3 ms·

If we could ever scan your neurons and determine data from them would you be ok with that? While I can't imagine them pulling out whole thoughts I can imagine t

If we could ever scan your neurons and determine data from them would you be ok with that? While I can't imagine them pulling out whole thoughts I can imagine them extracting phone numbers as an example. Sure that might be 100-200-500 years in the future. I have no idea but unless you believe the data in your brain is stored in your sole it seems reasonable to believe someday there could be a device that could dump your brain the same way we can dump memory from other devices and that certain pieces of data will be able to be extracted. Is that the same? Different? Okay? Not okay? Or how about closer to reality: Memory enhancing chips are already available/in the works (https://www.technologyreview.com/s/513681/memory-implants/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/513681/memory-implants/) should someone using those be required to allow the government to get a data dump of them?

rayiner 10y ago
> If we could ever scan your neurons and determine data from them would you be ok with that? The premise behind the self-incrimination privilege is that coerced confessions are not just unfair, they are unreliable. If you can scan neurons directly (and reliably), that rationale doesn't apply. And in any case, I don't see the slippery slope here. Your phone and a diary are both external things where you voluntarily put information--completely different from scanning your brain.
- barrkel 10y ago
  Both writing and computers are tools for the mind. To the degree that you create a large distinction between them, you privilege people who don't need tools over those who do. (I don't really see much difference between scanning neurons and scanning phones. I don't see that one can use phones without involuntarily putting information into them. As hard as I try to ensure my phone's Chrome browser doesn't store my browsing history, Google works just as hard to ensure that it does.) (PS: on the topic of a bunch of people from the government scanning your neurons looking for stored thoughts: it's a horrifying world I want no part of, because such power would be abused to eliminate dissent. Governments are constructed by people, and people are not to be trusted with that kind of power.)

rayiner 10y ago

> If we could ever scan your neurons and determine data from them would you be ok with that? The premise behind the self-incrimination privilege is that coerced confessions are not just unfair, they are unreliable. If you can scan neurons directly (and reliably), that rationale doesn't apply. And in any case, I don't see the slippery slope here. Your phone and a diary are both external things where you voluntarily put information--completely different from scanning your brain.

barrkel 10y ago
Both writing and computers are tools for the mind. To the degree that you create a large distinction between them, you privilege people who don't need tools over those who do. (I don't really see much difference between scanning neurons and scanning phones. I don't see that one can use phones without involuntarily putting information into them. As hard as I try to ensure my phone's Chrome browser doesn't store my browsing history, Google works just as hard to ensure that it does.) (PS: on the topic of a bunch of people from the government scanning your neurons looking for stored thoughts: it's a horrifying world I want no part of, because such power would be abused to eliminate dissent. Governments are constructed by people, and people are not to be trusted with that kind of power.)