Brain Privacy

sleepyrobot writes "As neuroscience advances and brain scans become more sophisticated, the Boston Globe points out that some privacy advocates are concerned about brain privacy. Could employees be scanned for violent or depressive impulses? Could soldiers be screened for homosexuality? It sounds like a Philip K. Dick vision of the future, but some predict this will be a bigger ethical issue than genetics."

Comments

This is scary, or is it just over-reaction?

[Blaine Hilton]

Now this is a rather disturbing article. I've always thought it was something that people can check out brain function and all of that, however I never thought off it as being a privacy concern. This article though brings up some interesting points. Such as having brain scans be a condition to being hired, much like a drug test of today. This at first seems shocking, but it is commonly accepted to take a drug test without any objections. With the heightened security concerns around the globe I believe people, as a whole are willing to work towards a "more secure" future.

The problem I see though is people are not thinking broad enough. Technologies such as this can be used on a large scale against humanity. I believe the consequences of such abilities need to be addressed in a uniform manner, without always talking about the terrorists that will kill us all anyway. How far will society let the security over take our lives? I for one do not want to end up living in a military state where every body that does not have blonde hair, blue eyes, and a perfect attitude is destroyed. Do you?

Go calculate something

Re:This is scary, or is it just over-reaction?

[RatBastard]

You want to test my blood/urine/etc... for drugs? Get a search warrant or get the hell out. My body is more private than my house. People put up with random/compulsery drug tests because they have been brainwashed by the whole "War on Drugs" debacle that it is a Good Thing to test people with no Probable Cause whatsoever.

Brain scanning like this, combined with genetic testing will create a tiered populous with those deemd "fit" (and deemed by who, exactly?) at the top, and the great unwashed masses at the bottom.

It seems almost inevitable that humanity keeps trying to organize itself into the lords and the serfs.

Frightening

[beatniklew]

The part that makes this the most frightening is that we've seen recently how far people are willing to go if they think that security is at hand. The Patriot Act and Patriot II (return of the civil liberty abuses), both passed with widespread support, just because people were scared. With the right amount of fear, this technology will not only be allowed, but mandated in usage to screen for "potential security risks"

irony

[Joe the Lesser]

Could soldiers be screened for homosexuality?

I always find it ironic that technologies created by open-mindedness have to ability to empower the narrow-minded.

Re:irony

[TGK]

In the early summer of 371 BC the two great armies of Ancient Greece met on the plain of Luctra.

The Spartan army that day numbered some 11,000 men, claiming a heritage stretching back hundreds of years. Glory upon glory enshrouded this fighting force, the decendents of the famous 300 and heirs to the legacy of Thermopylae.

Across the plain from them stood the Thebian army. Only 6,000 stong, the Thebians were acutely aware of the overwhelming numerical superiority of their enemy.

In the moments before the crucial clash of arms, Epaminandos, general of the Thebian Army, called "The Sacred Band" to hold a position usualy reserved for cannon fodder: face to face with the Spartan Elite. The Band consisted of 300 highly trained shock troops. Against them stood nearly 600 of Sparta's best.

But the Thebians held a key advantage. Hoplite warfare relies heavily on the defence of those on the flanks, as well as the defence of the individual, to maintain the integrity of the unit. Here the Thebian system was superior. The Sacred Band was comprised, not simply of 300 shock troops, but of 150 pairs of homosexual lovers. These men were willing to fight and die for each other, not only because it benefited the unit as a whole, but because of the deeper bonds between them.

When the sun set on Luctra that day it set upon the aftermath of the Thebian victory. The Spartan army had been crushed by a smaller force and forced to request a truce. In the years following Luctra, Spartan military power would be shattered forever.

While I don't argue that sexual tension in our military can be a problem, I object to the idea that is MUST be a problem. Speaking as a historian I belive the problems in our military associated with sex and sexuality do not derive from having people sexualy attracted serving together, but rather the way we deal with that circumstance. The Thebians turned it into an advantage. They were not the first, nor the last.

Uh Oh

[theBraindonor]

Now my boss will know how burned-out and disgruntled I have become... I'm so screwed...

DMCA

[wowbagger]

I'm sorry, but I hold the copyright over my brain and the information therein, and your brain scanner is an unlawful circumvention device under the DMCA.

My lawyers will be calling.

Got a whole lotta hype

[TopShelf]

There's a major difference between a drug screen and having your brain scanned as a condition of employment. A drug screen is meant to pick up illegal activity which poses a tangible safety and liability issue to a potential employer. There's nothing illegal about thinking anything (at least in the developed democracies), so I don't see brain scans becoming accepted practice during my lifetime (knock on wood).

Re:Got a whole lotta hype

[Mr. Slippery]

A drug screen is meant to pick up illegal activity which poses a tangible safety and liability issue to a potential employer.

Bullshit.

