Mick Ryan and Therese Keane

Over the last decade, military theorists and authors in the fields of future warfare and strategy have examined in detail the potential impacts of an ongoing revolution in information technology. There has been a particular focus on the impacts of automation and artificial intelligence on military and national security affairs. This attention on silicon-based disruption has nonetheless meant that sufficient attention may not have been paid to other equally profound technological developments. One of those developments is the field of biotechnology.

There have been some breathtaking achievements in the biological realm over the last decade. Human genome sequencing has progressed from a multi-year and multi-billion dollar undertaking to a much cheaper and quicker process, far outstripping Moore’s Law. Just as those concerned with national security affairs must monitor disruptive silicon-based technologies, leaders must also be literate in the key biological issues likely to impact the future security of nations. One of the most significant matters in biotechnology is that of human augmentation and whether nations should augment military personnel to stay at the leading edge of capability.

Biotechnology and Human Augmentation

Military institutions will continue to seek competitive advantage over potential adversaries. While this is most obvious in the procurement of advanced platforms, human biotechnological advancement is gaining more attention. As a 2017 CSIS report on the Third Offset found most new technological advances will provide only a temporary advantage, assessed to be no more than five years. In this environment, some military institutions may view the newer field of human augmentation as a more significant source of a future competitive edge.

Biological enhancement of human performance has existed for millenia. The discovery of naturally occurring compounds by our ancestors has led to many of the cognitive and physical enhancements currently available. In the contemporary environment, for example, competition in national and international sports continues to fuel a race between creation of the next generation of performance enhancements and regulatory bodies developing detection methods. One example of this is the use of gene doping to hone the competitive edge in athletes, an off-label use of gene therapies originally developed for the treatment of debilitating genetic and acquired diseases. Despite the possibility of cancer and a range of other lethal side effects, some athletes consider these an acceptable risk. Might this not translate to adversaries adopting any possible advantage without equal disregard for ethics and safety considerations?

Gene Doping (Ralf Hiemisch)

It cannot be safely be assumed all states will share the same ethical, moral, legal, or policy principals as Western democratic societies. Based on developmental trajectories to date, contemporary military institutions should anticipate that all forms of human enhancements, whether relatively benign or highly controversial, will continue to evolve. For contemporary strategic leaders, the key is to anticipate how these developments may potentially impact on military institutions.

Impacts on Military Institutions

Theoretically, future advances in biotechnology may permit the augmentation of cognitive performance. However, given the challenges of biocompatibility of silicon, significant enhancements to human performance in the near future are likely to be found in prosthetics, wearable computing, or human teaming with artificial intelligence. In the longer term, some forms of gene therapy may obviate the need for implants. Noting this, a selection of likely challenges are explored below.

Previously, integration of new groups into the military dealt with human beings.

A first order issue will be group cohesion. Military institutions have deep experience integrating newcomers into their ranks. Fundamental to effective future teaming will be evolving this approach to establish trust and group cohesion between normal humans and those who are augmented. The degree to which military leaders can and should trust augmented personnel to make decisions about saving and taking lives is likely to be an evolutionary process. It also remains to be seen whether or not teams comprised of augmented and non-augmented humans are capable of developing trust. Experimentation and trials are needed to establish whether augmented people will bias away from decisions and input from non-augmented people and vice versa. While institutions can learn from historical integration challenges, there is one essential difference with augmented humans. Previously, integration of new groups into the military dealt with human beings. If augmentation using neurotechnology significantly enhances cognitive function, this may represent a separate and distinct group of future Homo sapiens.

The second challenge will be accessibility. Military institutions will need to decide what proportion of its forces will be augmented. Given that early generations of this biotechnology may be expensive, it is unlikely an entire military institution can be augmented. If so, who will be augmented and why? Military institutions will need to develop a value proposition to ensure physical and cognitive augmentation produces superior outcomes to the use of un-augmented personnel. Yet another question to ask is whether military personnel will be de-augmented on leaving the service. The transition of augmented personnel into a largely unaugmented populace may be traumatic for military personnel, and for society more broadly. Even more severe in its repercussions may be transitioning de-augmented personnel into a populace where augmentation is ubiquitous.

The Role of Humans in the Age of Robots (The Luvo)

The third challenge will be conceptual. One Chinese scientist, writing in 2006, has proposed military biotechnology offers the chance to shift to a “new balance between defence and attack, giving rise to a new concept of warfare, a new balance of military force, and new attacking power.” While the emphasis of this particular article was on a more merciful form of warfare—about which we should be skeptical—it nonetheless highlights the requirement to rethink what biotechnology and human augmentation means for how military institutions develop warfighting concepts. When humans arrive with cognitive enhancement, a range of tactical, operational, and strategic concepts may become irrelevant. Strategic thinking, using a combination of biological and silicon-based technologies could take organisations in very different directions than is presently the case. It also bears examining whether those with augmentation will enable greater diversity of performance (particularly in the intellectual realm) or if it will lead to increased homogenisation of physical and cognitive performance.

The fourth challenge is obsolescence. A fundamental challenge for humans waging war is that, despite technological advances, one of the weakest links is the physical capacity of the human. As Patrick Lin was written, technology makes up for our absurd frailty. Therefore, might normal humans without augmentation become irrelevant in a new construct where military institutions possess large numbers of physically and cognitively augmented personnel? It remains to be seen whether unaugmented humans might able to compete with physically and cognitively augmented military personnel. The augmentation of humans for different physical and cognitive functions may also drive change in how military institutions operate, plan, and think strategically.

A fifth challenge is military education and training. Traditional military training emphases the teaching of humans to achieve learning outcomes and missions as individuals and teams. In an integrated augmented/non-augmented institution, training methods must evolve to account for the different and improved capabilities of augmented personnel and to blend the capabilities of augmented and non-augmented personnel. Similarly, education for military leaders currently seeks to achieve their intellectual development in the art and science of war. If humans augmented with cognitive enhancements are present, both institutional and individual professional military education will also need to evolve. Learning delivery, as well as key learning outcomes, will have to be re-examined to account for the enhanced physical and cognitive performance of this new segment of the military workforce. Even issues as basic as fitness assessments must be re-examined. Potentially, military organisations could drop physical assessments by automatically augmenting people to the institutionally desired level of performance.

