Some questions on the ethics of mind reading

[w1z4rd]

With the recent developments in neural network mapping and mind reading technologies I got to thinking about the ethics around it. First some of the media I have consumed that for me thinking about this:

This is an interesting article on mapping brains.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...prinklr&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

This is an interesting article on using a brain scanner combined with AI language modules to get an idea of what you are thinking about:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow

So that, and some life experiences got me thinking. What if we mastered this technology? What would or should be the ethics around it?

So for this post, I would like you to imagine it is the distant year 20XX. Some countries have developed the technology to read our minds from low earth orbiting satellites and this technology is now in the hands of the rich and powerful. Basically, everything you think, every image you imagine, is interpreted by an AI to an ongoing stream of your thoughts that those that are well connected can view.

So this got me asking a few questions.

• Should powerful corporations and authorities be allowed to stream your mind without your permission? There is no physical intrusion.
• Should you be held accountable for naughty/bad/weird/angry thoughts/imagination? Say you were at home alone in your bath and you were fantasizing about your favorite model and that gets recorded, distributed and sent to the person you were thinking about? Where you immoral for having the thought or are the people invading your privacy more immoral?
• What if you suspect that person might be criminal? Is it okay to read their thoughts without them knowing? Since the tech is top secret in this thought experiment, most of this would be done without due process.
• Is it okay to control criminals and punish them every time they have a thought you do not like? What about terrorists? Or journalists you don’t like? Or climate change activists?
• If the technology existed as mentioned here, and slowly more and more powerful corporations and secret government technologies were adopting it, should it be kept secret from the world? Remember, we live in an Epstein world where truth and justice don’t always win.. and the powerful (with access to this technology) are often very corrupt themselves and would like most likely use it to manipulate and control the population than protect them.

One of the reasons I want to think about this is right now, if they ever did invent this technology, I don’t think there would be any laws to protect us, especially when considering many of us live outside the jurisdictions where this happens from.

What are your thoughts? I know crazy thread, but just a thought experiment

 

[Sarkus]

• Should powerful corporations and authorities be allowed to stream your mind without your permission? There is no physical intrusion.

No. It's the absolute invasion of privacy which most, at least in Western democracies, hold as a fundamental human right.
It would violate numerous legal protections, such as the freedom of thought, and the right to silence so as not to self-incriminate, that are themselves based on ethical considerations.
With regard corporations doing so, they would in effect be strip-mining your thoughts and monetising them. If they want to pay to access people's thoughts, and the people agree to it, that's a different matter, but you're talking about without permission. Even without considering other ethical considerations, I would consider this to be nothing other than theft.

• Should you be held accountable for naughty/bad/weird/angry thoughts/imagination? Say you were at home alone in your bath and you were fantasizing about your favorite model and that gets recorded, distributed and sent to the person you were thinking about? Where you immoral for having the thought or are the people invading your privacy more immoral?

The people accessing your thoughts are invading your privacy. There is nothing wrong with fantasising about someone. It is a natural part of human psychology. Thinking about something and acting it out are very different. Thinking about something is NOT a problem, no matter what the thought. It is only ever the acting on it part that can be considered a problem. Sure, there are some thoughts one might have that might warrant seeking professional help about, especially if there is concern about not being able to stop acting on it in some way. And by "acting on it" I don't just mean doing what is being thought about, but also discussing it, writing online about it etc. The bottom line: if it is just in your head, and goes no further, it is not a problem. And it should be allowed to stay in the head. Someone being able to rip that out, no matter how harmlessly, is an absolute violation.
Personally, accessing people's thoughts without permission I would consider to be a form of rape, and should be treated as such.

• What if you suspect that person might be criminal? Is it okay to read their thoughts without them knowing? Since the tech is top secret in this thought experiment, most of this would be done without due process.

No. You're into "thought crime" territory, which I consider abhorrent. How would you distinguish between someone who is about to act on their thoughts, and someone who simply has those thoughts without ever having the compulsion to act on them. I can guarantee that everyone here has fantasised about something that would be illegal if acted out as imagined. It's a natural part of being human.

• Is it okay to control criminals and punish them every time they have a thought you do not like? What about terrorists? Or journalists you don’t like? Or climate change activists?

