Do we need new ‘Neurotech-rights’?
Trust thought for today - about neurotech trust & governance
Joint meeting of Council of Europe and OECD - “Do we need new Human Rights for Neurotechnologies’. A new area for me with a new project & working group to talk about soon.
Link to the conference which should have a recording soon & the comprehensive but dense primer of the issues.
https://lnkd.in/gAR5aZZF
Neurotech describes physical and observational interventions focused on the workings of the brain, including conscious and unconscious thought. ‘Observation of the mind and manipulation of the mind’ as someone said, ‘reading the brain and writing into the brain’ someone else. But also a reminder by reading this, I have physically changed your brain, so it happens already!
The Human Rights issues roughly in the graphic below from the Neurorights Initiative, as good as I could find, but not identical to descriptions here - freedom of thought & mental integrity mentioned. Serious & scary ways this tech could be developed, used & misused. https://lnkd.in/g2SuSYRe.
Discussions on whether we need whole new rights, or whether these can be encompassed within existing rights. I was persuaded by Susie Alegre that these could be already protected mainly under 9, 18 & 19. But as with the 1997 debate about the human genome & genetic data & recent debates on AI, interpretation would be needed, but is not insurmountable with effort & collaboration. No mention of citizens as part of this process, no mention at all until the Q's in the last panel & no chat for me to rant on!
Whether we get our act together with the governance in time remains to be seen, the balance of precaution & innovation needed as usual. Unlike AI there wasn’t call for multinational agreements, but a view that individual states would do their own thing, which I thought interesting, but odd.
I was reassured by some speakers that fears about our minds being read against our will ain’t going to happen anytime soon, big brother will get us in much more insidious ways first! More immediate worries are about charlatans who claim, as they do with AI already, to predict behaviours from interpreting brain workings such as voting patterns from brain scans & job suitability. This is currently bllx, probably illegal & discriminatory & should be shunned, but may evolve to have a place. More concern about probabilistic interpretations such as detecting psychopaths aged 5 and where that leads. Yowsa.
Pleased also to see discussion about 'technosolutionism' and reminders there are high tech, low tech & no tech solutions. Tech is not necessarily best. As in this great article I found so profound 'innovation should be tailored to human needs not tech possibilities.'
https://lnkd.in/gHDxqagU