8 ms·

If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that mad

If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that made this possible, would you take it? Something non-invasive, like a computer that images your brain while you sleep. If we are machines, then it seems reasonable that within a few millennia we might have this capability. I'm trying to think up some scenarios where it might be reasonable to turn over your brain to a business. The ability to become "immortal" would probably be enough for most people. Is your disembodied mind still you? Do you feel an attachment to the idea of preserving it? What about modifying it? Where it gets really strange is if you think of your wife or husband making a backup of their brain, then running a simulator on that backup. I.e. giving it "life" by letting the simulated neurons fire. Does that count as thinking? What if you can see those thoughts? What if you can communicate? Would you love them just as much as you love your SO? Probably useless questions, but I can't help but wonder. (I've expanded my comment since it was posted; the "no"'s are in response to the first question.) Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
aquadrop 9y ago
> If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that made this possible, would you take it? Something non-invasive, like a computer that images your brain while you sleep. No. If you were offered wings so you could fly, but in exchange you must spend rest of your life in a cage, would you take it?
- bkmartin 9y ago
  Would it then become important for that business to give these minds that would not make them feel trapped and caged? Wouldn't the quality of results be hampered if lots of suffering were to occur? Could the mind at some point become useless since it would be drowned in depressive, cyclical, and often illogical thought? That, too, would create a research point, but would be pretty inhumane and I would hope an ethics oversight panel would not allow such states to exist. So many questions surround this... If the body is dead, but the brain is still active of reasonable thought and to that end communication, who decides it's fate? Does a mind deteriorate once there is no outside stimuli of the senses? Not that I would agree to be in this state, but man there would be huge fields of research to do.
  - mindcrime 9y ago
    Would it then become important for that business to give these minds that would not make them feel trapped and caged? Sounds like a more reasonable basis for the genesis of the Matrix than what was portrayed in the movie. :-)
  - nsxwolf 9y ago
    There's a Black Mirror episode about this, but saying which episode it is would be a big spoiler. Just watch the whole series if you haven't.
- bognition 9y ago
  Honestly it would depend on the size of the cage.
  - aquadrop 9y ago
    2x2x2 meter cage.
    - bdamm 9y ago
      2x2x2 AU would still be too small.
    - ceejayoz 9y ago
      It further depends on the amenities on offer, and the bird's size. Hell, folks (including me) want to live on a Mars base, where "living in a cage" is probably an apt description of life for at least the first couple generations. I'd sure as hell hand over a copy of my brain to a corporation in exchange for the ability to back up my brain and functionally live forever.
      - aquadrop 9y ago
        You missed the part I was replying to, when I replied it was the only content of the parent post. My analogy is about deal where you as a human get wings (ability to fly), but have to spend the rest of your life in a cage.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
kirykl 9y ago
People already essentially turn their brains over to businesses today, without such grand promises of intelligence or immortality. Its actually maybe even a pretty accurate description of religion
- emiliobumachar 9y ago
  Religion does make a grand promise of immortality.
  - kirykl 9y ago
    which is what I said
  - QuantumGravy 9y ago
    To be fair, only some do. Others just assume endless reincarnation is a thing and promise escape. Whether you see that as real distinction is something else entirely.
amelius 9y ago
> If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that made this possible, would you take it? "And, my students, if we equate both expressions, then, ... ahem, by the way, do you know how easy it is to get a brain extension from Acme Corp?"
jlebrech 9y ago
yes I would download all the knowledge I could into offline storage and only connect for updates.
EGreg 9y ago
A more interesting question is, what if you wake up one day as one of 10 copies of yourself? Would you today be worried about preserving the life of all 10 clones (with memories)? We are all afraid to die - but what if tomorrow there were clones with the memories you have today? The question basically is posed here http://existentialcomics.com/comic/1 http://existentialcomics.com/comic/1
- booleandilemma 9y ago
  The movie The Prestige deals with the concept of self copies too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prestige_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prestige_(film)
- QuantumGravy 9y ago