No, it's not okay. For reasons hopefully encapsulated above. Slippery slope, if nothing else (although that in itself seems a weak reason).

• If the technology existed as mentioned here, and slowly more and more powerful corporations and secret government technologies were adopting it, should it be kept secret from the world? Remember, we live in an Epstein world where truth and justice don’t always win.. and the powerful (with access to this technology) are often very corrupt themselves and would like most likely use it to manipulate and control the population than protect them.

Yes, it should be kept secret, because if it got revealed that it existed, let alone used, would/should cause utter mayhem. Most who gave it any thought would/should see it as an absolute betrayal by the government / corporation. There would/should be mass protests, political backlash, riots, and a corrective movement.

If those who had this tech did nothing with it, or only ever looked at the terrorists, extremists etc, then one could say that there is no harm... just as there would be no harm in allowing the NSA or other national security organisations to monitor all your calls: if you don't do anything to break the law, what's the issue. But the problem is that it is a slippery slope, a creeping normality: you get used to all communications being monitored, as they're only going after the worst. Then someone starts going after the not-so-worst, but you've now gotten used to the fact that all communications are monitored that that's not an issue. Then gradually more and more decline into "thought crime", all with the normality of what has gone before.

One of the reasons I want to think about this is right now, if they ever did invent this technology, I don’t think there would be any laws to protect us, especially when considering many of us live outside the jurisdictions where this happens from.

This doesn't happen in any jurisdiction at the moment. The tech doesn't exist to read thoughts. There are jurisdictions where privacy is not as much of a right, or not to the same extent, and one only has to imagine a curtailing of what is considered "private" (i.e. beyond scope of legal system) to understand the issue, bearing in mind it is not the technology itself, but the use to which it can be put that is the issue. Imagine the worst. That is what you'd be allowing if you consider the tech acceptable without permission.

What are your thoughts? I know crazy thread, but just a thought experiment

A good thread to post, as it can cover many areas.
What I've posted above is really just my "knee-jerk reaction" to the idea. Maybe it's only 'cos I have "thoughts" that I'd worry about someone else knowing (even if the chance of acting on them is precisely 0%)!!

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

If my thought dreams could be seen
The'd probably put my head in a guillotine
But it's alright Ma
It's life and life only

Quote from Bob Dylan song

On a more positive note, it might help people communicate better.

 

[w1z4rd]

No. It's the absolute invasion of privacy which most, at least in Western democracies, hold as a fundamental human right.
It would violate numerous legal protections, such as the freedom of thought, and the right to silence so as not to self-incriminate, that are themselves based on ethical considerations.
With regard corporations doing so, they would in effect be strip-mining your thoughts and monetising them. If they want to pay to access people's thoughts, and the people agree to it, that's a different matter, but you're talking about without permission. Even without considering other ethical considerations, I would consider this to be nothing other than theft.

The people accessing your thoughts are invading your privacy. There is nothing wrong with fantasising about someone. It is a natural part of human psychology. Thinking about something and acting it out are very different. Thinking about something is NOT a problem, no matter what the thought. It is only ever the acting on it part that can be considered a problem. Sure, there are some thoughts one might have that might warrant seeking professional help about, especially if there is concern about not being able to stop acting on it in some way. And by "acting on it" I don't just mean doing what is being thought about, but also discussing it, writing online about it etc. The bottom line: if it is just in your head, and goes no further, it is not a problem. And it should be allowed to stay in the head. Someone being able to rip that out, no matter how harmlessly, is an absolute violation.
Personally, accessing people's thoughts without permission I would consider to be a form of rape, and should be treated as such.

No. You're into "thought crime" territory, which I consider abhorrent. How would you distinguish between someone who is about to act on their thoughts, and someone who simply has those thoughts without ever having the compulsion to act on them. I can guarantee that everyone here has fantasised about something that would be illegal if acted out as imagined. It's a natural part of being human.

No, it's not okay. For reasons hopefully encapsulated above. Slippery slope, if nothing else (although that in itself seems a weak reason).

Yes, it should be kept secret, because if it got revealed that it existed, let alone used, would/should cause utter mayhem. Most who gave it any thought would/should see it as an absolute betrayal by the government / corporation. There would/should be mass protests, political backlash, riots, and a corrective movement.

