neurotechnologies in any way against civilians.
If we cannot arrange this, all is lost.
Here are some articles / documents:
-
"We are on a path to a world in which algorithms will enable us to decode people's mental processes and directly manipulate the brain mechanisms underlying their intentions, emotions and decisions."
Gabriela Ramos, UNESCO's assistant director-general for social and human sciences
AI-supercharged Neurotech Threatens Mental Privacy: UNESCO - ‘What seemed like science fiction is already here’: why it’s important to talk (seriously) about neurorights
And here are some presentations:
- Nita A. Farahany - Ready for Brain Transparency? #WEF23 #Davos
- James Giordano - The Brain is the Battlefield of the Future Read 'Future' as 'Today'
Coming soon: Thought police (investigation and truth-finding; risk assessment; intervention):
Here are some examples:
- Some organizations may already scan and use your brain data (neurodata) because there is no law that tells them not to do this.
- In many countries, law enforcement, including police, is preparing to use neurotechnology for investigation and truth-finding, risk assessment and intervention. This is like the thought-police, we do not want this, do we?
- In the very near future, states and organizations may make access to services like health-care, education, work, dependent on our consent to share our brain data (neurodata) with them.
- And today there are many questions, like smartwatches that measure your heartbeat. A camera and sensor in a car that watches your eyes, and measures your skin conductance. If this data is in the cloud, then you are sharing mental data. Today this has not been properly regulated.
Mental privacy is:
-
Freedom and privacy of thoughts, intentions, emotions and freedom from manipulation of these.
Nobody should be allowed to read our thoughts, intentions, emotions, or control them with neurotechnologies. We must have free will meaning that we should have ultimate control over our own decision making, without any influence and/or manipulation from neurotechnologies. And under no circumstances may neurotechnology be used to disrupt or alter, for any instance of time, a person's sense of self.
-
Freedom and privacy of control of your body parts.
Our brain is a computer, and by accessing and manipulating the brain, our body parts can be accessed and manipulated too. Someone could give you epileptic seizures, control movement of limbs like your arms and legs, induce pain, even control your erection or orgasm.
Our governments do not inform us, because they do not want to inform us, nobody likes a government that can look inside your brain and control you with neurotechnology.
However, there are people, often scientists and philosophers, who have been clamoring for years that we must regulate mental privacy. And in 2021, Chile became the first nation in the world to have a constitution that addresses the challenges neurotechnologies. Also Spain is working on this. And the United Nations recently started a study to quantify the dangers of neurotechnology for human rights.
The most advanced technology is in the military and they are not going to tell us about this. No problem, if the military of one country wants to attack the military of another country, let them do it. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement also want to use this technology. We cannot stop neurotechnology developments but we can and we must forbid the military, intelligence agencies and law enforcement (and their contractors) to use neurotechnology in whatever way against civilians, even if they are criminals.
If we would allow neurotechnology to be used against criminals then the governments will make laws (read: use existing laws) that can put everyone under a criminal investigation, meaning a subject of neurotechnology surveillance and manipulation.
We cannot trust our governments, look how everything we do is tracked today. They started by telling us they needed anti-terrorist laws to monitor Jihad groups. Then they used these laws to monitor journalists and activists. Today these laws are used to track everyone. To governments, every citizen is a (potential) terrorist.
Meanwhile, many governments are exploring how to apply neurotechnology in criminal law. Did you see the movie Minority Report? This movie is about Pre-crime, the idea that a crime can be anticipated before it happens. You did not see it? Then try to watch it anyway. That's one of the things governments are working on right now.
Introducing neurotechnology in criminal law, is the beginning of the end.
Do not let so-called experts confuse you. The solution is very simple: Neurotechnology and civilians is a no-go. All neurotechnology scientists work for governments. Although some may appear to be (very) concerned, they also have well-paid jobs and status. Some even work for the military. Can we really trust their opinions?
There are many occasions when you want to share (part of) your mental privacy. For example for a medical application. Other examples are when playing a game, or using a brain-controlled RC helicopter. In these cases:
- The consent must be voluntary and explicit;
- An explicit reason for the access must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
- The period of time of the access must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
-
If neurodata is acquired:
- The location(s) where the neurodata is processed must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
- The security measures taken at these locations must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
- Any transfer of acquired neurodata to locations other than those explicitly mentioned is strictly prohibited.
-
If the neurodata is also stored:
- The storage location(s) must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
- The security measures taken at the storage locations must be provided by the neurotechnology provider.
- Any transfer of acquired neurodata to locations other than those explicitly mentioned is strictly prohibited.
- Etc.
- Current legislation is hopelessly outdated.
- Neurotechnology and civilans is a no-go.
- Consent must be explicit, with very extensive safeguards.
- New laws must explicitly prohibit all government organizations including military, intelligence agencies, national and local police, and their contractors, from using neurotechnologies in any way against civilians. Including NO neurotechnology applications in criminal law.