  From the moment those copies exist, I'm not them and they're not me. We do not share subjective experiences. If you think we're equivalent and expendable, you'd best murder me in secret and pretend it never happened. You know, like incinerating me inside a teleporter or someth... oh crap, we're going there. Yeah, I have a few issues with that comic. > The man was not a murderer. This is one of a few logical leaps I can't accept. His past selves are already "dead". His future selves do not yet exist. If, for example, all my ancestors are dead and my offspring not yet conceived, how does my suicide harm them in any way? None will so much as feel the grief of losing me, but I'm supposed to feel guilty over "murdering" them? (Let's not follow up on what this would mean for topics such as abortion!) If future and past selves are of such importance that we not murder them, how can present copies be valued any less? If destroying the original is not necessary, then that must surely be murder as well. It's worse, actually, because then it's not even hypothetical; "The Machine" would be intentionally and unnecessarily ending a life. Why do I possess the subjective experience of me, not you, and not some other me separated by time or space? Barring notions of a soul, either those other instances are not real in some sense or else there's something phenomenologically special about each, which I can only attribute to being uniquely present at a particular point in space-time. If the teleported me is a clone, their existence ought to have nothing to do with me, thus I should not be murdered for their sake. However, if the teleported me instead can only exist as a function of my past-self ceasing to be, then that's little different than how I am from any moment to the next. TL;DR: If it works like the movie version of "The Prestige" where one copy is murdered purely for convenience, I'm not stepping into that teleporter.
captainmuon 9y ago
I think we should really fix society before we develop that kind of technology. We need a socio-cultural breaktrough of the same magnitude as the technological breakthrough. Something on par with the development of monotheism, enlightenment, capitalism, or democracy. A "communistic" utopia (for lack of a better word) without the flaws of its historical implementations. Then the question is moot. There is no private business, or indeed any other entity, government or private, that you would make such a deal with. There is no second party that wants to withhold technology, or steal your thoughts. Rather it will be "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - you get the augmentation for free, and you contribute what you feel comfortable sharing back to society. Often, utopia is portrayed as the result of a technolocial breakthrough, sometimes "if we could read each others thoughts there would be no misunderstanding and conflict". I believe it is the other way around - utopia is a precondition for singularity-type technology. At least, if we want it to be beneficial and not hellish. Brain implants are easy, communism is going to be hard.
- imron 9y ago
  > communism is going to be hard. Not if everyone has brain implants!
  - captainmuon 9y ago
    Touché. That's why I'm not getting a brain implant :-D
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  I agree. Once we develop the ability to upload and modify brains, it will be easy to morph them. We can extract the primal desire to defend yourself, to become angry, to want to own property. These emotions will be reserved for the founders. It will take time to get there. Many will resist, so we have to keep our goal a secret. But people are gullible. With our morphogenic brain technology, we can give people experiences they've only dreamed of. Think of it. The high of heroin, with none of the downsides. The ability to know instantly when any of your loved ones are in distress. The ability to shape yourself and your children into any form you desire. If we appeal to base emotions, if we appeal to their need to control, to own, to shape, then we can implement our plan.
kingkawn 9y ago
All extrapolated technological symbolism that, when experienced as reality, will fail to stand up to the actual non-symbolic experience of existence.
petra 9y ago
I really wonder how valuable would augmented intelligence be , when AI will be so much smarter. If it would be the same as physical strength today,maybe most people won't bother with that too much, and instead focus on other things,maybe more core to feeling well. One of those things could be the experiences meditation practices talking about, enlightenment etc, and it seems that we won't need neuron level sensing to do that, but something more at the affordable fmri level or maybe eeg+localization, and those seem to be here much before intelligence augemntation. So I wonder if we'll ever see intelligence augmentation.
- morley 9y ago
  We basically already have intelligence augmentation; it's just in the form of computers and smartphones. Interestingly, despite widespread adoption of both, there's still some people "smarter" (i.e. better at certain tasks) than others because they can better apply the tools available.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mfoy_ 9y ago
The Gentle Seduction is a short story that you might find interesting. http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html
bmc7505 9y ago
