What kind of privacy and security measures are needed when a machine can read your mind?

logo-mind-tech

What kind of privacy and security measures are needed when a machine can read your mind?

In recent decades, meetings between information technology, biotechnology, and neuroscience have produced entirely new research, which is developing new, previously unknown products and services.

From nanotechnology opportunities for computer-brain integration occurs even an entirely new civil-military research, to develop a communication between computers and human minds / thoughts, called synthetic or artificial telepathy.

Understanding how the human brain works is not only leading to innovations in medicine, but also providing new models for energy-efficient, fault tolerant and adaptive computing technologies.

Research about artificial neural networks (signal processing) systems, and evolutionary, genetic algorithms, resulting in that you can now construct a self-learning computer programming themselves among others to read the human brain’s memories, feelings and knowledge.

Bioelectronics and a miniaturized signal processing systems in the brain may play in brain functional arkitektuer and through the spoken language to find out what the signals mean.

It is about creating a computer model of the brain including the evidence should provide the answer to what a person is, what is a conscience? What a responsibility is? Whence arises norms and values, etc.?None of these questions can be answered without copy the brain’s functional architecture.

Research Council Ethics Committee wrote the following on medical ethics Nano 2004:
Plus and minus with nanotechnology.
=

+ It is good to give medicine into the brain via the blood-brain barrier. + It is good to insert electrodes into the brain to give sight to a blind or to control a prosthetic hand. + It is good to use nanotechnology to stem terrorism on innocent people. + It is good for those who can afford to exploit nanotechnology for their own health and their own prosperity.

It’s not good when the particles that enter the body through the lungs and stresses the heart and other organs. – It’s not good if the technology used to read or to influence others’ thoughts, feelings and intentions. – There is no good if the same technology used to control and manage the innocent people.– It’s not good for the poor, who do not have access to the advanced technology.

Is it ethical for researchers to retain parts of uploaded minds (copied biologically conscious) that when the copied person is deceased?

Scientific psychological approach that studies the mechanisms underlying human thought processes. In the cognitive psychology main areas of work include memory , perception , knowledge representation,language , problem solving , decision making, awareness and intelligence .

Sources:
http://library.binarydissent.com/TS41259.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/AAAI.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/aecsi.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/artificial_emotion.pdf

Charles Darwin collected on his time in a variety of materials to describe the diversity of species and to announce his great work in 1859, if the origin of species (evolution theory)

Just as Charles Darwin collected the amounts of material, now played human neurons and nervous systems in bit by bit, in order to simulate the human brain and nervous system of the computer models.As computers developed enough power, research will be able to simulate a human brain in real time.

There are already injectable bioelectronics and multimedia technology as a “hang out” with people for years to clone their feelings, memories and knowledge. The protection against illegal recording and exploitation of people, according to Swedish European professors are not enough.

Ethical aspects of so-called ICT (Information and Comunication Technologies) implants in the human body are discussed for several years at the European level of The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies under the guidance of such Professor Goran Hermerén. One of the recommendations is that the dangers of ICT implants will be discussed in EU countries. But this has in any event not occurred in Sweden.

By using the new technology to read and copy human neurons and nervous systems so computers can learn ontologies and later “artificial intelligence”, an intelligence that has no ethical foundations and values.

“Artificial intelligence” is a research area that aims to develop computer-based applications that behave and act in a manner that is indistinguishable from human behavior.

The next step in computer development, computers / software that imitate humans. These computers come with their artificial intelligence to be able to threaten the man’s integrity, identity, autonomy and spirituality

Listen to Anders Holst and the Swedish Institute of Computer Science (SICS) in the SRS radio interview robotnyheter.se on AI and to simulate the brains of computers.

Years of recordings of people using the new brain chips and broadband technology visualizes piecemeal man’s own self, this is copied to the new more powerful computers.

A radio program where Asa Wikfors associate professor of theoretical philosophy, Lars Bergstrom Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Martin Ingvar professor of neurophysiology talking about the mind, brain implants and how the view of man’s own in the future I will be able to change.

Some of the research with brain implants (ICT) to clone the human brain is conducted according to many sources of criminal, without informed consent. This is probably because the ethical appeal can not be approved for life-long computerized study of brain implants, where the consequences for the individual is less than the benefits of the research.

Illegal computer cloning could lead to unprecedented physical, psychological and legal consequences for man and society. Illegal data cloning also involves research to do everything in their power to bring technology to the ICT implants read and copy pro men’s thoughts is not disclosed.

Nanoscience and biological implants can lead to serious problems if the technology is used in ways that violate people’s privacy. It is almost impossible to find electronic components, when incorporated in nanoscale particles. Businesses and governments will this new technology to find out things about people in a whole new way. Therefore, nanotechnology will also require new laws and regulations, just as the development of computers has contributed to the enactment of such Personal Data Act.

Swedish Professors also ask, how can you prevent and control the unauthorized use of nanotechnology, although there are legislation? Traceability, or rather the scarcity of traceability, is a perennial topic of debate on ethics, risk and safety. Another recurring theme is the monitoring, how nanotechnology can be used for monitoring purposes, where the individual or group is unaware of the surveillance and unable to find out if she / they are supervised (e) or not.

The government and their ethical advice, according to the EU has a responsibility to inform and educate the community in this new area of research. This has not been entrusted to the government was aware of the technologies already in 2003.

That some of today’s important scientific breakthroughs in nanotechnology / bioelectronics and information not published, because the established academic, financial and political centers of power to preserve their interests and protect unethical research on humans, research thus miss opportunities revealed. Research and its implications are misleading in relation to the judiciary and traditional medical diagnostics. It also goes against all human rights conventions.

Instead of Sweden and Europe, through their political gatekeepers favors confidential unethical civilian-military research on the civilian population during the development of software and networking technologies for medical and military surveillance would research it can make its research progress and the new paradigm’s insights.

In this way Sweden could use progress to solve many of its current political problems and be able to make an international pioneer work for the benefit of all mankind.

We want this website to create an awareness and an awareness that many of the new technologies described developed on the civilian population in Sweden and the rest of the world, without their consent and / or knowledge, this for many years.

Mindtech cooperate with the media and the Swedish Church to try to push the ethical debate that the EU research council and Professor Goran Hermerén initiated in this topic back in 2004. An ethical debate that has since been blacked out by the research and its representatives.

Know someone who is multi-media online but do not dare talk about it?

It is easy not to be believed for a person who alleges that a paradigm shift in computer-brain integration and multimedia technology is already here.

We are aware that portions of the information here may sound like pure science fiction, but it is already a real reality.

By: Magnus Olsson

See also: http://www.mindcontrol.se

Sources:
http://library.binarydissent.com/TS41259.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/AAAI.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/aecsi.pdf
http://library.binarydissent.com/artificial_emotion.pdf

 

For all the governments (About Mind Control)

For all the governments of European countries (About Mind Control)

For all the governments of European countries (About Mind Control)

One of the most powerful weapons are now targeting some of the civilian population during its development. The weapon is called brain implants and synthetic telepathy. Synthetic telepathy covers mind reading, and artificial intelligence. People who are involved in the development of invasive imaging of the brain and nervous system without their consent has no legal protection, no human rights, and no medical help. Instead of receiving protection diagnosed these people to suffer from a mental illness. Research is conducted 24 / 7 over the aging process.

The most frightening implications of this technology is the serious risk that it facilitates totalitarian control of humans.

It is alarming to governments in this emerging technology masks the effects of the illegal research behind the incorrect diagnosis, that the victims suffer from a mental illness.