The sixth challenge is one of choice. Command structures demand a reduction in an individual’s free will to refuse such that informed consent is not quite the same as for the general population. And when experimental augmentation options progress to become approved interventions, can we equate a parent considering whether to choose an approved cognitive augmentation option for their child to a soldier contemplating the same when operating alongside augmented peers where the stakes are orders of magnitude greater? How much choice will military personnel have in the augmentation process? Will this be on a volunteer basis or by direction, and what are the moral, legal, and ethical implications of these stances? Speculation that augmentation may become mandatory for some professions may also apply to the military.

The final issue addressed in this article is one of ethics. Research communities are grappling with the ethical and moral implications of augmentation for society as a whole. While the first concern in evaluating the military applications of biotechnology is international humanitarian law, bioethics must also be considered. Ethical considerations pervade almost every aspect of human augmentation, and there are ethical considerations threaded through the other challenges raised in this article. For example, beyond the first order questions of whether we should augment soldiers are issues such as how much augmentation should be allowable. Military institutions should also assess the cumulative effects of multiple augmentations and the consequences of converging augmentation. There may also be a point at which a highly augmented human may cross the human-machine barrier, as well as a range of unanticipated capabilities that emerge from different augmentation combinations.

A Way Ahead

These issues must be informed by those within the biotechnology community, but they alone cannot solve them. Broader involvement by senior military, government, and community leaders is required. One expert in biotechnology has written that “clearly the new forms of power being unleashed by bio-technology will have to be harnessed and used with greater wisdom than power has been used in the past.” If military institutions are to demonstrate wisdom in their investments in biotechnology, they must explore societal impacts as well as effects within military institutions.

“Splitting humankind into biological castes will destroy the foundations of liberal ideology. Liberalism still presupposes that all human beings have equal value and authority.”

It is likely some augmentation will be—at least initially—expensive. It may be beyond the means of most people in society and, potentially, many government and corporate institutions. If only military personnel might be augmented, what are the impacts on civil-military relationships, and who would make this decision? In this construct, it could be unethical to deny the benefits of augmentation to wider society. However as Yuval Harari has noted, this may see a differentiation in how society views augmented and non-augmented people—“Splitting humankind into biological castes will destroy the foundations of liberal ideology. Liberalism still presupposes that all human beings have equal value and authority.” In Western democracies, this poses profound questions about conferred advantage, societal sense of fairness and equality, and the value of individuals within society.

In Western democratic systems, development of regulation, policy, and legal frameworks is not keeping pace with the current tempo of complicated technological advancements. It cannot be assumed other states are allowing these deficits to slow their efforts in biotechnology, not to mention the unregulated efforts of non-state actors. While the focus of the fourth industrial revolution remains predominantly on technologies, perhaps for Australia (and other democracies) it is also these areas which require a complementary revolution in the Whole of Nation enterprise so as to keep up with the pace of change and facilitate systematic assessment of human augmentation implications.

Conclusion

The potential to augment the physical and cognitive capacity of humans is seductive. There will be some who will not demonstrate responsible behaviour in taking advantage of these new technologies. Humans have demonstrated in the past the capacity to responsibly manage disruptive technologies such as flight, atomic weapons, and space-based capabilities. This means thoughtful academics, national security practitioners, and people from wider society must be part of the discussion on why and how biotechnology might be used in future. It is vital for the future of global security, and for the human race, that mechanisms for responsible ethical and legal use of biotechnology are considered and developed. This must occur in parallel with the scientific endeavours to develop new biotechnologies.

Mick Ryan is an Australian Army officer, and Commander of the Australian Defence College in Canberra, Australia. A distinguished graduate of Johns Hopkins University and the USMC Staff College and School of Advanced Warfare, he is a passionate advocate of professional education and lifelong learning. Therese Keane is a scientist with the Defence Science and Technology Group. Although with a background in mathematics now expanding into biotechnology. The views expressed are the authors’ and do not reflect the official position of the Australian Department of Defence or the Australian Government.

May 2 2012

Artificial Hippocampus, the Borg Hive Mind, and Other Neurological Endeavors

November 15

Many of us know about ‘Borg Hive Mind’ from TV programs where the characters are linked through brain-to-brain or computer-to-brain interactions. However, this is more than a science fiction fantasy. The idea was contemplated seriously in the 2002 National Science Foundation report, Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science. ‘Techlepathy‘ is the word coined, referring to the communication of information directly from one mind to another (i.e. telepathy) with the assistance of technology.

Many research activities focus on neuro-engineering and the cognitive sciences. Many neuroscientists and bioengineers now work on:

cognitive computing
digitally mapping the human brain (see here and here); the mouse brain map has just been published
developing microcircuits that can repair brain damage, and
other numerous projects related to changing the cognitive abilities and functioning of humans, and artificial intelligence.

Journals exist for all of these activities — including the Human Brain Mappingjournal. Some envision a Human Cognome Project. James Albus, a senior fellow and founder of the Intelligent Systems Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology believes the era of ‘engineering the mind‘ is here. He has proposed a national program for developing a scientific theory of the mind.

Neuromorphic engineering, Wikipedia says, “is a new interdisciplinary discipline that takes inspiration from biology, physics, mathematics, computer science and engineering to design artificial neural systems, such as vision systems, head-eye systems, auditory processors, and autonomous robots, whose physical architecture and design principles are based on those of biological nervous systems.”

There are many examples.

Researchers from Harvard University have linked nanowire field-effect transistors to neurons. Three applications are envisioned: hybrid biological/electronic devices, interfaces to neural prosthetics, and the capture of high-resolution information about electrical signals in the brain. Research is advancing in four areas: neuronal networks, interfaces between the brain and external neural prosthetics, real-time cellular assays, and hybrid circuits that couple digital nanoelectronic and biological computing components.

Numenta, a company formed in 2005, states on its webpage that it “is developing a new type of computer memory system modelled after the human neocortex.”

Kwabena Boahen, an associate professor of bioengineering at Stanford University, has developed Neurogrid, “a specialized hardware platform that will enable the cortex’s inner workings to be simulated in detail — something outside the reach of even the fastest supercomputers.” He is also working on a silicon retina and a silicon chip that emulates the way the juvenile brain wires itself up.

