Tag Archives: brain stimulation by electric currents

Next Wild West: Monetizing Mental Data

Leave a reply

Some  brain–computer interfaces (BCI) are capable not only to record conscious thoughts but also the impulses of the preconscious. Most BCIs are connected the brain’s motor cortex, the part of the brain that initiates and controls voluntary movements by sending signals to the body’s muscles. But some people have volunteered to have an extra interface implanted in their posterior parietal cortex, a brain region associated with reasoning, attention and planning…The ability of these devices to access aspects of a person’s innermost life, including preconscious thought, raises the stakes on concerns about how to keep neural data private. It also poses ethical questions about how neurotechnologies might shape people’s thoughts and actions — especially when paired with artificial intelligence…

Consumer neurotech products capture less-sophisticated data than implanted BCIs do. Unlike implanted BCIs, which rely on the firings of specific collections of neurons, most consumer products rely on electroencephalography (EEG). This measures ripples of electrical activity that arise from the averaged firing of huge neuronal populations and are detectable on the scalp. Rather than being created to capture the best recording possible, consumer devices are designed to be stylish (such as in sleek headbands) or unobtrusive (with electrodes hidden inside headphones or headsets for augmented or virtual reality).

Still, EEG can reveal overall brain states, such as alertness, focus, tiredness and anxiety levels. Companies already offer headsets and software that give customers real-time scores relating to these states, with the intention of helping them to improve their sports performance, meditate more effectively or become more productive, for example. AI has helped to turn noisy signals from suboptimal recording systems into reliable data, explains Ramses Alcaide, chief executive of Neurable, a neurotech company in Boston, Massachusetts, that specializes in EEG signal processing and sells a headphone-based headset for this purpose…

With regard to EEG, “There’s a wild west when it comes to the regulatory standards”… A 2024 analysis of the data policies of 30 consumer neurotech companies by the Neurorights Foundation, a non-profit organization in New York City, showed that nearly all had complete control over the data users provided. That means most firms can use the information as they please, including selling it.

The government of Chile and the legislators of four US states have passed laws that give direct recordings of any form of nerve activity protected status. But ethicists fear that such laws are insufficient because they focus on the raw data and not on the inferences that companies can make by combining neural information with parallel streams of digital data. Inferences about a person’s mental health, say, or their political allegiances could still be sold to third parties and used to discriminate against or manipulate a person.

“The data economy, in my view, is already quite privacy-violating and cognitive- liberty-violating,” Ienca says. Adding neural data, he says, “is like giving steroids to the existing data economy”.

Excerpt from Liam Drew, Mind-reading devices can now predict preconscious thoughts: is it time to worry?, Nature, Nov. 19, 2025

Mass-Market Brain Manipulation and Human Rights

Leave a reply

Scientific advances are rapidly making science-fiction concepts such as mind-reading a reality — and raising thorny questions for ethicists, who are considering how to regulate brain-reading techniques to protect human rights such as privacy.

On 13 July, 2023 neuroscientists, ethicists and government ministers discussed the topic at a Paris meeting organized by UNESCO, the United Nations scientific and cultural agency. Delegates plotted the next steps in governing such ‘neurotechnologies’ — techniques and devices that directly interact with the brain to monitor or change its activity. The technologies often use electrical or imaging techniques, and run the gamut from medically approved devices, such as brain implants for treating Parkinson’s disease, to commercial products such as wearables used in virtual reality (VR) to gather brain data or to allow users to control software… Neurotechnology is now a US$33 billion industry.
One area in need of regulation is the potential for neurotechnologies to be used for profiling individuals and the Orwellian idea of manipulating people’s thoughts and behaviour. Mass-market brain-monitoring devices would be a powerful addition to a digital world in which corporate and political actors already use personal data for political or commercial gain.

Commercial devices are of more pressing concern to ethicists. Companies from start-ups to tech giants are developing wearable devices for widespread use that include headsets, earbuds and wristbands that record different forms of neural activity — and will give manufacturers access to that information.

The privacy of this data is a key issue. Rafael Yuste, a neuroscientist at Columbia University in New York City, told the meeting that an unpublished analysis by the Neurorights Foundation, which he co-founded, found that 18 companies offering consumer neurotechnologies have terms and conditions that require users to give the company ownership of their brain data. All but one of those firms reserve the right to share that data with third parties. “I would describe this as predatory,” Yuste says. “It reflects the lack of regulation.”…Another theme at the meeting was how the ability to record and manipulate neural activity challenges existing human rights. Some speakers argued that existing human rights — such as the right to privacy — cover this innovation, whereas others think changes are needed.