Nazi torture in concentration camps with the miniaturization of electronics has moved directly into people’s brains to copy the brain signalsysstem, a procedure that takes the lives of many people who can not keep. It’s about a chip that works as a search engine / ESM systems in the brain. This feature can be “Googling” your memories, read minds just before consciousness and copy your feelings. The chips are described in the future be used to “Googling” directly with the brains of tomorrow’s Internet. The scheme is to give people an expanded memory, be a communication system for the military and an escort system for Alzheimer’s disease.

To retrieve information directly from the brain to evaluate it is called by Swedish professors for alternative nanotechnology diagnostics. The diagnosis affects strangely successful people, this may be because the technology is being abused?

Should it be accepted that automated monitoring of self-learning, computers and brain implants with synthetic telepathy can drive people to suicide? This technology changes the man’s integrity, identity and autonomy.

Should scientists and government representatives who are aware of this research to obtain further confidence when they are aware that these technologies developed through research on civilians without their consent?

What would you do if you ran into this copying “Cloning” of the brain? When you are looking for help in the rough torture as copying, so did you hear that you had delusions

It is the tax money that pays for this research?

Can we be sure that all the crimes committed by people with voices in his head is disease-related? Could it be that the perpetrators have been manipulated and tortured by the computer-brain integration for committing crimes?

Is the whole research brain implants and related networking technologies a completely lawless area of research?Swedish and European professors warned of this trend back in 2004!

How long has this research been going on in secret?

By: Magnus Olsson

Controlling the Human Mind !!!

The NSA – Behind The Curtain

Mon Jan 16, 2012 7:54 PM EST

As promised, today we will take an in-depth examination of the NSA’s global intelligence gathering network. What you are about to read will come as an eye-opener and represents the current state of the NSA’s capabilities.

Continue reading this entry …

Continue reading this entry …

Mon Jan 9, 2012 2:59 PM EST

Before we get to the good stuff, analyzing the technology employed in the NSA’s global listening network, I thought I would deal with one more instance of disinformation.  This one appeared on Slashdot.org on Christmas Day under the title of “The Science of Santa”.  I  …

Continue reading this entry …

Sun Jan 1, 2012 3:14 AM EST

Its been around seven months since my last article on the NSA’s technology. I have been watching the slow spread of the information throughout the web and the disinformation it has spawned. It has been very interesting to watch the spies at work.

Continue reading this entry …

More after the links

Agenda of Links:

Dr Nick Begich – Controlling the Human Mind, Earth Pulse Press Anchorage – isbn=1-890693-54-5}}
Walter Bowart – http://www.scribd.com/doc/24531011/O…n-Mind-Control
John Marks – In Search of the Manchurian Candidate, publisher WW Norton & Co, 1979, isbn=0-393-30794-8

==References==
1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27162401/ – Army developing ‘synthetic telepathy’
2. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/H…tic_telepathy/ articleshow/3596708.cms – US army developing synthetic telepathy
3.url=http://io9.com/5038464/army-sinks-millions-into-synthetic-telepathy-research – Army Sinks Millions Into “Synthetic Telepathy” Research
4. http://io9.com/5065304/tips-and-tric…he-us-military – Tips and Tricks for Mind Control from the US Military
5. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html#Dewan – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
6. http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationD…51134&KC=&FT=E – Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves
7. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/resear…FarwellDonchin – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
8. http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationD…11991&KC=&FT=E – Communication system and method including brain wave analysis and/or use of brain activity
9. http://www.sst.ws/tempstandards.php?pab=1_1 – TEMPEST measurement standards
10. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill…bill=h107-2977 – Space Preservation Act of 2001
11. http://www.raven1.net/silsoun2.htm – PSY-OPS WEAPONRY USED IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR}}
12. Wall, Judy, “Military Use of Mind Control Weapons”, NEXUS, 5/06, Oct-Nov 1998
13. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
14. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
15. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
16. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
17. Noah, Shachtman – Pentagon’s PCs Bend to Your Brain – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/03/the_us_military
18. http://pinktentacle.com/2008/12/scie…ly-from-brain/ – Scientists extract images directly from brain
19. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html#Overview – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy -Overview
20. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/resear…eechProduction – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
21. http://www.slavery.org.uk/Bioeffects…al_Weapons.pdf -Bioeffects of selected non-lethal weapons
22. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con…ent=a785359968 – Partial Amnesia for a Narrative Following Application of Theta Frequency Electromagnetic Fields
23. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.11/persinger.html – This Is Your Brain on God
24. http://www.charlesrehn.com/charlesre…/The%20NSA.doc – The NSA & Synthetic Telepathy
25. http://www.uwe.ac.uk/hlss/research/c…2/SmithC.shtml – Journal of Psycho-Social Studies – Vol 2 (2) 2003 – On the Need for New Criteria of Diagnosis of Psychosis in the Light of Mind Invasive Technology by Dr. Carole Smith
26. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ci…lweapons02.htm – Eleanor White – New Devices That ‘Talk’ To The Human Mind Need Debate, Controls
27. http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P…S=PN/5,159,703 – Silent subliminal presentation system
28. http://www.audioholics.com/education…uency-response | – Understanding Loudspeaker Frequency Response
29. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=367925 – Q: Radio signals picked up by tooth fillings
30. http://cbcg.org/gjcs1.htm| – God’s Judgment Cometh Soon
31. http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/6587729.html – Apparatus for audibly communicating speech using the radio frequency hearing effect
32. http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac….MS%20info.html – Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
33. http://www.scribd.com/doc/6508206/SY…ARLY-MIND-WARS – SYNTHETIC TELEPATHY AND THE EARLY MIND WARS
34. http://newdawnmagazine.com.au/Articl…_Part_One.html – Brain Zapping
35. http://genamason.wordpress.com/2009/…tic-telepathy/ – More on synthetic telepathy
36. http://newdawnmagazine.com.au/Articl…_Part_One.html – Brain Zapping
37. http://daprocess.com/01.welcome.html – DaProcess of A Federal Investigation PG 1 of 4
38. ,http://www.uwe.ac.uk/hlss/research/c…2/SmithC.shtml -Journal of Psycho-Social Studies – Vol 2 (2) 2003 – On the Need for New Criteria of Diagnosis of Psychosis in the Light of Mind Invasive Technology by Dr. Carole Smith
39. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill…bill=h107-2977 – Space Preservation Act of 2001
40. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/…n4694713.shtml – 60 Minutes: Incredible Research Lets Scientists Get A Glimpse At Your Thoughts
41. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?…ted;photovideo – 60 Minutes: Video – Mind Reading

Synthetic telepathy “Artificial Telepathy” NSA (USA) FOI (Sweden)

 Synthetic telepathy “Artificial Telepathy” NSA (USA) FOI (Sweden)

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

Synthetic telepathy“Artificial Telepathy” is the art of electronically transfering thought directly to and from a brain. The primary objectives of Mindtech are to expose technology that can provide point to point communication from one brain to another, to localize unwanted sources of telepathic communication, and to provide evidence that technologically implemented telepathy is possible.

Technology to block unwanted voices is being investigated. A key objective is to prove the existence of criminals who abuse existing synthetic telepathy technology. Further objectives include investigating other computational substrates than brain tissue. http://www.cyberbrain.se is also interested in marketing existing synthetic telepathy technology. For justice and medical purposes only.