What troubles me is not the permission to read, but to write. While potentially useful for a host of medical applications, this is a scientifically plausible proposal to create technology that will literally have the ability to control minds. While you might be comfortable with sharing intellectual property with a business entity, giving that same entity the ability to adjust internal motivation, or alter sensory input is a dangerous Faustian bargain. How much would you trade for free will?
- lordnacho 9y ago
  > What troubles me is not the permission to read, but to write. Argh, I can just imagine having extremely realistic advertisements beamed directly into my mind, in exchange for something like immediate translation. It's gonna be really weird when those perfume ads start before Christmas.
ihaveahadron 9y ago
Somebody needs to figure out why these people keep thinking a clone of you is you. It keeps happening over and over again. What kind of primate shit is this that won't fucking go away.
propman 9y ago
Reminds me too much of Black Mirror
fosco 9y ago
makes me this of the original star trek which I have been rewatching recently. in the first episode [0] another race is capable of causing hallucinations and making humans experience anything they desire. later on you find out that the captain (not kirk in the very first episode) is found by kirk and now can only say yes or no through an version of Stephen Hawkings chair. Spock knowing that his brain is still fully operational decides through loyalty to Captain Pike to bring him back to this alien race so he can enjoy living in this fake world and not be in the handicapped state that he is. the episode closes with the Captain Kirk showing interest in wonder at the opportunity provided by this race. I suspect given the opportunity many would take this. ( without knowing any of the consequences I tentatively would certainly take it in that situation) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cage_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cage_(Star_Trek:_The_Origi... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Menagerie_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Menagerie_(Star_Trek:_The_...
jacquesm 9y ago
The question you should ask is would Feynman have agreed to it? Because that's the person who will have to put up with it. You can only ask such a question if you're willing to give the future recipient of the gift the option to back out and be sent back to your present state. And if that new individual isn't 'you' in a legal sense you might find that contract nul and void anyway. > Where it gets really strange is if you think of your wife or husband making a backup of their brain, then running a simulator on that backup. There is a Black Mirror episode around that called 'Be right back'.
- AgentME 9y ago
  >There is a Black Mirror episode around that called 'Be right back'. Well, they were approximations based on people's social media presence, and the episode's conflict mainly came from the imperfection of the approximation. I think you get a very different set of cultural conflicts if the simulation is of an accurate copy of the mind (issues more like in the book Permutation City).
solotronics 9y ago
what happens when someone copies a simulation of you and tortures it digitally to get all your passwords and information?
gene-h 9y ago
Honestly, I think it's more worth focusing on the near term ethical problems of such technology rather than the far off ones. So let's say that this project does pan out, and three years down the road we determine a programmer with one of these neural interfaces installed can open 20 terminal windows at the same time. With a special set of emacs/vim bindings they can bang out code 100x faster than regular programmers. So now companies are sponsoring their programmers to get the surgery. Sounds like a pretty good deal right? Well in three-five years time, surgery probably won't change much. Installing such devices is still going to be pretty risky. And even then, having the hardware in introduces its own medical risks. Our super-programmers can't ever go swimming because of the risks of the fiberoptic and power jack plug going through their skull getting infected. This is a problem current medical implants have, so probably one we will still have in a couple years time. There are a whole host of other problems with this too. IE what do you do when the hardware in your head is obsolete? Can the company that paid to put it in fire you because you aren't keeping up, in part because you have obsolete hardware in your head? [0]http://amputeeimplantdevices.com/what-are-the-risks/ http://amputeeimplantdevices.com/what-are-the-risks/
beachbum8029 9y ago
Just make sure not a forget a very important phrase: ignorance is bliss.
- fenwick67 9y ago
  This this this... being intelligent will not make you happy. I wouldn't take hyperintelligence for free.
abecedarius 9y ago
Deaf people today face a similar choice: getting a cochlear implant, you don't control the software (afaik). This is a significant part of why I still have no cochlear implant. If we want freedom of thought in the glorious transhuman future, well, that could evolve out of what's happening today, and we ought to value human autonomy more in today's systems. DRM is another such arena: as I said in another thread the other day, do you want it enforced by your brain implant? No? Then think about how you want to allow the issue to get framed. Ditto for compelled decryption.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

