http://www.slipperybrick.com/2008/12/scientists-extract-images-directly-from-the-brain/
This is some terrific stuff.
Picturing Your Thoughts
- Thread starter c0rnedfr0g
- Start date
I have seen a lot of work done with functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to determine what people's intentions were, what they were looking at, and even what music they were listening to.
These advances, while fascinating as they may be, have me extremely worried in that I have a strong gut feeling that this technology will inevitably find its way into the field of Law Enforcement and Intelligence-gathering (something that would completely end privacy as we know it).
These technological advances pose a series of major ethical issues. Unfortunately, it seems lately that ethical guidelines are not being kept in pace with scientific advancements, which are expanding at an exponential and unprecedented rate.
These advances, while fascinating as they may be, have me extremely worried in that I have a strong gut feeling that this technology will inevitably find its way into the field of Law Enforcement and Intelligence-gathering (something that would completely end privacy as we know it).
These technological advances pose a series of major ethical issues. Unfortunately, it seems lately that ethical guidelines are not being kept in pace with scientific advancements, which are expanding at an exponential and unprecedented rate.
This wont be an exact science for a long time so I don't have too much worry about someone's thoughts being used as evidence in court for quite some time yet.
However, I do agree that we need to make the law catch up with technology so when this sort of thing really is put to such a task we know how to handle it. Personally, I think the brain is a terrible witness and should never be given much credence.
I wonder what resolution the mind is in. . .
However, I do agree that we need to make the law catch up with technology so when this sort of thing really is put to such a task we know how to handle it. Personally, I think the brain is a terrible witness and should never be given much credence.
I wonder what resolution the mind is in. . .
Venardhi,
Actually we're getting closer and closer. I predict that we are only 5 to 10 years away from being able to completely read the thoughts of another person.
I don't see that happen any time soon. In many cases it's actually hard for legislators to keep up, and even if they can keep up, they're usually unwilling to for one reason or another, meaning that in either case, the only time any legislation is passed, it's often a knee-jerk reaction. To make it worse, these knee-jerk reactions often seem to be for all the wrong things -- like stem-cell research which is incredibly useful -- you can coax an embryonic stem-cell into growing into any cell in the entire human body. They oppose it for religious reasons which is ironic since these fetuses were already *aborted* and were going to basically be trashed (at least with stem-cell research, something useful could come out of them). Granted there are certain aspects of genetic-engineering, which stem-cell research can facilitate, (but it would probably be pretty easy to place laws in effect to restrict this) that do worry me*. To make it even more messed-up, many of these anti-abortion, anti stem-cell research crowd are whole-heartedly in support of the death-penalty (which is kind of ironic don't you think? Don't abort him-- let him grow up so we can execute 'em!)!
Unless the issue at hand becomes a gigantic nation-wide one, politicians are not going to do a single thing about it. And considering every time a politician (which can include the President) invokes fear of some terrorist group, everyone let's the government take away more of our precious freedoms and privacy rights. This is unlikely to change short of a huge change in overall attitude (regarding the importance of civil-rights).
CuttingEdge100
Footnote
* - Certain aspects of genetic engineering worry me. Some are obvious, others are not so obvious. One is the fact that one particular company heavily involved in genetic research is Monsanto -- who's attitude towards patenting genes, and even organisms (including animals) modified with them, combined with their incredibly aggressive litigiousness in regard to enforcing these patents is rather disturbing.
Actually we're getting closer and closer. I predict that we are only 5 to 10 years away from being able to completely read the thoughts of another person.
I don't see that happen any time soon. In many cases it's actually hard for legislators to keep up, and even if they can keep up, they're usually unwilling to for one reason or another, meaning that in either case, the only time any legislation is passed, it's often a knee-jerk reaction. To make it worse, these knee-jerk reactions often seem to be for all the wrong things -- like stem-cell research which is incredibly useful -- you can coax an embryonic stem-cell into growing into any cell in the entire human body. They oppose it for religious reasons which is ironic since these fetuses were already *aborted* and were going to basically be trashed (at least with stem-cell research, something useful could come out of them). Granted there are certain aspects of genetic-engineering, which stem-cell research can facilitate, (but it would probably be pretty easy to place laws in effect to restrict this) that do worry me*. To make it even more messed-up, many of these anti-abortion, anti stem-cell research crowd are whole-heartedly in support of the death-penalty (which is kind of ironic don't you think? Don't abort him-- let him grow up so we can execute 'em!)!
Unless the issue at hand becomes a gigantic nation-wide one, politicians are not going to do a single thing about it. And considering every time a politician (which can include the President) invokes fear of some terrorist group, everyone let's the government take away more of our precious freedoms and privacy rights. This is unlikely to change short of a huge change in overall attitude (regarding the importance of civil-rights).
CuttingEdge100
Footnote
* - Certain aspects of genetic engineering worry me. Some are obvious, others are not so obvious. One is the fact that one particular company heavily involved in genetic research is Monsanto -- who's attitude towards patenting genes, and even organisms (including animals) modified with them, combined with their incredibly aggressive litigiousness in regard to enforcing these patents is rather disturbing.
Last edited:
^^ Many people that support the death penalty but not abortion do so not out of irony; rather, the opposite. They believe that only the guilty should be punished. Weird, I know. The believe that everyone should have a shot at life, and if they screw it up too badly, then that's it. Curtains.
As for stem cell research, the argument there is to not encourage additional abortions with the excuse of doing it for the greater good. The idea is to not encourage abortions.
As for stem cell research, the argument there is to not encourage additional abortions with the excuse of doing it for the greater good. The idea is to not encourage abortions.
Dasher'n'Dancer32,
I don't know about you or most people, but doubt that people would just go around having abortions like there's no tomorrow if stem-cell research was made legal.
CuttingEdge100
I don't know about you or most people, but doubt that people would just go around having abortions like there's no tomorrow if stem-cell research was made legal.
CuttingEdge100