If those who had this tech did nothing with it, or only ever looked at the terrorists, extremists etc, then one could say that there is no harm... just as there would be no harm in allowing the NSA or other national security organisations to monitor all your calls: if you don't do anything to break the law, what's the issue. But the problem is that it is a slippery slope, a creeping normality: you get used to all communications being monitored, as they're only going after the worst. Then someone starts going after the not-so-worst, but you've now gotten used to the fact that all communications are monitored that that's not an issue. Then gradually more and more decline into "thought crime", all with the normality of what has gone before.

This doesn't happen in any jurisdiction at the moment. The tech doesn't exist to read thoughts. There are jurisdictions where privacy is not as much of a right, or not to the same extent, and one only has to imagine a curtailing of what is considered "private" (i.e. beyond scope of legal system) to understand the issue, bearing in mind it is not the technology itself, but the use to which it can be put that is the issue. Imagine the worst. That is what you'd be allowing if you consider the tech acceptable without permission.


A good thread to post, as it can cover many areas.
What I've posted above is really just my "knee-jerk reaction" to the idea. Maybe it's only 'cos I have "thoughts" that I'd worry about someone else knowing (even if the chance of acting on them is precisely 0%)!!

Thank you for such a thoughtful and detailed response. I mostly agree with you. The only space I saw that I am not on the same page as you is about keeping it secret. Mostly because of how I know humans abuse things. Sorry for my overly long replies. Here are my thoughts on keeping it secret.

Governments can use this to control people and populations. Got anyone who opposes the government? Start leaking private information on them and let them know you know what theyre thinking to freak them out. Use this in conjunction with “big data” (all the data you have harvested off private databases).

Kompromat. Political people and powerful business people can be controlled with information taken from someone’s personal thoughts. Also, any tech that can see inside our minds, can see inside our buildings. They can watch you (on the toilet), and watch what you think.

You know how much big oil controls the current government, do you not think such technologies would not be used against climate change activists?

Some of these rich and powerfully connected people have big corporations. Is it not possible that the corporations with access to this type of knowledge and information could use it to steal trade secrets from other corporations? Perhaps that genius scientist in some far away place never gets his Nobel prize because as he is thinking of the idea and first putting pen to paper, the idea is been stolen from his mind, all his trade secrets gone to some big corp which patents it first?

Another way this could be abuse privately, is I can easily imagine these giant corporations training their AI LLM`s on our minds without our permission.

Some of these rich and powerful people are religious. Could the lack of knowledge in this type of tech not be abused by those that abuse the concept of faith? Think about if, if you can read someone’s thoughts, you can create what appear to be “miracles”. I mean, how else could someone know about your personal private prayer if God was not listening? That can be used to powerfully control someone.

For all we know the rich and powerful could do some crazy stuff, like turn our personal lives and thoughts into entertainment for themselves and play the Sims with us, but in real life.

More and more countries, private and civilian may develop these technologies. I understand why you would want to keep this secret, but as the tech is adopted by more and more powerful entities. If this technology is abused… Would we not have a duty to warn the public to protect themselves from ending up in some type of authoritarian corporate nightmare?

I understand your desire to keep it secret, but I feel given the nature of humans and what drives them, I feel it would be a better solution to slowly educate the public, and teach them how to carefully live in a changed world.

Technically technology like this could be used to end corruption. But it wont be, (its going to be used to manipulate and control us) and how can we use it to end corruption if people are not aware that it is been used?

Anyways, some thoughts.

 

[Sarkus]

Thank you for such a thoughtful and detailed response. I mostly agree with you. The only space I saw that I am not on the same page as you is about keeping it secret. Mostly because of how I know humans abuse things.

I don't disagree, really. My position was more that, if they are keeping it secret (your question suggested that to be the case) then it is better that it remains forever a secret than it comes out, because of the response by the public to such betrayal etc. I fully agree that if the tech ever arises that it is made public from the outset. That way an open-source prevention can be established, and the status-quo maintained, etc. But if it is being secretly used, the gov't would most certainly be better off keeping it secret, and the longer they keep it a secret, the greater the need to keep it a secret because the more disastrous the backlash. By "keeping it secret" I'm also assuming that they're using it and the population is oblivious to it, ignorant of it. And this may well be a case of "ignorance is bliss".
Perhaps my view is a case of "earlier revelation to the public the better... until a point such that revelation of its on-going use would be disastrous for all." Hmmm. But what point would that be? How could we tell? And if we can't, can we ever say that that point is reached, in which case, "earlier revelation" prevails?