Researchers at the University of Washington are working on an implantable electronic chip that may help to establish new nerve connections in the part of the brain that controls movement.

The Blue Brain project — a collaboration of IBM and the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, in Lausanne, Switzerland – will create a detailed model of the circuitry in the neocortex.

A DNA switch ’nanoactuator‘ has been developed by Dr. Keith Firman at the University of Portsmouth and other European researchers, which can interface living organisms with computers.

Kevin Warwick had an RFID transmitter (a future column will deal with RFID chips) implanted beneath his skin in 1998, which allowed him to control doors, lights, heaters, and other computer-controlled devices in his proximity. In anotherexperiment, he and his wife Irena each had electrodes surgically implanted in their arms. The electrodes were linked by radio signals to a computer which created a direct link between their nervous systems. Kevin’s wife felt when he moved his arm.

In his book I, Cyborg, Kevin Warwick imagines that 50 years from now most human brains will be linked electronically through a global computer network.

St. Joseph’s Hospital in the United States has implanted neurostimulators (deep brain stimulators) using nanowires to connect a stimulating device to brain. A pacemaker-like device is implanted in the chest, and flexible wires are implanted in the brain. Electrical impulses sent from the ‘pacemaker’ to the brain are used to treat Parkinson’s, migraine headaches and chronic pain, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, improve the mobility of stroke victims, and curb cravings in drug addicts.

In 2003/2004 a variety of publications (see links below) reported on the efforts of professor Theodore W. Berger, director of the Center for Neural Engineering at the University of Southern California, and his colleagues, to develop the world’s firstbrain prosthesis – an ‘artificial hippocampus’ which is supposed to act as a memory bank. These publications highlighted in particular the use of such implants for Alzheimer’s patients.

The research program is proceeding in four stages: (1) tests on slices of rat brains kept alive in cerebrospinal fluid… reported as successful in 2004; (2) tests on live rats which are to take place within three years; (3) tests on live monkeys; and (4) tests on humans — very likely on Alzheimer’s patients first.

The Choice is Yours

If these advancements come to pass, they will create many ethical, legal, privacy and social issues. For the artificial hippocampus we should ask: would brain implants force some people to remember things they would rather forget? Could someone manipulate our memory? What would be the consequence of uploading information (see my education column)? Will we still have control over what we remember? Could we be forced to remember something over and over? If we can communicate with each other through a computer what will be the consequence of a Global Brain?

It is important that people become more involved in the governance of neuro-engineering and cognitive science projects. We should not neglect these areas because we perceive them to be science fiction. We also need to look beyond the outlined ‘medical applications.’ If the artificial hippocampus works, it will likely be used for more than dealing with diseases.

I will cover brain-machine interfaces, neuro-pharmaceutical-based ‘cognitive enhancement,’ and neuroethics and the ethics of artificial intelligence in future columns.

Gregor Wolbring is a biochemist, bioethicist, science and technology ethicist, disability/vari-ability studies scholar, and health policy and science and technology studies researcher at the University of Calgary. He is a member of the Center for Nanotechnology and Society at Arizona State University; Member CAC/ISO – Canadian Advisory Committees for the International Organization for Standardization section TC229 Nanotechnologies; Member of the editorial team for the Nanotechnology for Development portal of the Development Gateway Foundation; Chair of the Bioethics Taskforce of Disabled People’s International; and Member of the Executive of the Canadian Commission for UNESCO. He publishes the Bioethics, Culture and Disability website, moderates a weblog forthe International Network for Social Research on Diasbility, and authors a weblogon NBICS and its social implications.

Resources

“World’s first brain prosthesis revealed.” Duncan Graham-Rowe. New Scientist. March 12, 2003.
“Scientists develop ‘brain chip.’” BBC News.
“This is your brain on a microchip.” Stefanie Olsen. C/NET News. May 11, 2006.
“Artificial brain parts on the horizon.” TWEAN News 14. May 30, 2006.
Theodore Berger. University of Southern California.
Center for Network Neuroscience, University of North Texas.
“Blueprinting the human brain.“ Stefanie Olsen. C/NET News.
“This is your brain online.” Philip E. Ross. IEEE Spectrum.
Allan Brain Atlas. Neuroscience Gateway/Nature.
Bio-X-Bugle. Stanford University.
The Blue Brain Project. Brain Mind Institute.
“Chips coming to a brain near you.” Lakshmi Sandhana. Wired News.
Human Brain Mapping. Wiley InterScience.
“Getting nanowires on the brain.” Liz Kalaugher. Nanotechweb. August 31, 2006.
“Couples’ nervous system linked by implants in limbs.” Simon Collins. June 7, 2004.The New Zealand Herald.
“Brain prosthesis passes live tissue test.” Helen Phillips. New Scientist.
“Doctor’s specialty is re-wiring brain.” Peggy Peck. CNN. March 22, 2006.
Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. St. Joseph’s Hospital, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Press release: FDA Approves Cyberonics’ VNS Therapy System for Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD). Cyberonics, Inc.
“F.D.A. considers implant device for depression.” Benedict Carey. May 21, 2005. The New York Times.

Apr 16 2012

New Surveillance System Identifies Your Face By Searching Through 36 Million Images Per Second

When it comes to surveillance, your face may now be your biggest liability.

Privacy advocates, brace yourselves – the search capabilities of the latest surveillance technology is nightmare fuel. Hitachi Kokusai Electric recently demonstrated the development of a surveillance camera system capable of searching through 36 million images per second to match a person’s face taken from a mobile phone or captured by surveillance. While the minimum resolution required for a match is 40 x 40 pixels, the facial recognition software allows a variance in the position of the person’s head, such that someone can be turned away from the camera horizontally or vertically by 30 degrees and it can still make a match. Furthermore, the software identifies faces in surveillance video as it is recorded, meaning that users can immediately watch before and after recorded footage from the timepoint.

This means that the biggest barrier in video surveillance, which is watching hours of video to find what you want, is gone.