Chemical screens for drug metabolites say absolutely nothing about whether you are a safety issue. If that was the issue, impairment tests would be used. (And a few intelligent employers do use impairment tests.) Drug screens are about what you're doing in your own time - they are a lifestyle screen. They're a loyalty oath to the Drug War.

(They're also surprisingly inaccurate for something that can ruin your life.)

I got my first job in high school, 17 years ago. I've been in the workforce ever since. I've never pissed in a cup for an employer. I've turned down job offers over it. I've still done ok.

Drug tests: just say no.

Re:Got a whole lotta hype

[privacyt]

You can sit around and hate whoever you like, it's when you act on it by assaulting others that it becomes a crime.

If you assault someone without hating them for their race, you get the standard punishment. But if you do the exact same assault and feel hatred, you get an additional punishment.

In some cases this can get absurd. Here in Pennsylvania a couple years ago, two ignorant pranksters put racist stickers on a sign outside a Martin Luther King memorial. Normally, such vandalism would been a misdemeanor, giving the punks a fine and comunity service. But in their case, it was a felony due to additional hate crimes penalties.

Is that good? Maybe so, since we all hate racists. But what if someone vandalizes a Microsoft billboard because they hate monopolistic corporations, and then they get a felony for having the wrong motives when they did the crime? If everyone doesn't have freedom of thought, then none of us do.

Punish people's crimes; don't punish their thoughts.

And since the thoughts of a person in a free society are no one's business but their own, the government needs to stay out of our brains and stop conccerning itself with our thoughts.

This is rediculous

[DJStealth]

This is rediculous, I'm doing some work on neurobiology wrt attention for my CS Masters in Computer Vision. From reading some of the recent research, I don't think the field of neurobiology is anywhere close to being able to determine such concepts from an fMRI or anything similar.

The Spartans

[RatBastard]

Could soldiers be screened for homosexuality?

You know what's really funny about this? The most feared army in Greek times, the Spartans, were all gay. Many of them fighting shoulder to shoulder with their lovers.

I want this for a programming tool...

[NetSettler]

The most conservative view of the brain's power say that it's a computer program. The most elaborate theories also envision that there are other structures like souls that can't be 'caught on tape'. Strangely, I'd be the hardcore conservatives wanting to use this technology are statistically more likely to be those who say we have unmeasurable souls. Just a guess. But if it's so, I wonder how they rationalize that.

But let's take the conservative view--that the brain is just a computer program that is trillions or quadrillions of times more complex than your average programming project for work. Now we're talking about hooking us up to a machine that has no idea what a single line of source looks like, no idea what data has been preloaded, and is just going to watch the approximate equivalent of the blinking lights on the console and tell me if my program is not only functioning correctly now, but whether it's predicted to function correctly in the future?

Geez, forget core dumps, stack debuggers, tracing tools, and all that. I just want one of these cool push-button debugging tools for writing programs!! People pay enormous amounts for teams of people to pour over source code for days or weeks or more on projects so trivial as today's... and it's apparently all wasted. We could have solved the whole Y2K problem by just letting this machine watch the blinky lights on the front of some COBOL boxes and tell us that the planes wouldn't crash and the elevators wouldn't stop. Why didn't we rush them into production if they were this close to ready?

Or is it possible that the effectiveness is slightly oversold?

Re:The Truth Machine

[sirgoran]

I have to disagree with you. People need privacy. There is no reason for anyone to know everything about what I say, think, or do.

I have nothing to hide, but my privacy is my own.
Am I gay? No.
Am I a criminal (Caught or not)? No.
Am I trying to hide something? No.
But, if I look at a woman and think to myself, "Boy I'd sure Like to F*** her!" That thought is my own and not something that anyone has the right to know about me. Thinking that doesn't make me a rapist nor someone to fear or "keep tabs" on.

Much like if I thought to myself, "Boy, the President is a dumb sonofabitch." That too is not something that I feel is something that should be public knowledge nor held against me. Just because I might think something doesn't make me guilty of anything.

Much like this discussion, it's my opinion and I should be the one to choose if and when I want to share it.

Everyone has a right to their own personal privacy. Just because someone enjoys their privacy, it doesn't make them a criminal. Did you ever think that it might protect you FROM the criminals? What would happen if everyone could know if you were scared of them. Wouldn't that make you a target of those that would exploit that fear?

Any kind of brain scanning that invades my privacy, or makes public my privacy is wrong.

That's my two bits on the matter.
-Goran

Brain Scanners Work On Politicians - No Problem!

[0x69]

Once a lie-detecting brain scanner is reasonably available, there'll be some public challenges to sleazy politicians to answer (under the scanner, with cameras rolling) questions like "did your vote on bill X have more to do with that fat campaign donation than with the good of the country?"

The media will hype this up so far, it'll make the Clinton sex scandals look like a 5-over-limit speeding ticket.

Conclusion - self-serving sleazy politicians will make sure than brain scanners are *extremely* illegal.