aquadrop 9y ago

> If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that made this possible, would you take it? Something non-invasive, like a computer that images your brain while you sleep. No. If you were offered wings so you could fly, but in exchange you must spend rest of your life in a cage, would you take it?

bkmartin 9y ago
Would it then become important for that business to give these minds that would not make them feel trapped and caged? Wouldn't the quality of results be hampered if lots of suffering were to occur? Could the mind at some point become useless since it would be drowned in depressive, cyclical, and often illogical thought? That, too, would create a research point, but would be pretty inhumane and I would hope an ethics oversight panel would not allow such states to exist. So many questions surround this... If the body is dead, but the brain is still active of reasonable thought and to that end communication, who decides it's fate? Does a mind deteriorate once there is no outside stimuli of the senses? Not that I would agree to be in this state, but man there would be huge fields of research to do.
- mindcrime 9y ago
  Would it then become important for that business to give these minds that would not make them feel trapped and caged? Sounds like a more reasonable basis for the genesis of the Matrix than what was portrayed in the movie. :-)
- nsxwolf 9y ago
  There's a Black Mirror episode about this, but saying which episode it is would be a big spoiler. Just watch the whole series if you haven't.
bognition 9y ago
Honestly it would depend on the size of the cage.
- aquadrop 9y ago
  2x2x2 meter cage.
  - bdamm 9y ago
    2x2x2 AU would still be too small.
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    It further depends on the amenities on offer, and the bird's size. Hell, folks (including me) want to live on a Mars base, where "living in a cage" is probably an apt description of life for at least the first couple generations. I'd sure as hell hand over a copy of my brain to a corporation in exchange for the ability to back up my brain and functionally live forever.
    - aquadrop 9y ago
      You missed the part I was replying to, when I replied it was the only content of the parent post. My analogy is about deal where you as a human get wings (ability to fly), but have to spend the rest of your life in a cage.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

kirykl 9y ago

People already essentially turn their brains over to businesses today, without such grand promises of intelligence or immortality. Its actually maybe even a pretty accurate description of religion

emiliobumachar 9y ago
Religion does make a grand promise of immortality.
- kirykl 9y ago
  which is what I said
- QuantumGravy 9y ago
  To be fair, only some do. Others just assume endless reincarnation is a thing and promise escape. Whether you see that as real distinction is something else entirely.

amelius 9y ago

> If you were offered the chance to become as intelligent as Feynman but only if you turn over a copy of all your future thoughts to the private business that made this possible, would you take it? "And, my students, if we equate both expressions, then, ... ahem, by the way, do you know how easy it is to get a brain extension from Acme Corp?"

jlebrech 9y ago

yes I would download all the knowledge I could into offline storage and only connect for updates.

EGreg 9y ago

A more interesting question is, what if you wake up one day as one of 10 copies of yourself? Would you today be worried about preserving the life of all 10 clones (with memories)? We are all afraid to die - but what if tomorrow there were clones with the memories you have today? The question basically is posed here http://existentialcomics.com/comic/1 http://existentialcomics.com/comic/1