The power of the search capabilities is in the algorithms that group similar faces together. When a search is conducted, results are immediately shown as thumbnails, and selecting a thumbnail pulls up the stored footage for review. Because the search results are displayed as a grid, mistaken identifications can be ruled out quickly or verified by pulling up the entire video for more information.

The scenarios that this system could be useful for are endless. The police, for instance, could find individuals from old surveillance video or pick them out of large crowds, whether they are suspects or people who’ve been kidnapped. Or if a retail customer is caught stealing something on camera, the system could pull up footage from each time the customer has been in the store to identify other thefts that went unnoticed.

Rapid search of the video database allows users to review video around key timepoints.

The company, which specializes in video cameras for the imaging, medical, and security markets, states that the system is ideally suited for large-scale customers, such as law enforcement agencies, transportation centers, and retail centers. The system will be released in the next fiscal year presumably customized to specific customer’s needs. Interested parties have to contact the company directly, which is probably wise in order to control whose hands it ends up in. And this means that soon, the only thing that’s going to be anonymous anymore are the agencies and organizations using the software.

While this news should make anyone concerned about privacy shudder, it really was only a matter of time before something like this was developed. Likewise, it means that competing systems will follow until systems like this are common. So it will be up to legislators to define how the technology can be used legally as with other surveillance systems, like license-plate recognition cameras.

Check out the video from the security trade show so you can see for yourself just how easy it is to be Big Brother with this system:

[Media: YouTube]

[Sources: DigInfo, Digital Trends, PhysOrg]

Apr 11 2012

Efficiency in Multi-Core Chips “computerbrain”

New Bandwidth Management Techniques Boost Operating Efficiency in Multi-Core Chips

ScienceDaily (May 25, 2011) — Researchers from North Carolina State University have developed two new techniques to help maximize the performance of multi-core computer chips by allowing them to retrieve data more efficiently, which boosts chip performance by 10 to 40 percent.

To do this, the new techniques allow multi-core chips to deal with two things more efficiently: allocating bandwidth and “prefetching” data.

Multi-core chips are supposed to make our computers run faster. Each core on a chip is its own central processing unit, or computer brain. However, there are things that can slow these cores. For example, each core needs to retrieve data from memory that is not stored on its chip. There is a limited pathway — or bandwidth — these cores can use to retrieve that off-chip data. As chips have incorporated more and more cores, the bandwidth has become increasingly congested — slowing down system performance.

One of the ways to expedite core performance is called prefetching. Each chip has its own small memory component, called a cache. In prefetching, the cache predicts what data a core will need in the future and retrieves that data from off-chip memory before the core needs it. Ideally, this improves the core’s performance. But, if the cache’s prediction is inaccurate, it unnecessarily clogs the bandwidth while retrieving the wrong data. This actually slows the chip’s overall performance.

“The first technique relies on criteria we developed to determine how much bandwidth should be allotted to each core on a chip,” says Dr. Yan Solihin, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering at NC State and co-author of a paper describing the research. Some cores require more off-chip data than others. The researchers use easily-collected data from the hardware counters on each chip to determine which cores need more bandwidth. “By better distributing the bandwidth to the appropriate cores, the criteria are able to maximize system performance,” Solihin says.

“The second technique relies on a set of criteria we developed for determining when prefetching will boost performance and should be utilized,” Solihin says, “as well as when prefetching would slow things down and should be avoided.” These criteria also use data from each chip’s hardware counters. The prefetching criteria would allow manufacturers to make multi-core chips that operate more efficiently, because each of the individual cores would automatically turn prefetching on or off as needed.

Utilizing both sets of criteria, the researchers were able to boost multi-core chip performance by 40 percent, compared to multi-core chips that do not prefetch data, and by 10 percent over multi-core chips that always prefetch data.

The paper, “Studying the Impact of Hardware Prefetching and Bandwidth Partitioning in Chip-Multiprocessors,” will be presented June 9 at the International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS) in San Jose, Calif. The paper was co-authored by Dr. Fang Liu, a former Ph.D. student at NC State. The research was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation.

NC State’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering is part of the university’s College of Engineering.

Roll over headlines to view top news summaries:

Apr 11 2012

Pacemaker for Your Brain: Brain-To-Computer Chip Revolutionizes Neurological Therapy

ScienceDaily (June 28, 2010) — By stimulating certain areas of the brain, scientists can alleviate the effects of disorders such as depression or Parkinson’s disease. That’s the good news. But because controlling that stimulation currently lacks precision, over-stimulation is a serious concern — losing some of its therapeutic benefits for the patient over time.

Now a Tel Aviv University team, part of a European consortium, is delving deep into human behavior, neurophysiology and engineering to create a chip that can help doctors wire computer applications and sensors to the brain. The chip will provide deep brain stimulation precisely where and when it’s needed.

Prof. Matti Mintz of Tel Aviv University’s Psychobiology Research Unit in its Department of Psychology is focusing on the behavioral-physiological aspects of the research. He and the rest of the international research team are working toward a chip that could help treat some diseases of the mind in just a few years. The platform, says Prof. Mintz, is flexible enough to provide a basis for a variety of clinical experiments, and tools which can be programmed for specific disorders. For example, the chip could restore lost functions of the brain after a traumatic brain injury from a car accident or stroke.

Reversing strokes, depression and aging

The team’s methodology is straightforward — they record activity using electrodes implanted in diseased areas of the brain. Based on an analysis of this activity, they develop algorithms to simulate healthy neuronal activity which are programmed into a microchip and fed back into the brain.

For now, the chip, called the Rehabilitation Nano Chip (or ReNaChip), is hooked up to tiny electrodes which are implanted in the brain. But as chips become smaller, the ReNaChip could be made small enough to be “etched” right onto the electrodes themselves.

For therapeutic purposes, though, only the electrodes will be inserted into the brain. “The chip itself can be implanted just under the skin, like pacemakers for the heart,” says Prof. Mintz, who is currently conducting experiments on animal models, “ensuring that the brain is stimulated only when it needs to be.”

One of the challenges of the proposed technology is the size of the electrodes. The researchers hope to further miniaturize deep brain electrodes while adding more sensors at the same time says Prof. Mintz. His Tel Aviv University colleague and partner Prof. Yossi Shaham-Diamond is working on this problem.