Welcome to Mindtech Enterprises

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

The experience of synthetic telepathy or“Artificial Telepathy” is really not that extraordinary. It’s as simple as receiving a cell-phone call in one’s head.
Indeed, most of the technology involved is exactly identical to that of cell-phone technology. Satellites link the sender and the receiver. A computer “multiplexer” routes the voice signal of the sender through microwave towers to a very specifically defined location or cell. The “receiver” is located and tracked with pinpoint accuracy, to within a few feet of actual location. But the receiver is not a cell phone. It’s a human brain.
Animation1
Out of nowhere, a voice suddenly blooms in the mind of the target. The human skull has no “firewall” and therefore cannot shut the voice out. The receiver can hear the sender’s verbal thoughts. The sender, in turn, can hear all of the target’s thoughts, exactly as if the target’s verbal thoughts had been spoken or broadcast. For this reason, the experience could be called “hearing voices” but is more properly described as “artificial telepathy”.
Now, if artificial telepathy were entirely voluntary, like a conversation between friends sitting across the room from one other, it might be kind of cool. One could talk back and forth with one’s friend, exchanging verbal thoughts exactly as if speaking on the phone, but without ever using one’s voice or mouth. It’s a completely silent, subvocal form of speech. Between lovers, this would be beautiful.
The problem is that artificial telepathy provides the perfect weapon for mental torture and information theft. It provides an extremely powerful means for exploiting, harassing, controlling, and raping the mind of any person on earth. It opens the window to quasi-demonic possession of another person’s soul.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
When used as a “nonlethal” weapons system it becomes an ideal means for neutralizing or discrediting a political opponent. Peace protestors, inconvenient journalists and the leaders of vocal opposition groups can be stunned into silence with this weapon.
Artificial telepathy also offers an ideal means for complete invasion of privacy. If all thoughts can be read, then Passwords, PIN numbers, and personal secrets simply cannot be protected. One cannot be alone in the bathroom or shower. Embarrassing private moments cannot be hidden: they are subject to all manner of hurtful comments and remarks. Evidence can be collected for blackmail with tremendous ease: all the wrongs or moral lapses of one’s past are up for review.
Like a perverted phone caller, a hostile person with this technology in hand can call at any time of day, all day long. Sleep can be disrupted. Prayers can be desecrated, religious beliefs mocked. Business meetings can be interrupted, thoughts derailed. Love can be polluted, perverted, twisted, abused. Dreams can be invaded, fond memories trashed.
The attacker cannot be seen or identified, the attack cannot be stopped, and the psychological damage is enormous. But there is no physical damage, not one single mark is left on the body and there is absolutely no proof that any crime or any violation ever took place! Everything that “happens” to the victim happens inside the victim’s head. What physical evidence is there to give the police? Without physical evidence, how can one photograph the “crime scene” or fingerprint the stalker? There are no footprints leading to or from the scene. Indeed, there is no physical scene at all, and no evidence that an attack ever took place.
Most people who experience this abusive form of “artificial telepathy” feel as if their mind has been raped. They find themselves hunted, stalked, harassed and abused by a person or persons who refuse to give their names, who defile one’s mind with the most foul and perverse language imaginable, and who refuse to hang up or go away. The caller or callers delight in the perverse and sadistic torture of their targets. Furthermore, they delight in violating the privacy of their targets, reading the target’s mind and commenting on everything the target thinks, in an effort to demonstrate as brutally as possible that the target has no privacy at all.
Imagine what a man might do if he found a  ”cell phone” that allowed him to dial into the heads and the private thoughts of anyone on earth. The temptation to choose a target at random and start spying on or abusing that person would be enormous, almost irresistable. It could become a sick and twisted hobby, a guilty pleasure very quickly. Put into the hands of a secret police unit, the potential for abusing such technology is even more chilling.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Synthetic Telepathy system, would be intelligence gathering and interrogation. As a communication system, it would have a limited appeal as any nation with a similar setup could either listen in, or pretend to be the A.I. interface. As such, it raises important ethical and legal questions, especially the question of secrecy given that all major governments would be aware of the system. Given that no law permits this type of interrogation, its secrecy may be more to do with criminal activity on behalf of the security agencies, rather than national security.
Its All About The Transceiver!
To understand how this works, it is best to start with the target, then trace backwards and identify each of the required subsystems. If we look at the last diagram to the left, we can see that the key to this system is its ability to both listen and respond to the electrical activity of the brain implant from satellite.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

Agenda of Links:

Dr Nick Begich – Controlling the Human Mind, Earth Pulse Press Anchorage – isbn=1-890693-54-5}}
Walter Bowart – http://www.scribd.com/doc/24531011/O…n-Mind-Control
John Marks – In Search of the Manchurian Candidate, publisher WW Norton & Co, 1979, isbn=0-393-30794-8

==References==
1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27162401/ – Army developing ‘synthetic telepathy’
2. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/H…tic_telepathy/ articleshow/3596708.cms – US army developing synthetic telepathy
3.url=http://io9.com/5038464/army-sinks-millions-into-synthetic-telepathy-research – Army Sinks Millions Into “Synthetic Telepathy” Research
4. http://io9.com/5065304/tips-and-tric…he-us-military – Tips and Tricks for Mind Control from the US Military
5. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html#Dewan – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
6. http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationD…51134&KC=&FT=E – Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves
7. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/resear…FarwellDonchin – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
8. http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationD…11991&KC=&FT=E – Communication system and method including brain wave analysis and/or use of brain activity
9. http://www.sst.ws/tempstandards.php?pab=1_1 – TEMPEST measurement standards
10. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill…bill=h107-2977 – Space Preservation Act of 2001
11. http://www.raven1.net/silsoun2.htm – PSY-OPS WEAPONRY USED IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR}}
12. Wall, Judy, “Military Use of Mind Control Weapons”, NEXUS, 5/06, Oct-Nov 1998
13. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
14. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
15. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
16. Soldier-Telepathy” Drummond, Katie – Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009…telepathy-push
17. Noah, Shachtman – Pentagon’s PCs Bend to Your Brain – http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/03/the_us_military
18. http://pinktentacle.com/2008/12/scie…ly-from-brain/ – Scientists extract images directly from brain
19. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html#Overview – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy -Overview
20. http://cnslab.ss.uci.edu/muri/resear…eechProduction – MURI: Synthetic Telepathy
21. http://www.slavery.org.uk/Bioeffects…al_Weapons.pdf -Bioeffects of selected non-lethal weapons
22. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con…ent=a785359968 – Partial Amnesia for a Narrative Following Application of Theta Frequency Electromagnetic Fields
23. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.11/persinger.html – This Is Your Brain on God 
24. http://www.charlesrehn.com/charlesre…/The%20NSA.doc – The NSA & Synthetic Telepathy
25. http://www.uwe.ac.uk/hlss/research/c…2/SmithC.shtml – Journal of Psycho-Social Studies – Vol 2 (2) 2003 – On the Need for New Criteria of Diagnosis of Psychosis in the Light of Mind Invasive Technology by Dr. Carole Smith
26. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ci…lweapons02.htm – Eleanor White – New Devices That ‘Talk’ To The Human Mind Need Debate, Controls
27. http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P…S=PN/5,159,703 – Silent subliminal presentation system
28. http://www.audioholics.com/education…uency-response | – Understanding Loudspeaker Frequency Response
29. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=367925 – Q: Radio signals picked up by tooth fillings
30. http://cbcg.org/gjcs1.htm| – God’s Judgment Cometh Soon
31. http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/6587729.html – Apparatus for audibly communicating speech using the radio frequency hearing effect
32. http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac….MS%20info.html – Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
33. http://www.scribd.com/doc/6508206/SY…ARLY-MIND-WARS – SYNTHETIC TELEPATHY AND THE EARLY MIND WARS
34. http://newdawnmagazine.com.au/Articl…_Part_One.html – Brain Zapping
35. http://genamason.wordpress.com/2009/…tic-telepathy/ – More on synthetic telepathy
36. http://newdawnmagazine.com.au/Articl…_Part_One.html – Brain Zapping
37. http://daprocess.com/01.welcome.html – DaProcess of A Federal Investigation PG 1 of 4
38. ,http://www.uwe.ac.uk/hlss/research/c…2/SmithC.shtml -Journal of Psycho-Social Studies – Vol 2 (2) 2003 – On the Need for New Criteria of Diagnosis of Psychosis in the Light of Mind Invasive Technology by Dr. Carole Smith
39. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill…bill=h107-2977 – Space Preservation Act of 2001
40. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/…n4694713.shtml – 60 Minutes: Incredible Research Lets Scientists Get A Glimpse At Your Thoughts
41. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?…ted;photovideo – 60 Minutes: Video – Mind Reading