booleandilemma 9y ago
The movie The Prestige deals with the concept of self copies too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prestige_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prestige_(film)
QuantumGravy 9y ago
From the moment those copies exist, I'm not them and they're not me. We do not share subjective experiences. If you think we're equivalent and expendable, you'd best murder me in secret and pretend it never happened. You know, like incinerating me inside a teleporter or someth... oh crap, we're going there. Yeah, I have a few issues with that comic. > The man was not a murderer. This is one of a few logical leaps I can't accept. His past selves are already "dead". His future selves do not yet exist. If, for example, all my ancestors are dead and my offspring not yet conceived, how does my suicide harm them in any way? None will so much as feel the grief of losing me, but I'm supposed to feel guilty over "murdering" them? (Let's not follow up on what this would mean for topics such as abortion!) If future and past selves are of such importance that we not murder them, how can present copies be valued any less? If destroying the original is not necessary, then that must surely be murder as well. It's worse, actually, because then it's not even hypothetical; "The Machine" would be intentionally and unnecessarily ending a life. Why do I possess the subjective experience of me, not you, and not some other me separated by time or space? Barring notions of a soul, either those other instances are not real in some sense or else there's something phenomenologically special about each, which I can only attribute to being uniquely present at a particular point in space-time. If the teleported me is a clone, their existence ought to have nothing to do with me, thus I should not be murdered for their sake. However, if the teleported me instead can only exist as a function of my past-self ceasing to be, then that's little different than how I am from any moment to the next. TL;DR: If it works like the movie version of "The Prestige" where one copy is murdered purely for convenience, I'm not stepping into that teleporter.

captainmuon 9y ago

I think we should really fix society before we develop that kind of technology. We need a socio-cultural breaktrough of the same magnitude as the technological breakthrough. Something on par with the development of monotheism, enlightenment, capitalism, or democracy. A "communistic" utopia (for lack of a better word) without the flaws of its historical implementations. Then the question is moot. There is no private business, or indeed any other entity, government or private, that you would make such a deal with. There is no second party that wants to withhold technology, or steal your thoughts. Rather it will be "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - you get the augmentation for free, and you contribute what you feel comfortable sharing back to society. Often, utopia is portrayed as the result of a technolocial breakthrough, sometimes "if we could read each others thoughts there would be no misunderstanding and conflict". I believe it is the other way around - utopia is a precondition for singularity-type technology. At least, if we want it to be beneficial and not hellish. Brain implants are easy, communism is going to be hard.

imron 9y ago
> communism is going to be hard. Not if everyone has brain implants!
- captainmuon 9y ago
  Touché. That's why I'm not getting a brain implant :-D
sillysaurus3 9y ago
I agree. Once we develop the ability to upload and modify brains, it will be easy to morph them. We can extract the primal desire to defend yourself, to become angry, to want to own property. These emotions will be reserved for the founders. It will take time to get there. Many will resist, so we have to keep our goal a secret. But people are gullible. With our morphogenic brain technology, we can give people experiences they've only dreamed of. Think of it. The high of heroin, with none of the downsides. The ability to know instantly when any of your loved ones are in distress. The ability to shape yourself and your children into any form you desire. If we appeal to base emotions, if we appeal to their need to control, to own, to shape, then we can implement our plan.

kingkawn 9y ago

All extrapolated technological symbolism that, when experienced as reality, will fail to stand up to the actual non-symbolic experience of existence.

petra 9y ago

I really wonder how valuable would augmented intelligence be , when AI will be so much smarter. If it would be the same as physical strength today,maybe most people won't bother with that too much, and instead focus on other things,maybe more core to feeling well. One of those things could be the experiences meditation practices talking about, enlightenment etc, and it seems that we won't need neuron level sensing to do that, but something more at the affordable fmri level or maybe eeg+localization, and those seem to be here much before intelligence augemntation. So I wonder if we'll ever see intelligence augmentation.

morley 9y ago
We basically already have intelligence augmentation; it's just in the form of computers and smartphones. Interestingly, despite widespread adoption of both, there's still some people "smarter" (i.e. better at certain tasks) than others because they can better apply the tools available.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

mfoy_ 9y ago

The Gentle Seduction is a short story that you might find interesting. http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html

bmc7505 9y ago

What troubles me is not the permission to read, but to write. While potentially useful for a host of medical applications, this is a scientifically plausible proposal to create technology that will literally have the ability to control minds. While you might be comfortable with sharing intellectual property with a business entity, giving that same entity the ability to adjust internal motivation, or alter sensory input is a dangerous Faustian bargain. How much would you trade for free will?

