Why scientists are transferring the issue of protecting the human brain and consciousness to the legal field, what neuro-rights are and why they are needed in the modern world.
When the sci-fi thriller Inception hit the box office worldwide, audiences were thrilled and overwhelmed by its futuristic story of a criminal gang invading people’s dreams to steal valuable data or dictate human decisions.
More than a decade has passed, however, and the technology envisioned by director Christopher Nolan is likely just around the corner. In any case, experts from Chile think so. They recently moved the debate on the safety of what man’s most precious possession – the mind – has to the legal field.
The South American nation strives to be the first in the world to legally defend the “neuro-rights” of citizens. Lawmakers are expected to pass constitutional reform that blocks technology that seeks to “strengthen, weaken, or disrupt” the mental integrity of people without their consent.
Opposition Senator Guido Girardi, one of the authors of the law, is worried about technologies – be it algorithms, bionic implants or some other devices – that can threaten “the essence of people, their autonomy, their freedom and free will.”
“If this technology manages to read [your thoughts], even before you even know what you are thinking, it can write emotions into your brain: life stories that do not belong to you and that your brain will not be able to distinguish whether they were yours. or the creations of designers, ”he notes.
Potential of neurotechnology
Dozens of sci-fi films and novels offered viewers a glimpse of the potential dark side of neurotechnology – perhaps attracting criminal masterminds hidden in secret strongholds by manipulating the world with sneaky laughs while petting a cat.
In fact, nascent technology has already shown how it can be useful.
In 2013, then US President Barack Obama promoted the BRAIN (Brain Research through the Promotion of Innovative Neurotechnologies) initiative, which aimed to study the causes of brain diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and epilepsy.
Today, Science Minister Andres Kuv is confident that the neuro-rights debate “is part of the consolidation of a new scientific institutional system in the country that is now attracting international attention.”
But many are concerned that technical advances may be abused by attackers. Chilean President Sebastian Pinera at the April Ibero-American summit in Andorra invited countries to jointly pass laws on this delicate issue.
“I call on all Ibero-American countries to foresee the future and to adequately protect now not only the data and information of our citizens, but also their thoughts, their feelings, their neural information, in order to prevent them from being manipulated with the help of new technologies,” the conservative Pinera said at the time.
What will the new bill be about?
The Chilean bill contains four main aspects: the protection of human mind data or neurodata; setting limits on the neurotechnology of reading and especially writing in the brain; establishing equitable distribution and access to these technologies; and imposing restrictions on neuroalgorithms.
Spanish scientist Rafael Yuste, an expert on the subject at Columbia University in New York, says some of these technologies already exist, and even the most futuristic ones will be available within 10 years.
They are already being applied to animals in laboratories. Scientists have experimented with rats by implanting images of unfamiliar objects into their brains and observing how they take these objects in real life as their own and incorporate them into their natural behavior.
“If you can interfere with and stimulate or suppress brain chemistry, you can change people’s decisions. This is what we have already done with the animals, ”says Juste.
All the risks and advantages of technology
Today science has opened up the possibility of creating hybrid humans with artificially enhanced cognitive abilities. The risk is that, without proper security measures, technology could be used to change people’s thoughts, using algorithms over the internet to reprogram their hardwiring; dictate your interests, preferences or consumption patterns.
“To avoid a two-speed situation with some improved people and others who are not, we believe that these neurotechnologies need to be regulated in accordance with the principles of universal justice, recognizing the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” says Yuste.
Yuste considers neurotechnology a “tsunami” that humanity will have to face, so people need to be prepared.
Neurotechnology is already being used to treat patients with Parkinson’s disease or depression by stimulating the brain with electrodes, Yuste said. Likewise, deafness is treated with “cochlear implants in the auditory nerve,” which stimulate the brain.
It is hoped that something like this in the future will restore vision to the blind or cure people with Alzheimer’s by strengthening the neural circuits of memory.
“It will be a beneficial change for humanity,” he concludes.
So, what neuro-rights are we talking about?
What is neuro-law?
Raphael Yuste, along with Sarah Goering, an assistant professor at the University of Washington, and a group of interested scientists began to develop an ethical framework that will govern the use and development of advanced neurotechnology: what we now call “neuro-rights.”
Several ethical principles that can regulate neuropathy are:
Confidentiality and Consent
Neurotechnology can collect a lot of data from its users (did you know that the way you use your smartphone can be used for behavioral research?), And this data needs to be protected. An individual should be able to opt out of sharing this data with third parties without their consent to avoid the kind of messy situations we’ve seen in the past with other forms of AI, as in the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data story.
Free will
Patients receive relevant information about the side effects and possible risks associated with the insertion of electrodes into the brain. However, these adverse emotional reactions are usually not included in informed consent data.
So who is to blame if a patient voluntarily suffers from an unexpected emotional reaction after electrode implantation? Will he know that it has to do with implantation and stimulation? Who is responsible for the potentially dire consequences? Establishing neuropathy will protect patients through the responsible development of neurotechnology.
Controlled growth
Several neurotechnologies are being developed with the aim of improving cognitive abilities. Think of it as “cognitive doping.” We need to draw a line when these “neuro-enhancement technologies” can be used appropriately, and how. It is also important to prevent possible inequalities between those who decide or can afford cognitive gain versus those who do not.
Bias
Neurotechnology is developed by people, and people are biased. We need to ensure that neurotechnology is created without bias.
More recently, it has emerged that racist biases are embedded in some facial recognition technologies. Neuro-rights must prevent such situations with the help of neurotechnology.
Why are neuro-rights needed?
With the growing business of brain-machine interfaces, it seems necessary to nudge legislators and human rights defenders to stay ahead of technology and prepare for possible challenges.
Dr. Raphael Yuste speaks about this loudly and clearly: “This is an urgent matter. This is not science fiction and we urgently need some kind of regulation. Technology is advancing, but if we do nothing, we will find ourselves in a situation where it will be too late to do something. Many companies are now developing devices that read brain signals to control robotic equipment and encode intentions and thoughts to apply them to control technology. The time has come”.