Now, the natural reaction of a normal and intelligent person who undergoes the horrible experience of mind rape for the first time is to panic and reach for a real phone. They call family, contact their doctor or call police with a bizarre complaint that “someone is beaming voices into my head.”
But if the police are the ones behind the abuse, the victims aren’t going to get much help, are they? And if the police are not the perpetrators, then how are they to make an arrest? It’s much more convenient and easy to believe that the caller is a nutcase.
In short order, the victim of mind rape finds herself or himself undergoing the additional humiliation of being carted off to the psych ward, often being committed involuntarily by a loved one “for one’s own good.”
The more vehement the efforts to prove that the voice or voices in one’s head are “real”, the more smug become the smiles of the medical doctors, who gently insist that such technology does not exist, that the voices cannot possibly be real, and that one must take a powerful psych med and lie down for a good long rest.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
The experience of “hearing voices” — especially voices that give a running stream of negative abuse — will gain one automatic admission to the rubber room. Indeed, hearing voices is a classic example of schizophrenia. If you hear voices, you are, by definition, crazy.
Yet when released from the psych ward with an expensive supply of meds, “voice hearers” often find that the meds are ineffective — exactly as one would expect if their problem had nothing to do with brain chemistry and everything to do with a bio-electronic attack by unseen stalkers.
Voice hearers often puzzle psychiatrists, because many of them don’t fit the classic model of schizophrenia, which usually begins onset in the early twenties. The victims of Synthetic telepathy “artificial telepathy” are often well into their thirties or fourties and many have no prior history of serious mental illness or drug abuse. Many seem to be alert, healthy, and rational even while insisting that they can hear voices. They agree with the psychiatrists that, yes, they are depressed, but who wouldn’t be a bit depressed under such trying circumstances? To be stalked and verbally bullied every waking hour of the day is a form of mental torture.
Victims of mind rape quickly learn not to discuss their “psychological problems” with family and coworkers. It’s embarrassing, it’s bizarre, it gets very little sympathy and only serves to alarm most people. The only way that another person can “help” is to suggest that the mind rape victim see a psychiatrist, who will promptly double one’s dose of psych meds and antidepressants. The result is a very stiff medical bill, which only adds financial pain to the mix. And the verbal harassment continues.
As they learn to endure their daily torture, voice hearers can usually return to mainstream life, where they are able to carry on intelligent, coherent conversations, hold down jobs, and function quite normally. In fact, if they don’t discuss their “problem” they usually can’t be told apart from normal people on the street. Because they are normal people.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
The growing number of voice hearers in our society is therefore well masked. Those who continue to insist that there is a “secret society of people beaming voices into our heads” are simply laughed into silence or labelled paranoid schizophrenics. They are completely discredited. In fact, many voice hearers have internalized the idea that they are mentally ill, and they struggle to understand how their “auditory hallucinations” could continue to seem so very, very real.
Naturally, many of these voice hearers are deeply confused. They turn to support groups, including such on-line communities as the Voice Hearers’ support group at Yahoo.com.
Anyone who doubts that “artificial telepathy” exists need only contact such a Voice Hearers community, where they will encounter people who continue to insist that they are being harassed by real people using an unknown or unexplained technology.
artificial telepathy
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Surprisingly, there is a tremendous amount of scientific literature and circumstantial evidence to back up that claim.
In the following posts, we will explore the history of synthetic telepathy and learn the names of the scientists who developed this sinister technology. We will also identify and examine some of the government agencies that are fielding and using this weapon of torture against innocent civilians.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Brain “Mind”Link Technology
The NSA – Behind The Curtain
consciousness
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Today we will take an in-depth examination of the NSA’s global intelligence gathering network. What you are about to read will come as an eye-opener and represents the current state of the NSA’s capabilities. Some of this will be expected, some of it will come as a shock.
What you will learn is that the technology that underpins this global listening network is a lot more advanced than governments would have you know. Usually wrapped up in basic, generalised, descriptions the general public is kept blind to the current state of technological development.
We will take this examination in three major parts. The first part will examine the core processing system. Once this part is understood, we can then look at how information flows to and from this core and where it is obtained from. Finally, we will examine how this information is used by the NSA.
I will cover as much as possible about this system, but the scope is very large. In general, any use of this data that the reader can observe is most likely already being conducted.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
The scope of the NSA’s infrastructure is mind boggling to say the least. Heavily compartmentalised, the entire array of systems is shielded from the average NSA employee as much as it is shielded from the public. That said, once you understand the core of the NSA, you will be in a position to see how information flows in and out of this core.
The NSA is built around a super-computer bound Artificial Intelligence known only as “Mr Computer” in the civilian world. This is not your average A.I., no basic set of responses or a mere dedicated algorithm that can spot patterns. Mr Computer is an entity or being in his own right. A sentient computer s The scope of the NSA’s infrastructure is mind boggling to say the least. Heavily compartmentalised, the entire array of systems is shielded from the average NSA employee as much as it is shielded from the public. That said, once you understand the core of the NSA, you will be in a position to see how information flows in and out of this core.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
The scope of the NSA’s infrastructure is mind boggling to say the least. Heavily compartmentalised, the entire array of systems is shielded from the average NSA employee as much as it is shielded from the public. That said, once you understand the core of the NSA, you will be in a position to see how information flows in and out of this core.
Mr Computer
 The NSA is built around a super-computer bound Artificial Intelligence known only as “Mr Computer” in the civilian world. This is not your average A.I., no basic set of responses or a mere dedicated algorithm that can spot patterns. Mr Computer is an entity or being in his own right. A sentient computer system as complex as any human.
Comparable to VMware in a way, an instance of Mr Computer can be started at a moments notice. Within seconds, a fully fledged virtual intelligence agent, ready to analyse the information that has been piped to him, can be up and running.
Mr Computer is competent enough to handle real-time interaction without human intervention. Mr Computer understands and speaks all modern languages and even a number of dead ones. Able to intelligently converse and express its own opinions, Mr Computer collates information from disparate sources and compiles them into concise reports that do not miss the smallest detail or nuance.
Mr Computer’s capabilities and human-like reasoning cannot be understated.
Read moore: http://www.mindcontrol.se
Mon Jan 16, 2012 7:54 PM EST
Newsvine

“Brain-Chip” Nano Implant in the brain of Magnus Olsson (Sweden)

“Brain-Chip” Nano Implant in the brain of Magnus Olsson (Sweden). “Brain-Chip”  E.U

“Brain-Chip” Implant in the brain of Magnus Olsson

 

digital man

A successful businessman visits the nearest hospital after an anxiety attack. He is sedated and wakes up as a different person. His life is starting to change. The voice coming from nowhere can tell him what time it is: the correct time.

The mental and psychological torture and control starts to take place. On one hand, they are telling him awful things, like “You are never going to wake up” when going to bed every evening or “We are dissapointed that you woke up” every time he was waking up in the morning. On the other side, they can manipulate his feelings and perceptions, and create the most positive feelings.