lordnacho 9y ago
> What troubles me is not the permission to read, but to write. Argh, I can just imagine having extremely realistic advertisements beamed directly into my mind, in exchange for something like immediate translation. It's gonna be really weird when those perfume ads start before Christmas.

ihaveahadron 9y ago

Somebody needs to figure out why these people keep thinking a clone of you is you. It keeps happening over and over again. What kind of primate shit is this that won't fucking go away.

propman 9y ago

Reminds me too much of Black Mirror

fosco 9y ago

makes me this of the original star trek which I have been rewatching recently. in the first episode [0] another race is capable of causing hallucinations and making humans experience anything they desire. later on you find out that the captain (not kirk in the very first episode) is found by kirk and now can only say yes or no through an version of Stephen Hawkings chair. Spock knowing that his brain is still fully operational decides through loyalty to Captain Pike to bring him back to this alien race so he can enjoy living in this fake world and not be in the handicapped state that he is. the episode closes with the Captain Kirk showing interest in wonder at the opportunity provided by this race. I suspect given the opportunity many would take this. ( without knowing any of the consequences I tentatively would certainly take it in that situation) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cage_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cage_(Star_Trek:_The_Origi... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Menagerie_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Menagerie_(Star_Trek:_The_...

jacquesm 9y ago

The question you should ask is would Feynman have agreed to it? Because that's the person who will have to put up with it. You can only ask such a question if you're willing to give the future recipient of the gift the option to back out and be sent back to your present state. And if that new individual isn't 'you' in a legal sense you might find that contract nul and void anyway. > Where it gets really strange is if you think of your wife or husband making a backup of their brain, then running a simulator on that backup. There is a Black Mirror episode around that called 'Be right back'.

AgentME 9y ago
>There is a Black Mirror episode around that called 'Be right back'. Well, they were approximations based on people's social media presence, and the episode's conflict mainly came from the imperfection of the approximation. I think you get a very different set of cultural conflicts if the simulation is of an accurate copy of the mind (issues more like in the book Permutation City).

solotronics 9y ago

what happens when someone copies a simulation of you and tortures it digitally to get all your passwords and information?

gene-h 9y ago

Honestly, I think it's more worth focusing on the near term ethical problems of such technology rather than the far off ones. So let's say that this project does pan out, and three years down the road we determine a programmer with one of these neural interfaces installed can open 20 terminal windows at the same time. With a special set of emacs/vim bindings they can bang out code 100x faster than regular programmers. So now companies are sponsoring their programmers to get the surgery. Sounds like a pretty good deal right? Well in three-five years time, surgery probably won't change much. Installing such devices is still going to be pretty risky. And even then, having the hardware in introduces its own medical risks. Our super-programmers can't ever go swimming because of the risks of the fiberoptic and power jack plug going through their skull getting infected. This is a problem current medical implants have, so probably one we will still have in a couple years time. There are a whole host of other problems with this too. IE what do you do when the hardware in your head is obsolete? Can the company that paid to put it in fire you because you aren't keeping up, in part because you have obsolete hardware in your head? [0]http://amputeeimplantdevices.com/what-are-the-risks/ http://amputeeimplantdevices.com/what-are-the-risks/

beachbum8029 9y ago

Just make sure not a forget a very important phrase: ignorance is bliss.

fenwick67 9y ago
This this this... being intelligent will not make you happy. I wouldn't take hyperintelligence for free.

abecedarius 9y ago

Deaf people today face a similar choice: getting a cochlear implant, you don't control the software (afaik). This is a significant part of why I still have no cochlear implant. If we want freedom of thought in the glorious transhuman future, well, that could evolve out of what's happening today, and we ought to value human autonomy more in today's systems. DRM is another such arena: as I said in another thread the other day, do you want it enforced by your brain implant? No? Then think about how you want to allow the issue to get framed. Ditto for compelled decryption.