Yuste and his colleagues propose five main neurorights: the right to mental privacy; protection against personality-changing manipulations; protected free will and decision-making; fair access to mental augmentation; and protection from biases in the algorithms that are central to neurotechnology.

Excerpt from Liam Drew, Mind-reading machines are coming — how can we keep them in check?, Nature, July 24, 2023

Decoding Brain Signals with a Credit Card

Leave a reply

A man unable to speak after a stroke has produced sentences through a system that reads electrical signals from speech production areas of his brain, researchers reported in July 2021…The participant had a stroke more than a decade ago that left him with anarthria—an inability to control the muscles involved in speech. Because his limbs are also paralyzed, he communicates by selecting letters on a screen using small movements of his head, producing roughly five words per minute.

To enable faster, more natural communication, neurosurgeon Edward Chang of the University of California, San Francisco, tested an approach that uses a computational model known as a deep-learning algorithm to interpret patterns of brain activity in the sensorimotor cortex, a brain region involved in producing speech . The approach has so far been tested in volunteers who have electrodes surgically implanted for non-research reasons such as to monitor epileptic seizures.

In the new study, Chang’s team temporarily removed a portion of the participant’s skull and laid a thin sheet of electrodes smaller than a credit card directly over his sensorimotor cortex. To “train” a computer algorithm to associate brain activity patterns with the onset of speech and with particular words, the team needed reliable information about what the man intended to say and when….So the researchers repeatedly presented one of 50 words on a screen and asked the man to attempt to say it on cue. Once the algorithm was trained with data from the individual word task, the man tried to read sentences built from the same set of 50 words, such as “Bring my glasses, please.” 


With the new approach, the man could produce sentences at a rate of up to 18 words per minute, Chang says…The system isn’t ready for use in everyday life, Chang notes. Future improvements will include expanding its repertoire of words and making it wireless, so the user isn’t tethered to a computer roughly the size of a minifridge.

Excerpts from Kelly Servick, Brain signals ‘speak’ for person with paralysis, Science, July 16, 2021

Registrar Brain: humans in war

Leave a reply

Two millivolts is enough to show that someone has seen something even before he knows he has seen it himself. The two millivolts in question are those associated with P300, a fleeting electrical signal produced by a human brain which has just recognised an object it has been seeking. Crucially, this signal is detectable by electrodes in contact with a person’s scalp before he is consciously aware of having recognised anything.

That observation is of great interest to the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).  DARPA’s Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts programme is dedicated to exploiting it in the search for things like rocket launchers and roadside bombs in drone and satellite imagery. To that end it has been paying groups of researchers to look into ways of using P300 to cut human consciousness out of the loop in such searches.

Among the beneficiaries are Robert Smith’s group at Honeywell Aerospace, in Phoenix, Arizona, and Paul Sajda’s at Neuromatters, in New York. Both of the “image triage systems” designed by these groups require the humans in them to wear special skull-enclosing caps. Each cap is fitted with 32 electrodes that record the brain’s electrical responses to whatever stimuli it is subjected to. Wearers have pictures flashed before their eyes at the rate of ten a second. That is too fast for conscious recognition, because the brain’s attention will have moved on to the next image before consciousness can come into play. It is not, though, too fast for the initial stages of recognition, marked by a P300 signal, to occur when suspicious items are present. Images that provoke such a signal are then tagged for review. According to Dr Sajda, this triples the speed with which objects of interest can be found.

Speed is important, of course. But in matters such as this, accuracy matters more. And some people think they can improve that, too—not by reading the brain, but by stimulating it. Many studies have shown that zapping the brain with a weak electric current, a procedure called transcranial neuronal stimulation, enhances what is known as “fluid intelligence”. This is the ability to reason, as opposed merely to recall facts. Another American military-research establishment, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), hopes to exploit this phenomenon for the purpose of target identification….[W]ith a current of just two milliamps, the stimulation is painless and safe, says Vincent Clark, a neuroscientist at the University of New Mexico. In a project paid for in part by IARPA, he and his team have stimulated the brains of more than 1,000 volunteers using a 9V battery connected to electrodes on the scalp. After half an hour of stimulation, volunteers spot in test photographs 13% more snipers, makeshift bombs and the like than do volunteers given a “sham” current of 100 microamps (5% of the experimental current) that mimics the skin-tingling induced by the experimental current.

Excerpts from Know your enemy: How to make soldiers’ brains better at noticing threats, Economist,  July 29, 2017