See for yourself.

Mind Control TI Magnus Olsson Sweden from Henning Witte on Vimeo.

Magnus Olsson is a rescent victim of modern Mind Control technology in Sweden.

Mind Control TI Magnus Olsson Sweden interviewed by a laywer who´s engaged in swedish victims Laywer Henning Witte

 

digital man

Magnus Olsson SWEDEN

For me, there was a day in life when everything changed. I went from a life as a citizen in a demo map indicative country into a world where violence and torture was the norm. It was not a journey across continents, but in life circumstances. It also included a science fiction drama that completely shattered my life. My name is Magnus Olsson, I am 38 years old, studied economics at the Cesar Ritz in Switzerland, American University of Paris and Harvard, Boston, USA, during the years 1988-1991. 1994 I started the company Jon Sandman who became a well known brand in the bedding industry. I managed with my life and had also met a wonderful woman whom I had two children with. They are now 13 to 16 years old. But all this harmony and success came to a sudden end. It happened five and a half years ago. After that, life has been about a constant struggle for survival. In order to cope with but also to be able to tell what has happened to me and get out of the nightmare.

The Following Punkt Has Been posted on the World Wide Web as a Notice of Legal Purposes. I am-being framed by the illegal use of Remote Neural Monitoring.

  • Magnus Olsson, a Victim of Remote Neural Monitoring. Anything I Think May Not Be Used Against Me in a court of law or Any Other venue. The person or person performing the Remote Neural Monitoring are here by ordered to cease and desist operations said.Any person’s knowledge or variable Participating in said illegal activity must report to the proper Such Authorities.

It all started after I had been admitted to St. George (Capio) hospital. It was in spring 2005. I had been sedated and you must have deposited or injected one implanted in my head. I came in during a difficult exercise. It must have with defense research to do but I had never heard of this kind of technology before it happened, remote control of brain. Not had I not believed in it who claimed that such things occurred in Sweden.

Proof:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IzHp1rM-Qo

ETHICS ANARCHY

mind reading

From being an open successful person, I was transformed in my new life circumstances. There were many problems to overcome. The first was to cope with. Life was suddenly just as difficult as it had previously been a pleasant result of the days and weeks. Another problem was that no help was available. This was entirely in secret and was more like what the perpetrators of acts of madness trying to explain about his powerlessness of being repossessed. I was induced by sensory stimuli that could not be distinguished from the real. I assumed that most would consider me as a mentally disturbed if I tried to explain what has befallen me. It was an idea from the beginning. I had no information to relate to. At this time, I was knocked out. I was completely pacified and under their power. But there came a day when I started trying to do something even if it took over two years. First I went to the Royal Institute of Technology in Valhallavägen in Stockholm and spoke with several people. Asked if they knew who was involved in biological and remote computer connection with people. Then I got an address to the Alba-Nova. When I went there, I happened to come just when an international conference was in progress. Here I got the first facts that spoke of opportunities to establish communication with human biological systems. It was known as Biotech or Brain-Computer Interface. I realized that this was something the media. It is an amazing thing that the technology exists and that the project is ongoing.

Light Brain

Therefore, I contacted one of my acquaintances, Thabo Motsieola as a reporter and a renowned TV profile. I got to know him during my time with Jon Sandman Enterprises, which I had sold. He understood me and was interested in the subject. It was a great success. My mother and media  also came to mean a lot for me to get help to fight with this thing. But at first I could only say that there was something that had made my very difficult life change. It was something that had happened, I said, but could not explain more. She demanded to know, and when I told it. “When I was sedated at St. George’s Hospital in sweden, implanted  something inside my head. Then you use me in an experiment. I must fight to survive hurricanes. You know my thoughts, see what I see and feel. Everything. And you can communicate with me. Transferring different sounds and even speech directly into the brain. “It was in early 2005.

She and MIND TECH SWEDEN became not only my biggest support, but also my ally in proving what I am exposed to.

My mother Elisabeth Nystrom Barringer. She has personal experience of care, has worked with doctors and midwives have been for many years. Now she is active in this matter. Helps me, contacting people and is involved in everything.

Magnus Olsson

When I started searching the internet I became aware that there are people who share my situation. Implanted in hospitals or other places and used for experiments. It is about international organized crime research. Many of the stories from the victims was similar to my own case. The Internet contains research reports, opinion articles and documentary material.There is information from different parts of the world and the brutal mentality, to take advantage of people in life-destroying brain experiments seem to be the same in the country than the abuse occurs. Of all the impacts that many talked about was a lot of identical to my case. The usual torture is easier to explain as it is to burn, cut or physical torment. Anybody can associate with what it would be. There are probably not a difficult topic to address than this. Especially when you also will speak in their own cause. The whole subject of the great technology is largely unknown – and that some people would be exposed, it is most unlikely. It does not occur in our country! So it is. That says enough, most of these things. But there will be a resolution already in the letter.

magnus olsson sweden

MAN DIGITAL 2.0

Targeted : http://moriarty.tech.dmu.ac.uk:8080/index.jsp?page=628608

Here are some examples of the methods they expose me to. Through interaction, you can bypass the sensory receptors and transmit messages / numbers directly into the brain. The same is with painful interfering signals and other sounds that you can often stay awake during the whole night. These applications are used daily for three years now. One can see through my eyes, hear my thoughts, manipulate my sleep and stay awake for long periods. Although increase or decrease heart rate, upload photos and scents into my brain as real as if I saw or smelled it in the natural environment. Of course you can hear what I hear, I am as a unit of the mainframe. You can change my behavior, including memory functions may be affected as well as emotions (having to be sexually aroused in inappropriate situations). For a long time has created a severe headache, nausea, blurred vision and problems with balance. Something that I never had before this started. In general, I am an example of that by inplantatet can create pain all over my body. Also, I collapsed and lost consciousness seven times within two months in spring 2008. On several of these occasions, I have come to the hospital by ambulance. My mom has been with me for five of those times and this is just one form of the consequences of what I am exposed to. It has no natural cause and you can never either to diagnose the cause.What I have mentioned here are the most common methods you use to torment me. All this is happening also in various stages day and night. In between, I try to sleep and rest so that I can survive. From my point of view, this is an equally crucial event that the establishment of concentration camps in Germany in the 1930s. Moreover, it seems a similar mentality that drives the perpetrators.

Proof of implants: http://www.us-government-torture.com/Larson%20Report%20Edit.pdf

IMPLANTED BRAINS,,,

Fifty years after Skinner and Rogers warned of Science was a declaration by the European Ethics Group of the Swedish professor Goran Hermerén as chairman. The group advises the European Commission on ethical considerations of scientific issues. Their records of March 16, 2005 was also presented as a recommendation to the European Commission (Prof. Rafael Capurro) look at  www.capurro.de/ECLSC2010.ppt and what to do up there is exactly the same as I am exposed to. They speak in clear words about the danger of this technology and provides an understanding of all parts of it that I have mentioned. The following quotes come from the EU group is translated into Swedish by the network with Robert Naeslund, which we now work with. Ethical Council, which has a participant from each EU country has an official status within the EU. The Swedish professor Goran Hermerén is also Sweden’s first professor of medical ethics while he is also President ofthe EGE, The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. In their descriptions, it is called we term as electrodes, transmitters, and brain chips for ICT implants, which stands for information and communication technologies. Their full document is 30 pages on the Internet in English at the following Internet address for the EU ethics group: http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/european-group-ethics/docs/avis20_en.pdf