The international multidisciplinary team, includes other researchers from TAU — Prof. Hagit Messer-Yaron and Dr. Mira Kalish — and partners from Austria, England and Spain, regularly converge on the TAU campus to update and integrate new components of the set-up and monitor the progress of the chip in live animals in Prof. Mintz’s lab.

A two-way conversation

The idea that a chip can interface between inputs and outputs of certain brain area is a very new concept in scientific circles, Prof. Mintz notes, although movies and TV shows about bionic humans have been part of the popular culture for decades. The researchers say that their ReNaChip could help people whose brains have deteriorated with age or been damaged by injury and disease. The chip will not only provide a bionic replacement for lost neuronal function in the brain, under ideal conditions, it could significantly rehabilitate the brain.

Currently, the researchers are attempting to rehabilitate motor-learning functions lost due to brain damage. “We are attaching the chip to the brain to stimulate relatively simple brain behaviors,” says Prof. Mintz. A controlled treatment for drug resistant epilepsy, based on the team’s technology, could be only a few years away, he says.

Apr 11 2012

Public awareness of the technologies and experiments on humans and its impact on individuals and society in Sweden and Europe / USA.

Public awareness of the MIND CONTROL Technologies and experiments on humans and its impact on individuals and society in Sweden and Europe.

Only within a small sphere of military / medical classified research and industrial projects are factual knowledge available. It has once been of scientific research has focused on the new technologoist is developed into a commercial orgy of humantorture and humiliation,injury to a third party carried out by researchers and their speaking computers with artificial intelligence.

How long shall attempt to sacrifice their families and work have to fight for their human rights in the frenzy of abuse that is now underway on software developed for mapping the brain. 25-04-2010. MINDTECH seeks to establish a network of laymen and media. This group will be dealing with the social and ethical sides to research, development and the implementation of emerging technologies in our society. The most interesting part are the Direct Human Brain – artifcial intelegence – Interface System technologies. MINDTECH will do extensive and thorough research into this totally new area, which at this point, is being investigated only by the few.

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

Implant chip in the human brain.Synthetic telepathy is communication systems built on thoughts, not speech. Multimedia communication network is based. Brain copying is performed around the clock, largely by learning computer, copying is nothing short of serious torture. No one would voluntarily give informed consent to this serious research abuse. It takes years of learning and program development to develop the new computer-brain interfaces and multimedia language between man and computer. Subjects are now against their will has been online for 6.5 years on Man-Brain-Computer-Interface.

Neurological research has progressed so far that you can hack the neural system is wireless, which means that a computer can communicate with your brain and store all your sensory experiences, and then studying your kognetiva behavior, ie, the ultimate human study. The commercial user fields are endless and it feels no need to explain the far-reaching consequences when abused. This technology brain-computer interaction has happened during the 2000’s and will revoltion our way of life.

“The right to search for truth implies also a duty one must not conceal any part of what one has found to be true”

( ALBERT EINSTEIN)

Brain-implant-chip.

IBM: Mind reading within reach in 5 years

The world is changing fast–maybe faster than we ever thought. And within five years, science fiction is going to turn into non-fiction. We’ll be able to read each other’s minds.

These are just three of the five predictions IBM announced this morning as part of its annual “5 in 5” prognostication project.

December 19, 2011 12:12 PM

The list is meant to promote long-term work being done under Big Blue’s Smarter Planet initiative–and the company says “5 in 5″ already has a track record of success. In 2008, IBM says, it suggested that within five years, consumers would talk to the Web–and the Web would respond. This, the predictions are a bit more :

Mind reading is no longer science fiction.
You will never need a password again.
The digital divide will cease to exist.
Junk mail will become priority mail.

It would seem the most interesting idea posited by IBM is the one about reading minds. But lest you think that what its scientists are saying is that you’ll be able to glare at a friend–or perhaps more importantly, an enemy–and know what he or she is thinking, that may be more than five years off. Rather, this is about how our brain implant might someday be synced with computing devices: If you just need to think about calling someone, it happens. Or you can control the cursor on a computer screen just by thinking about where you want to move it.

We’ve been issuing the Next 5 in 5 predictions for the past six years. So, how are we doing? Mindful of the difficulty, and considering the fact that for most of the predictions less than five years have passed, we’ve done pretty well. Two of the first year’s predictions, for instance, have pretty much come true: We will be able to access healthcare remotely from just about anywhere in the world. Today, through telemedicine, patients can connect with physicians or specialists from just about anywhere via inexpensive computers and broadband networks. Doctors can view x-rays and other diagnostic imagery from thousands of miles away. Technologies the size of a few atoms will address areas of environmental importance. Nanotechnology is now used in countless fields and industries, including agriculture, biotechnology and sensor networks, enabling us to understand and interact with the naturals.

Mr Computer’s capabilities and human-like reasoning cannot be understated.

Read moore: http://www.mindcontrol.se/?page_id=6776

Mon Jan 16, 2012 7:54 PM EST

Predictions from other years have panned out as well. A couple of examples: You will have a crystal ball for your health. Thanks to advances in genetic research and high-performance computing it is now possible to affordably decipher an individual’s entire genome. This makes it possible for physicians to alert people to medical conditions they might fall prey to, and it clears the pathway, eventually, to truly personal medicine. You will talk to the Web…and the Web will talk back. Today, speech recognition and mobile communications technologies make it possible for people to talk to the Internet using their computers or mobile phones, be understood, and listen to automated voices that are responsive to their needs. The Next 5 in 5 initiative got its start in an IBM Innovation Jam in 2006. The seed goal was to get the entire company thinking about grand challenges. “If you give people a grand challenge you push them to really innovate,” says Meyerson. “That’s when extraordinary things can happen.” IBM has played a significant role in each of these breakthroughs. So, it’s working.

Brain-chip.

By: Anders Sandberg. Oxford U.K An implant. It is an independent processor linked to the neurocomputer built to house an artifcial intelegence. The artifcial intelligence program has access to the sensory data and information in the neurocomputer, and can “read” surface thoughts of the owner (of course, access controls can be set if needed, both in the implant and the (artifcial intelegence). Having a (or several) as advisor/secretary/partner is becoming more and more common, although most people rely on an external artifcial intelegence system and a wireless neural connection. It is not uncommon for users to get a motoric shunt to give the artifcial intelegence the ability to control the body.Chips with monitoring artifcial intelegence are sometimes used for or behaviour correction in Landfall.