 

[TheVat]

So that, and some life experiences got me thinking. What if we mastered this technology? What would or should be the ethics around it?

So for this post, I would like you to imagine it is the distant year 20XX. Some countries have developed the technology to read our minds from low earth orbiting satellites and this technology is now in the hands of the rich and powerful. Basically, everything you think, every image you imagine, is interpreted by an AI to an ongoing stream of your thoughts that those that are well connected can view.

This makes rape look like pilfering a candy bar. I would favor obliteration of the infrastructure of such a technology even if it required a coronal mass ejection which sent us all back to pencil, paper, and telegraphs. I appreciate that Sarkus patiently gave you such a thoughtful and nuanced reply, but I feel all this needs is a Hard No from we the people. This seems like one of those questions where deontological ethics is sufficient. It is deeply inherently wrong.

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

Someone will come up with a counter-tech. A personal field projector that blocks their tech is one possibility. Could be inclosed in a fancy hat to wear.

 

[Tiassa]

No. It's the absolute invasion of privacy which most, at least in Western democracies, hold as a fundamental human right.

Well, that's why Altman wants a new social contract, because human rights get in the way of his AI.

 

[C C]

With the recent developments in neural network mapping and mind reading technologies I got to thinking about the ethics around it. [...] What are your thoughts? I know crazy thread, but just a thought experiment

Yah, the "inner voice" of private thoughts and the outer speech produced by vocal cords surprisingly share the same signal source in the motor cortex. Thus enabling eavesdropping on that introspective activity. (Research paper)

Since AI decoding will surely be a necessary component in the brain interface enabling technopathic communication between future transhuman cyborgs, a monitoring safeguard will have to built-in to not only prevent unintended seepage of private thoughts, but perhaps even to bar infiltration and "downloading" of personal memories by other technopathic cyborgs that belong to the same social network club. (Though the latter threat depends on how deep into brain architecture companies are approved to have their installed BCIs go, even with permission from the client.)

Of course, once these initial technopathic clubs and "families" start developing (from birth) in the direction of becoming a gestalt intelligence or group consciousness integrated by their wireless communication ability, those safeguards will be dropped completely. The "hive mind" can't have a fully emergent and coherently coordinated ego if distinct sub-identities are allowed to still form and flourish in a protected, private refuge. (Or welcome to some transhuman version of dissociative identity disorder in the beginning for group-mind entities, prior to that being corrected.)
_

 

[Olga]

With the recent developments in neural network mapping and mind reading technologies I got to thinking about the ethics around it. First some of the media I have consumed that for me thinking about this:

This is an interesting article on mapping brains.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...prinklr&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

This is an interesting article on using a brain scanner combined with AI language modules to get an idea of what you are thinking about:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow

So that, and some life experiences got me thinking. What if we mastered this technology? What would or should be the ethics around it?

So for this post, I would like you to imagine it is the distant year 20XX. Some countries have developed the technology to read our minds from low earth orbiting satellites and this technology is now in the hands of the rich and powerful. Basically, everything you think, every image you imagine, is interpreted by an AI to an ongoing stream of your thoughts that those that are well connected can view.

So this got me asking a few questions.

• Should powerful corporations and authorities be allowed to stream your mind without your permission? There is no physical intrusion.
• Should you be held accountable for naughty/bad/weird/angry thoughts/imagination? Say you were at home alone in your bath and you were fantasizing about your favorite model and that gets recorded, distributed and sent to the person you were thinking about? Where you immoral for having the thought or are the people invading your privacy more immoral?
• What if you suspect that person might be criminal? Is it okay to read their thoughts without them knowing? Since the tech is top secret in this thought experiment, most of this would be done without due process.
• Is it okay to control criminals and punish them every time they have a thought you do not like? What about terrorists? Or journalists you don’t like? Or climate change activists?
• If the technology existed as mentioned here, and slowly more and more powerful corporations and secret government technologies were adopting it, should it be kept secret from the world? Remember, we live in an Epstein world where truth and justice don’t always win.. and the powerful (with access to this technology) are often very corrupt themselves and would like most likely use it to manipulate and control the population than protect them.