magnus olsson brain chip

Look at :  http://www.targeted-individuals-europe.com/

It asks the important question of a human being ceases to be human when his brain was implanted: a human being ceases to be human cases in some parts of her physical self, especially the brain, has been replaced or supplemented by ICT implants? In particular, as inplantaten can help to create the front-line people, who are always connected and can be conformed differently, to receive and emit signals for meetings, habits and movements. This naturally affects their dignity. In my case, it translates as connected persons not primarily manipulation but rather to break down and torture me. It is a form of torture. When this happens to people like me, educated, self-employed and any links to psychiatry and the legal system is of course an even clearer symptom of social disease. Then you can understand the degree of hardship mental patients and criminals have to live with. This is clearly just as degrading as to start locking up people in secret concentration camps. There were people just like now, completely lost the rights to his life and his body. EU group writes:One can also see this trend as a threat to human dignity and in particular to the human body’s integrity … Sure it is. Here, man has lost the last own, his body and brain. It also writes that hjärninplantaten used to control people. In some cases, already implanted microchips with opportunities for individual and social control. The confirms that this is a system that retrieves information from the brain. Brain-computer interaction or direct brain control is performed by communications technology which retrieves information from the brain and evaluates it. The worst threat, as in my case is clear and has also distanced the concentration camp opportunities affecting the central nervous system and man’s identity as a species. They show that ICT implants may affect the nervous system and in particular the brain and man’s identity as a species and individual autonomy … As already mentioned inplantaten can be used for both health and non-medical purposes.Both possibilities with implants should of course be subject to the informed condition

It should be questioned about this technique, even with the informed consent should be used.From the following quotation, one can see that there is a threat not only to a few individuals, but against our entire society. In its evaluation EGE makes the general conclusion that non-medical applications of implants is a potential threat to human dignity and democratic society … The use of remote control to take control of people’s will must be absolutely forbidden. Those old dictatorships forced people to hold certain views, but here you can see that Sweden is one step further and implanted brain chip to control man’s will.

Another text from their document indicates that there are no studies on the health risks of what I face. It must be emphasized that there is no reliable research studies on the long-term aspects of health related to ICT implants in the human body … The unlimited freedom for some can be a danger to others’ health and safety … As in other areas, the freedom to use the implants in the cell, as the principle of freedom, can collide with potentially adverse social effects. We’ve seen it for that abuse, violence and abuse of people for increasing the authorities’ power over the individual has had disastrous consequences. It is good that the European Commission’s ethical council takes it up to do it the easier for everyone else to also realize it.

Ethics group also asks the question to what extent this technology will be misused by the military. But no matter what career plans they are responsible, it is a horror story. See threats they paint up and understand that it has gone far on the road. I was a successful self-employed with good education, an orderly life, but despite that I was a victim, how far can inplantaten give an individual or a group, special opportunities which may become a threat to society? … How far is it acceptable to people checked with the applications of other individuals who exploit this potential? … To what extent will this technology be misused by the military?

New York mind

What do journalists, MPs, party leaders on my case! Is it something that should continue? I’m an experiment victims who completely lost the right to my life! I must fight to survive but I am an adult and have support, can explain myself and that makes my situation hope after all. But even worse is it with children and the mentally ill as a professor Hermerén also suggests use of it here. ICT implants as through a network’s capacity can be misused in several ways for all varieties of social control and manipulation, such as for children and handicapped persons. Ethical Council also mentions, as I have said about their transfer of votes and other information that need not be perceived by the sensory receptors, but instead can is transmitted directly into the brain. It mentions it under the threat of military applications that need to be further examined. There will discuss: ‘Intrusive’ technology which bypasses normal sensory experiences. It’s the worst invasive you can experience. By disturbing the man of my brain. Creates a sounding cacophony of different tones and volumes that cuts into my head day and night. Moreover, adding to the number that can communicate with my thoughts but also has so much of other scary elements that it is not possible to describe what they claim.

But when this thing once and coming in under the media scrutiny, it must come out. We can see this power as part of their own insane idea, and with it follows all perversions. EU group suggests that it also spreads out racism among people. And there is of course through direct contact in people’s brains with the ability to manipulate perceptions.They write: EGE stresses the following possibilities should be banned: ICT implants used for the creation of cyber-racism … ICT implants used for changing the identity, memory, perception, cognition and perception of others … ICT implants in order to dominate others … Implants Monitoring of individuals also threatens human dignity. They can be used by government agencies, individuals and groups to increase their power over others. This topic must come to the knowledge, into the mass media. It must be addressed in parliament and every man must know it. The network we are part of the can indicate that the abuse lasted for 60 years without any uncovered. It must obviously be a big secret buried in the fact.

Read down under:

Read moore :  http://hplusmagazine.com/2009/08/18/your-brain-neurotechnology/

Conceptual BCI system with various kinds of Neurofeedbacks. In the development of a BCI we need to handle two learning systems: The machine should learn to discriminate between different complex patterns of brain activity as accurate as possible and the BCI users should learn via different neurofeedback configurations to modulate their EEG activity and self-regulate or control them.

mind war

Another promising extension of BCI is to incorporate various neurofeedbacks to train subjects to modulate EEG brain patterns and parameters such as ERPs, ERD, SMR, P300 or slow cortical potentials (SCPs) to meet a specific criterion or to learn self-regulations skills. The subject then changes their EEG patterns in response to some feedback. Such integration of neurofeedback in BCI (Fig. 4) is an emerging technology for rehabilitation, but we believe is also a new paradigm in neuroscience that might reveal previously unknown brain activities associated with behavior or self-regulated mental states. The possibility of automated context-awareness as a new interface goes far beyond the standard BCI with simple feedback control. We hope to develop the next level of BCI system using neurofeedbacks for some selective cognitive phenomena. To do so, we need to rely increasingly on findings from other disciplines, especially, neuroscience, information technology, biomedical engineering, machine learning, and clinical rehabilitation.

I look forward to your response

magnus olsson

Stockholm August 7, 2009

Magnus Olsson

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN

bionicgate@live.se

Tel:             0709 263004      

Av: Mediagroup sweden, Magnus Olsson Stockhom SVERIGE…

Magnus Olsson

Microsoft Patents Body-As-Network

Microsoft Patents Body-As-Network

A human conduit could distribute power across wearable devices, developer says.

By Stephen LawsonIDG News    Jun 24, 2004 12:00 am

Microsoft has a patent on a new kind of network: Your body.

The software giant has received a U.S. patent for a “method and apparatus for transmitting power and data using the human body.” An application for the patent, No. 6,754, 472, was filed in 2000 and awarded this week.

Microsoft proposes linking portable devices such as watches, keyboards, displays, and speakers using the conductivity of “a body of a living creature.”

Powering Devices

A variety of devices could be powered selectively from a single power source carried on the body, via multiple power supply signals at different frequencies, according to the patent abstract. In addition, data and audio signals could be transmitted over that same power signal. The power source and devices would be connected to the body via electrodes.

In the patent application, Microsoft says the company set out to address the proliferation of small handheld or wearable devices with redundant parts for input and output of data, such as separate speakers in a watch, a radio, and a personal digital assistant. If all those devices were networked, they could all share one speaker, the company suggests. Personal wireless networks have potential problems involving power consumption, interference and security, and batteries add weight and are inconvenient to replace or recharge, according to Microsoft.

A Microsoft spokesperson on Wednesday confirmed the company has been awarded the patent. Microsoft did not immediately provide any details of product plans for the technology.

Practical Uses

The idea of using the body to transmit power among devices is not new, according to Gartner analyst Ken Dulaney. However, small batteries and wireless personal-area network technologies such as Bluetooth may be a more practical approach, he says.

“Think about the problems of always having to have things touching your body,” Dulaney says. “I think this could be one of those technologies that’s interesting but not practical in the long run.”