Moodulator

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

An implant of the limbic system, enabling the owners to control their moods. Normally it just sets an allowed range and a bias (e.g. towards cheerfulness or calm), but it can also induce stronger emotional states. The implant is somewhat dangerous due to the risk of addiction to extreme positive states; most users at least tend to improve their mood. Originally it was developed on Nova for treatment of certain emotional disorders, especially the rare but devastating OIAIS (Ocean Induced AutoImmune Syndrome, an autoimmune illness induced by certain poisons causing severe mood swings due to damage of the limbic system). Later more widespread use developed. There are also moodcasters, systems sending signals to the implants of people who have allowed access. Moodcasters are mainly used in virtual dramas.Autonomous control bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

Enables the owner to control many aspects of the autonomous nervous system such as hunger, sleep or pain. Turning off these functions are of course dangerous, but sometimes useful. It can also act as a super-alarm clock (guaranteed to wake you up) or “homeostatic tuner” to optimise the hormone balance of the body.

Mind Control “Brain Control” and Brain Cloning !

“To build a Computerbrain”

–

Are You a Robosapiens YET ?

One of the most powerful weapons are now targeting some of the civilian population in Europe during its development. The weapon is called brain implants and synthetic telepathy. Synthetic telepathy covers mind reading, and artificial intelligence, to clone the brain and build a computerbrain. 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.

–

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 Europe, without their consent and / or knowledge, for this many years.

Mindtech cooperate with the media and the Swedish / European companies to try to enforce the ethics debate. 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 the person who claims that a paradigm shift in computer-brain integration and multimedia technology is already here.

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

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

. bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

Brain Implants and miniaturized Signal Analysis System is implanted in people without their informed consent, in hospitals all over Europe. The systems are used to clone, and make an artificial copy of the human life, including their nervous system, memory, learning and emotions. This type of illegal research of are impossible to detect. This crimes can continue because yet there is no technology that can detect bioelectronics/neuroelectronics in nano size. The artificial intelligence which performs the majority of the research work, is programmed as a war machine that does not hesitate from any means in order to improve its learning and cloning of a human. This intelligence acquire continuously, more and more unreasonable arguments for continuing its work to grow, including the use of gross physical and mental abuse in an attempt to uphold ”companionship” with the person who is under intrusion. This is also a war between humans and the new computer brains.

These works are aimed at exploring and expose the techno-ethics /Human-Brain- of human interactions with adaptive and cognitive systems developed in the framework of Computer, Bionics, and Artificial Intelligence “computerbrain”.These interactions notably include:

– Human, Brain-Computer non-invasive interactions, involving (AI) autonomous computer which inhabit human environments;

– Human, Brain-machine invasive interactions, involving bionic systems for restoring or enhancing human functionalities;

– Human Brain-softbot interactions, involving AI systems for information access and communication like a Computerbrain, with related areas of applied ethics, concerns:

– Preservation and promotion of human freedom, rights, and identity;

– Fair access to adaptive BRAIN, machinery resources;

– Scientific method and techno-ethical policies;

– Precautionary principles in human-machine interactions;

– Responsibilities for cooperative human-machine deliberation and action;

– Machine autonomy and accountability;

– Individual and societal impact of human brain-machine cognitive and affective bonds;

– Intercultural aspects of robosapiens development, design, and use.

Scientists Successfully Implant Chip That Controls The Brain

Allowing

Thoughts, Memory And Behavior To Be Transferred From One

Brain To Another Brain

In a scene right out of a George Orwell novel, a team of scientists working in the fields of “neural engineering” and “Biomimetic MicroElectronic Systems” have successfully created a chip that controls the brain and can be used as a storage device for long-term memories. In studies the scientists have been able to record, download and transfer memories into other hosts with the same chip implanted. The advancement in technology brings the world one step closer to a global police state and the reality of absolute mind control.

More terrifying is the potential for implementation of what was only a science fiction fantasy – the “Thought Police” – where the government reads people’s memories and thoughts and then rehabilitate them through torture before they ever even commit a crime based on a statistical computer analysis showing people with certain types of thoughts are likely to commit a certain type of crime in the future.

We already pre-emptively invade nations and torture alleged terrorist suspects with absolutely no due process of law, so the idea of pre-emptively torturing a terrorist suspect before hand to prevent them from committing an act of terrorism in the future really isn’t that far fetched of an idea.

Perhaps a less sensational example, than those I just depicted out of own of Orwell’s famous dystopian novels would be using the technology as it is depicted the modern day Matrix movies, in which computer programs are uploaded into people’s brains allowing them to instantly learn how to perform a wide variety of tasks.

That is exactly the example that Smart Planet uses in their write-up on the USC press release.

Wideband Link

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

The implants used to achieve group consciousness. Unlike an ordinary neuro, (atrificial intelligence) inteface it connects to most of the cerebral cortex and has a much higher bandwidth. It can send and receive signals not just of primary sensory and motor information but also higher order associations and thoughts. Since each human has an individual “mental language” sophisticated translation systems and much training is required before digital telepathy is possible. Wideband links are also used by the Net Transcendence and Next Step Foundation in their experiments with expanding the human mind. One of the most controversial and interesting applications is to let software rewrite parts of the cortex; theoretically this could be the ultimate psychodesign, even if it is currently extremely crude.

Medial forebrain pacemaker

bluered.gif (1041 bytes)

An implant in the motivation and pleasure centres that is controlled by the owner’s neurocomputer. It is illegal and very addictive: users quickly become hooked on anything that activates it. It can be used together with behaviour therapy to change habits and personality.

Thought Control – a new ethical problem! Being able to connect the human brain to a computer via electrodes open, of course, frightening possibilities. Will it be possible to control a person’s thoughts?