One of the reasons I want to think about this is right now, if they ever did invent this technology, I don’t think there would be any laws to protect us, especially when considering many of us live outside the jurisdictions where this happens from.

What are your thoughts? I know crazy thread, but just a thought experiment

Природа убрала эти функции у большинства людей, чтобы человечество, узнав мысли других, не истребило друг друга.

 

[w1z4rd]

This makes rape look like pilfering a candy bar.

When I imagine someone going into your mind and getting your most intimate thoughts. It does have rape like feel to it.

And if, like in the example, other people are shown or told about what you thought, that does have a "revenge porn" feel to it.

I would favor obliteration of the infrastructure of such a technology even if it required a coronal mass ejection which sent us all back to pencil, paper, and telegraphs. I appreciate that Sarkus patiently gave you such a thoughtful and nuanced reply, but I feel all this needs is a Hard No from we the people. This seems like one of those questions where deontological ethics is sufficient. It is deeply inherently wrong.

I do feel such technologies (when/if they are developed) will be developed and used on us. I have no doubt. The power people who would control these technologies care about goal objectives. Not ethics. If they can control an enemy nation or its people with kompromat. They will. If they can steal trade secrets. They will. If they could use this technology to get some kinda advantage in the market. They will.

I know such technology and abuse of it is a terrible thought. I believe its coming. If it can be used to advance money and power it will be. We going to have to learn to live with it one day.

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

What are you all afraid of. Your thoughts aren't you. They are just a mirror.

 

[w1z4rd]

What are you all afraid of. Your thoughts aren't you. They are just a mirror.

Personal information being weaponized against you to manipulate and control you.

 

[Pinball1970]

With the recent developments in neural network mapping and mind reading technologies I got to thinking about the ethics around it. First some of the media I have consumed that for me thinking about this:

This is an interesting article on mapping brains.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...prinklr&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

This is an interesting article on using a brain scanner combined with AI language modules to get an idea of what you are thinking about:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow

So that, and some life experiences got me thinking. What if we mastered this technology? What would or should be the ethics around it?

So for this post, I would like you to imagine it is the distant year 20XX. Some countries have developed the technology to read our minds from low earth orbiting satellites and this technology is now in the hands of the rich and powerful. Basically, everything you think, every image you imagine, is interpreted by an AI to an ongoing stream of your thoughts that those that are well connected can view.

So this got me asking a few questions.

• Should powerful corporations and authorities be allowed to stream your mind without your permission? There is no physical intrusion.
• Should you be held accountable for naughty/bad/weird/angry thoughts/imagination? Say you were at home alone in your bath and you were fantasizing about your favorite model and that gets recorded, distributed and sent to the person you were thinking about? Where you immoral for having the thought or are the people invading your privacy more immoral?
• What if you suspect that person might be criminal? Is it okay to read their thoughts without them knowing? Since the tech is top secret in this thought experiment, most of this would be done without due process.
• Is it okay to control criminals and punish them every time they have a thought you do not like? What about terrorists? Or journalists you don’t like? Or climate change activists?
• If the technology existed as mentioned here, and slowly more and more powerful corporations and secret government technologies were adopting it, should it be kept secret from the world? Remember, we live in an Epstein world where truth and justice don’t always win.. and the powerful (with access to this technology) are often very corrupt themselves and would like most likely use it to manipulate and control the population than protect them.

One of the reasons I want to think about this is right now, if they ever did invent this technology, I don’t think there would be any laws to protect us, especially when considering many of us live outside the jurisdictions where this happens from.

What are your thoughts? I know crazy thread, but just a thought experiment

Twenty years on the site? Wow I just want to hi dude!

 

[Wizard of Whatever]

Personal information being weaponized against you to manipulate and control you.

Can't do that. Sometimes I even have trouble. They might torture me, jail me, or kill me. So what. Every day and night is torture, this world and body is a jail cell, and death would be a joy.,

 

[w1z4rd]

Worth a share here:

 

[Luchito]

Hope my neighbor to never use such reading machine on me, I have so many thoughts and dreams with her beautiful wife...