One area in which the body could be useful as a network conduit might be useful is with medical devices, he adds.

Ethical Assessment of Implantable Brain Chips

20th World Congress of Philosophy Logo

Bioethics and Medical Ethics

 

Ethical Assessment of Implantable Brain Chips

 

Ellen M. McGee and G. Q. Maguire, Jr.

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

 

ABSTRACT: My purpose is to initiate a discussion of the ethics of implanting computer chips in the brain and to raise some initial ethical and social questions. Computer scientists predict that within the next twenty years neural interfaces will be designed that will not only increase the dynamic range of senses, but will also enhance memory and enable “cyberthink” — invisible communication with others. This technology will facilitate consistent and constant access to information when and where it is needed. The ethical evaluation in this paper focuses on issues of safely and informed consent, issues of manufacturing and scientific responsibility, anxieties about the psychological impacts of enhancing human nature, worries about possible usage in children, and most troubling, issues of privacy and autonomy. Inasmuch as this technology is fraught with perilous implications for radically changing human nature, for invasions of privacy and for governmental control of individuals, public discussion of its benefits and burdens should be initiated, and policy decisions should be made as to whether its development should be proscribed or regulated, rather than left to happenstance, experts and the vagaries of the commercial market.

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

The future may well involve the reality of science fiction’s cyborg, persons who have developed some intimate and occasionally necessary relationship with a machine. It is likely that implantable computer chips acting as sensors, or actuators, may soon assist not only failing memory, but even bestow fluency in a new language, or enable “recognition” of previously unmet individuals. The progress already made in therapeutic devices, in prosthetics and in computer science indicate that it may well be feasible to develop direct interfaces between the brain and computers.

Worldwide there are at least three million people living with artificial implants. In particular, research on the cochlear implant and retinal vision have furthered the development of interfaces between neural tissues and silicon substrate micro probes. The cochlear implant, which directly stimulates the auditory nerve, enables over 10,000 totally deaf people to hear sound; the retinal implantable chip for prosthetic vision may restore vision to the blind. Research on prosthetic vision has proceeded along two paths: 1) retinal implants, which avoid brain surgery and link a camera in eyeglass frames via laser diodes to a healthy optic nerve and nerves to the retina, and 2) cortical implants, which require brain surgery and the pneumatic insertion of electrodesinto the brain to penetrate the visual cortex and produce highly localized stimulation.

The latest stage in the evolution towards the implantable brain chip involves combining these advances in prostheses technology with developments in computer science. The linkage of smaller, lighter, and more powerful computer systems with radio technologies will enable users to access information and communicate anywhere or anytime. Through miniaturization of components, systems have been generated that are wearable and nearly invisible, so that individuals, supported by a personal information structure, can move about and interact freely, as well as, through networking, share experiences with others. The wearable computer project envisions users accessing the Remembrance Agent of a large communally based data source.

Wearables and body-nets are intermediate technologies; the logical next step in this development is the implantable brain chip, direct neural interfacing. As early as 1968, Nicholas Negroponte, presently director of MIT’s Media Lab, first prophesied this symbiosis between mankind and machine. His colleague, Professor Gershenfeld, asserts that “in 10 years, computers will be everywhere; in 20 years, embedded by bioengineers in our bodies…” Neither visionary professes any qualms about this project, which they expect to alter human nature itself. “Suddenly technology has given us powers with which we can manipulate not only external reality — the physical world — but also, and much more portentously, ourselves.” Once networked the result will be a “collective consciousness”, “the hive mind.” “The hive mind…is about taking all these trillions of cells in our skulls that make individual consciousness and putting them together and arriving at a new kind of consciousness that transcends all the individuals.”

The technology for implantable devices is becoming available, and at prices that make such systems very cost effective. Three stages of introduction of such devices can be delineated. The earliest adopters will be those with a disability, who will use this as a more powerful prosthetic device. The next stage, represents the movement from therapy to enhancement, and it is at this point that ethical evaluation becomes imperative. One of the first groups of non-disabled “volunteers” will probably be the professional military, where the use of an implanted computing and communication device with new interfaces to weapons, information, and communications could be lifesaving. The third group of users will probably be those involved in very information intensive businesses, who will use these devices to develop an expanded information transfer capability.

As intelligence or sensory “amplifiers”, the implantable chip will generate at least four benefits: 1) it will increase the dynamic range of senses, enabling, for example, seeing IR, UV, and chemical spectra; 2) it will enhance memory; 3) it will enable “cyberthink” — invisible communication with others when making decisions, and 4) it will enable consistent and constant access to information where and when it is needed. For many these enhancements will produce major improvements in the quality of life, or their survivability, or their performance in a job. The first prototype devices for these improvements in human functioning should be available in five years, with the military prototypes starting within ten years, and information workers using prototypes within fifteen years; general adoption will take roughly twenty to thirty years. The brain chip will probably function as a prosthetic cortical implant. The user’s visual cortex will receive stimulation from a computer based either on what a camera sees or based on an artificial “window” interface.

Not every computer scientist views such prospects with equanimity. Michael Dertouzos writes, “even if it would someday be possible to convey such higher-level information to the brain — and that is a huge technical “If” — we should not do it. Bringing light impulses to the visual cortex of a blind person would justify such an intrusion, but unnecessarily tapping into the brain is a violation of our bodies, of nature, and for many, of God’s design.”

This succinctly formulates the essentialist and creationist argument against the implantable chip. Fears of tampering with human nature are widespread; the theme that nature is good and technology evil, that the power to recreate oneself is overreaching hubris, and that reengineering humanity can only result in disaster, is a familiar response to each new control that man exercises. The mystique of the natural is fueled by the romantic world view of a benign period when humans lived in harmony with nature. However attractive, it is probable that this vision is faulty inasmuch as man has always used technology to survive, and to enhance life; the use of technology is natural to man. Thus this negative response to the prospect of implantable chips is certainly inadequate, although it points to a need to evaluate the technology in terms of the good or evil possibilities for its use by men, or governments.

The call not to “play God” is also familiar, and suffers from the same difficulties articulated by David Hume. This critique relies on a religious sense that improving on the design of creation insults the Creator. In particular, it proposes that attempts to alter the functioning of the brain for purposes of creating a superior human being can be decried as usurping God’s power. To be persuasive this argument must depend on a restrictive, even for religionists, view of creation, one that sees no role for human creativity.

Rejection of wiring brains directly to a computer also stems from a desire for bodily integrity, and intuitions about the sanctity of the body. Thus, many accept the invasion of the organic by the mechanical for curative purposes, but feel that such uses for enhancement are wrong. This conviction, that respect for humans requires the physical integrity of the body is a version of “the inviolability-of persons view”, a deontological position. Using this standard, a distinction is drawn between therapeutic and enhancement procedures; “An intervention that is life-saving, rehabilitative, or otherwise therapeutic can be consistent with the principle that the physical integrity of the body should be preserved even if it involves a bodily ‘mutilation’ or intrusion, provided that it promotes the integrity of the whole.” Implantable chips that amplify the senses, or enhance memory or networking capacities would, thus, be suspect. For others, however, there is no bright line between therapy and enhancement — how deficient does my memory have to be before it would be ethical to wire my brain to a computer? — and the argument is too weak to preclude the use of this technology, anymore than it is possible to proscribe cosmetic surgery, or the use of mood-improving drugs if the benefits seems to outweigh the medical risks. However, even if we discount the force of these three arguments, there are a myriad of other technical, ethical and social concerns to consider before proceeding with implantable chips. The areas of concern for technology assessment are extensive, including risks, appropriateness, societal impact, costs and equity issues and need evaluation by a multi disciplinary team. Study of this device would seem to need participants from at least the fields of computer science, biophysics, medicine, law, philosophy, public policy and international economy. Unlike the scientific community at the advent of genetic technologies, the computer industry has not, as yet, engaged in a public dialogue of these promising, but risky technologies. This avoidance of discussion, and simple reliance upon principles of free scientific inquiry and the market economy is itself a moral stance requiring justification.