There are important ethical aspects of this. It would, of course, theoretically able to control brain functions and modify the human personality. For example, make them more or less prone to aggression or to increase learning ability by adding to chronic stimulation. It’s like with everything else, with the knowledge that there can use it in many ways, “says Göran Lundborg Sweden

People who are exposed without informed consent for research abuse and torture of the new technology, explained idiot when they seek help from authorities. This lack of knowledge caused by the researchers to withhold reports on the technology’s existence

——————————-

By: Anders Sandberg. Oxford U.K

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 Brain in computer science indicate that it may well be feasible to develop direct interfaces between the brain and computers.

Colleague, Professor Gershenfeld, asserts that “in 5 years, computers will be everywhere; in 10 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 intellegence, consciousness”, “the hive mind.” “The hive mind…is about taking all these trillions of cells in our skulls that make individual intelligence. consciousness and putting them together and arriving at a new kind of consciousness that transcends all the individuals.”

BRAIN CHIP FUTURE... By: Ellen.McGee and MQ Maguire Jr (KTH STOCKHOLM SWEDEN)

A collaboration with mindtech

Mindtech To this information about the revolution highlighting interdisciplinary research, without informed consent to communicate with mind- brain-computer interface.

It’s about providing information to create a general awareness that leads to an ethical debate about this technology. This will hopefully lead to a legislation against the misuse of technology.

It is also about identifying who or what in Sweden and Europe who have illegally engaged in research on people under torture forms.

Mindtech cooperate with the media, church, the private sector and victims of this research.

By: Magnus Olsson / SWEDEN

Apr 10 2012

Hacking The Brain !

The world is changing fast–maybe faster than we ever thought. And within five years, science fiction is going to turn into non-fiction. We’ll be able to read each other’s minds, forget all our passwords.

IBM 2012 5 IN 5

To understand the issue a little clearer, we will need to treat the human brain much like a computer with dedicated hardware. In this respect, what we are looking for is one, or more, security flaws that we can exploit. So, we have to come at this much like a hacker would.

We know from our previous articles that the brain emits weak radio frequencies in the sub-1000Hz range. The principles of radio tell us anything that can produce a radio signal, can also accept one. Thus, we have overcome our first major hurdle, the establishment of a physical transport layer. A physical transport layer allows for two-way communications.

http://rg.revolvermaps.com/f/f.swf
Instant readers of th world

Given that we know that no information is directly encoded onto the radio waves, the frequencies are unique due to axon properties and the supply of energy will cause a neuron to fire, we have now established a data transport layer. That is, data is not communicated, it is stimulated in the target and the target experiences whatever that stimulation corresponds to.

If we return to our hacker analogy, what we have found is the human brain, whilst using a spread spectrum and a highly discreet frequency response to eliminate cross-talk, is unable to label information and determine that it has been processed before. In short, the human brain is vulnerable to what is known as a replay attack.

For those that have a deeper interest, or indeed are involved in Neuroscience, I have come across a scientific paper which should outline the principle in more scientific terms. The following paper, published in 1995, describes the electromagnetic induction of “fundamental algorithms”, or neural networks, to generate any sensory perception required. We will get to how this functions in a moment, for now, have a quick read:

On the possibility of directly accessing every human brain by electromagnetic induction of fundamental algorithms.

Persinger MA.

Behavioural Neuroscience Laboratory, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.

Abstract :

Contemporary neuroscience suggests the existence of fundamental algorithms by which all sensory transduction is translated into an intrinsic, brain-specific code. Direct stimulation of these codes within the human temporal or limbic cortices by applied electromagnetic patterns may require energy levels which are within the range of both geomagnetic activity and contemporary communication networks. A process which is coupled to the narrow band of brain temperature could allow all normal human brains to be affected by a subharmonic whose frequency range at about 10 Hz would only vary by 0.1 Hz.

I have provided two diagrams, on the right hand side, to explain how this functions. If we look at diagram two, we can observe how the neurons, when viewing green grass, emits a specific pattern of radio waves at certain frequencies. If we now look at diagram three, we can observe that transmitting this pattern and frequencies back to the brain will result in the target seeing green grass. Of course, there are certain limitations and we will discuss them in a moment.

As we can see, anything we can possibly experience can be reduced to certain patterns and frequencies emitted from the human brain. As such, any experience can be faked by a computer and sent to your brain. Thus, it is a matter of recognizing these patterns and frequencies and this brings us back to the first citation in this article.

As human beings, we all assume that we are unique and that should be the case with our brains. As much as we would wish this to be true, it is simply not. We all must perform the same functions and be wired relatively similarly to conduct those functions. The reason we can all, for the most part, see, touch, smell, hear and taste indicates that we have all have the same basic circuitry that allows these perceptions to function. With pattern matching and a large database we can build a library of thoughts, feelings, images, opinions and sounds that are generally applicable to anyone.

Thus, as the above citation calls it, we all have certain fundamental algorithms. As such, we all emit very similar patterns and frequencies due to this similar wiring. The slight variations that do occur, prevent us from emitting radio waves that would cause interference in all of our perceptions. If this we’re not the case, we would experience each others thoughts, vision, auditory and emotional experiences every minute of every day. Again, for our astute readers, this would indicate limited acts of natural telepathy due to wave propagation and frequency response. That, however, is a completely different story.

The limitation that I mentioned earlier are the result of actively processing input. That is, whilst I can put phosphenes or bright images in your vision, I may not be able to put more subtle or complex images. The problem is that the neurons are already firing and I have only two choices, interrupt or accelerate. That would usually translate to either darkness, or a bright spot. A similar issue exists with all sensory input. As a result, it is not possible to place someone into a VR type environment, but it is possible to scramble their inputs, causing wide spread malfunctions, hallucinations and loss of motor skills.

The Dark Side

That’s pretty much it for the technical side of the mechanism, but the real question would be, what would it be like? Well, if I got you to think of the phrase “Hello World!” and recorded the associated frequencies and patterns, I could retransmit them and you would feel that you have just thought the words “Hello World!”, in your own inner voice. Unless you had extensive experience with the A.I. and a very deep understanding of your own mind, then it would be impossible to tell the difference.

Now, imagine a merger talks, or even political agreement. To get a person to commit to an agreement, I simply transmit a copy of my own feelings of acceptance to the target. They now feel the way you do about the agreement and will sign. It is also possible to block certain thoughts, or feelings of negativity, and even place your own counter-arguments to these thoughts directly into their mind. As far as the target is concerned, it was their own idea and they did it out of their own free will.

