- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Are you talking about the fMRI thing from Professor Gallant, or the helmet from Emotiv, or MALINTENT, or? They really shouldn't push these as mindreading. But it makes good stories. The first one uses blood flow in the brain, although there's a guy in the U.S. that believes that magnetic fields can control the thalamus. The second is a gaming device. The third looks like a high tech lie-detector for airports.
I'm all in favor of protecting the right to think in peace, in fact the torture treaty bans "severe disruption of the psyche". I would be in favor of privacy for thought, too. These devices are not really mind-reading though. Some case could be made for not allowing the MALINTENT scans anywhere where you don't have the right to screen people. BTW, Sony holds a patent on using a helmet to control magnetic fields to influence the thalamus to make people see virtual worlds.
I think I'm also worried, perhaps more, at the research to delete memories. Although I know it's being done with the best of intentions (to alleviate PTSD), you can see why it might best be regulated. Given what Lt.Col. Vandeveld says about BSCT psychologists and their ethics, and all.