Ethical appraisal of implantable computer chips should assess at least the following areas of concern: issues of safety and informed consent, issues of manufacturing and scientific responsibility, anxieties about the psychological impacts of enhancing human nature, worries about possible usage in children, and most troublesome, issues of privacy and autonomy. As is the case in evaluation of any future technology, it is unlikely that we can reliably predict all effects. Nevertheless, the potential for harm must be considered.

The most obvious and basic problems involve safety. Evaluation of the costs and benefits of these implants requires a consideration of the surgical and long term risks. One question, — whether the difficulties with development of non-toxic materials will allow long term usage? — should be answered in studies on therapeutic options and thus, not be a concern for enhancement usages. However, it is conceivable that there should be a higher standard for safety when technologies are used for enhancement rather than therapy, and this issue needs public debate. Whether the informed consent of recipients should be sufficient reason for permitting implementation is questionable in view of the potential societal impact. Other issues such as the kinds of warranties users should receive, and the liability responsibilities if quality control of hard/soft/firmware is not up to standard, could be addressed by manufacturing regulation. Provisions should be made to facilitate upgrades since users presumably would not want multiple operations, or to be possessors of obsolete systems. Manufacturers must understand and devise programs for teaching users how to implement the new systems. There will be a need to generate data on individual implant recipient usefulness, and whether all users benefit equally. Additional practical problems with ethical ramifications include whether there will be a competitive market in such systems and if there will be any industry-wide standards for design of the technology.

One of the least controversial uses of this enhancement technology will be its implementation as therapy. It is possible that the technology could be used to enable those who are naturally less cognitively endowed to achieve on a more equitable basis. Certainly, uses of the technology to remediate retardation or to replace lost memory faculties in cases of progressive neurological disease, could become a covered item in health care plans. Enabling humans to maintain species typical functioning would probably be viewed as a desirable, even required, intervention, although this may become a constantly changing standard. The costs of implementing this technology needs to be weighed against the costs of impairment, although it may be that decisions should be made on the basis of rights rather than usefulness.

Consideration also needs to be given to the psychological impact of enhancing human nature. Will the use of computer-brain interfaces change our conception of man and our sense of identity? If people are actually connected via their brains the boundaries between self and community will be considerably diminished. The pressures to act as a part of the whole rather than as a single isolated individual would be increased; the amount and diversity of information might overwhelm, and the sense of self as a unique and isolated individual would be changed.

Since usage may also engender a human being with augmented sensory capacities, the implications, even if positive, need consideration. Supersensory sight will see radar, infrared and ultraviolet images, augmented hearing will detect softer and higher and lower pitched sounds, enhanced smell will intensify our ability to discern scents, and an amplified sense of touch will enable discernment of environmental stimuli like changes in barometric pressure. These capacities would change the “normal” for humans, and would be of exceptional application in situations of danger, especially in battle. As the numbers of enhanced humans increase, today’s normal range might be seen as subnormal, leading to the medicalization of another area of life. Thus, substantial questions revolve around whether there should be any limits placed upon modifications of essential aspects of the human species. Although defining human nature is notoriously difficult, man’s rational powers have traditionally been viewed as his claim to superiority and the center of personal identity. Changing human thoughts and feeling might render the continued existence of the person problematical. If one accepts, as most cognitive scientists do, “the materialist assertion that mind is an emergent phenomenon from complex matter, … cybernetics may one day provide the same requisite level of complexity as a brain.” On the other hand, not all philosophers espouse the materialist contention and use of these technologies certainly will impact discussions about the nature of personal identity, and the traditional mind-body problem. Modifying the brain and its powers could change our psychic states, altering both the self-concept of the user, and our understanding of what it means to be human. The boundary between me “the physical self” and me “the perceptory/intellectual self” could change as the ability to perceive and interact expands far beyond what can be done with video conferencing. The boundaries of the real and virtual worlds may blur, and a consciousness wired to the collective and to the accumulated knowledge of mankind would surely impact the individual’s sense of self. Whether this would lead to bestowing greater weight to collective responsibilities and whether this would be beneficial are unknown.

Changes in human nature would become more pervasive if the altered consciousness were that of children. In an intensely competitive society, knowledge is often power. Parents are driven to provide the very best for their children. Will they be able to secure implants for their children, and if so, how will that change the already unequal lottery of life? Standards for entrance into schools, gifted programs and spelling bees – all would be affected. The inequalities produced might create a demand for universal coverage of these devices in health care plans, further increasing costs to society. However, in a culture such as ours, with different levels of care available on the basis of ability to pay, it is plausible to suppose that implanted brain chips will be available only to those who can afford a substantial investment, and that this will further widen the gap between the haves and the have-not. A major anxiety should be the social impact of implementing a technology that widens the divisions not only between individuals, and genders, but also, between rich and poor nations. As enhancements become more widespread, enhancement becomes the norm, and there is increasing social pressure to avail oneself of the “benefit.”Thus, even those who initially shrink from the surgery may find it becomes a necessity, and the consent part of “informed consent”would become subject to manipulation.

Beyond these more imminent prospects is the possibility that in thirty years, “it will be possible to capture data presenting all of a human being’s sensory experiences on a single tiny chip implanted in the brain.” This data would be collected by biological probes receiving electrical impulses, and would enable a user to recreate experiences, or even to transplant memory chips from one brain to another. In this eventuality, psychological continuity of personal identity would be disrupted with indisputable ramifications . Would the resulting person have the identities of other persons?

The most frightening implication of this technology is the grave possibility that it would facilitate totalitarian control of humans. In a prescient projection of experimental protocols, George Annas writes of the “project to implant removable monitoring devices at the base of the brain of neonates in three major teaching hospitals….The devices would not only permit us to locate all the implantees at any time, but could be programmed in the future to monitor the sound around them and to play subliminal messages directly to their brains.” Using such technology governments could control and monitor citizens. In a free society this possibility may seem remote, although it is not implausible to project usage for children as an early step. Moreover, in the military environment the advantages of augmenting capacities to create soldiers with faster reflexes, or greater accuracy, would exert strong pressures for requiring enhancement. When implanted computing and communication devices with interfaces to weapons, information, and communication systems become possible, the military of the democratic societies might require usage to maintain a competitive advantage. Mandated implants for criminals are a foreseeable possibility even in democratic societies. Policy decisions will arise about this usage, and also about permitting usage, if and when it becomes possible, to affect specific behaviors. A paramount worry involves who will control the technology and what will be programmed; this issue overlaps with uneasiness about privacy issues, and the need for control and security of communication links. Not all the countries of the world prioritize autonomy, and the potential for sinister invasions of liberty and privacy are alarming.

In view of the potentially devastating implications of the implantable brain chip should its development and implementation be prohibited? This is, of course, the question that open dialogue needs to address, and it raises the disputed topic of whether technological development can be resisted, or whether the empirical slippery slope will necessarily result in usage, in which case regulation might still be feasible. Issues raised by the prospect of implantable brain chips are hard ones, because the possibilities for both good and evil are so great. The issues are too significant to leave to happenstance, computer scientists, or the commercial market. It is vital that world societies assess this technology and reach some conclusions about what course they wish to take.

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

20th World Congress of Philosophy Logo