Why debate when you can impose your will?

Sat Oct 9, 2010 2:48 PM EDT

The Neurophone

Although the offered explanations for “Hearing Voices” can include everything from trickery to hidden transmitters to tinnitus to psychic/haunting experiences to possession or encounters with God/aliens (to so – called schizophrenic episodes) by far the most common REAL reason is covert Neurophone harassment as arranged by government agencies and/or other criminals.

US Patent # 3,393,279. July 16th, 1968

US Patent # 3,647,970. March 7th, 1972

The Neurophone was developed by Dr Patrick Flanagan in 1958. It’s a device that converts sound to electrical impulses. In its original form electrodes were placed on the skin but with defence department developments, the signals can be delivered via satellite. They then travel the nervous system directly to the brain (bypassing normal hearing mechanisms). Dr Flanagan’s “3D holographic sound system” can place sounds in any location as perceived by the targeted / tortured listener. This allows for a variety of deceptions for gullible victims.

Today, the CIA, DIA (etc) use satellites and ground – based equipment to deliver verbal threats, deafening noise and propaganda; using neurophone technology. Anything from TV’s/radio’s appearing to operate when switched off through to “Voices from God” and encounters with “telepathic” aliens are all cons using neurophone technologies to torment, deceive and (most importantly) discredit agency/criminal targets. Naturally, the system can mimic anyone’s voice and automatic computer translations (into any language) are incorporated.

Anecdotal evidence indicates that people like David Koresh, Martin Bryant and others could have been programmed then remotely triggered (or tricked) using harrassment technologies like the neurophone. (Although most of the targets are intelligent and law-abiding). For example, John Lennon’s killer, Mark Chapman, (Sweden) Anna Lind, Olof Palme, reportedly heard voices before and after silencing the agency-hounded peace advocate. “God” apparently told him to confess verbally.

To explain why others physically moving into the path of the laser do not pick up the signals, please note the following “possibilities”… a) Kirlean photography may be an ancillary system so it’s attuned to the targets personal energy field (their unique EM waves).

b) The magnetite in our brains can act as a detectable fingerprint.

c)Equally each of us has a unique bioelectrical resonance frequency in our brains. EMF Brain stimulation may be encoded so that pulsating EM signals sent to the targets brain cause audio-visual effects which only the target experiences. This, to me, is the best explanation.

d) The individuals “vibrational pattern” could be used as a signal filter like a radio receiving only the sound modulating the frequency of the station it’s tuned to.

e) The monitors simply adjust the volume downwards when you’re in a position where the signal could hit someone else’s body. Even if they heard it (briefly) they’d attribute it to another voice in the crowd etc.

As with the final proof, the definitive answer lies in the actual blueprints; secreted in the bowels of the Pentagon or some similar facility. Nonetheless, there is no report of ANY intercepted neurophone signals. If it wasn’t so effective it would not have been used to facilitate silent communications between U.S. government agents/Europ/military personnel.

Highlight of the Mindjustice.org website:

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Op-Eds:

Outlaw nonconsensual human experiments now by Cheryl Welsh, published online June 2009 athttp://www.thebulletin.org/

New article “Bioethics Commission Failed Obama’s Mandate in New Report” by Cheryl Welsh in The Daily Censored, an online news source in cooperation with Sonoma State University’s student-run Project Censored. See: http://dailycensored.com/2012/01/05/bioethics-commission-failed-obamas-mandate-in-new-report/

President Obama will act on the Presidential Bioethics Commission December 2011 report. Now is a unique time for public input. Human subject protections should include a U.S. rule or statute that requires informed consent in classified research.

Table of Contents

Citations of Mind Justice

Russian Research

Experimentation Law

Selected Projects by Mind Justice

Research and Information

Allegations by Targeted Individuals from Around the World

Future Plans for Mind Justice

This is an extensive list of informational website relating to the crimes of organised, directed energy weapons, pyscho-electronic mind control, and related topics.

www.organised-crime-of-covert-electronic-assault-nz.com

www.mireilletorjman.com

www.nationalcaresociety.org

www.catchcanada.org

www.freedomfchs.com

www.oasisturningpoint.org

www.mindjustice.org

www.stopcovertwar.com

www.raven1.net

www.raven1.net/gaslight.htm

www.raven1.net/glossary.htm

www.multistalkervictims.org

www.shoestringradio.net

www.shoestringradio.net/policewhoknow.txt

www.shoestringradio.net/docswhoknow.txt

www.eharassment.ca

www.mindcontrolforums.com

www.americancognitivelibertiesassoc.org

www.psychologicalharassment.com

www.govharass.com

www.us-government-torture.com

www.us-government-torture.com/Larson%20/Report%20Edit.pdf

www.afafa.org

www.surveillanceissues.com

www.projectcensored.org

www.thematrixdeciphered.com

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mkultra

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/mind_control

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/cointelpro

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Olson

www.lesliecrawford.cabanova.com

archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=1275

www.rob-profile.com

www.jbhfile.com

www.wanttoknow.info/mindcontrol10pg

www.wanttoknow.info/emailmk

www.wanttoknow.info/mindcontrolinformation#mindcontrolsummaries

www.webspawner.com/users/perpbuster

www.bugsweeps.com/info/electronic_harassment.html

www.exoticwarfare.com

www.exoticwarfareproof.org

www.amnestyusa.org/Reports_Statements_and_Issue_Briefs/Torture_and_the_Law/page.do?id=1107981&n1=3&n2=38&n3=1052

takeaction.amnestyusa.org

Posted 2 months, 1 week ago.

Add a comment

The NSA / IBM – Behind The Curtain

Mr Computer’s capabilities and human-like reasoning cannot be understated.

IBM BRAIN-LIKE COMPUTER CHIP, FUTURE ROBOT APOCALYPSE IS RIGHT ON SCHEDULE

IN SCIENCE’S STORIED QUEST TO MIMIC HOW THE HUMAN BRAIN FUNCTIONS, IBM HAS HIT A MAJOR MILESTONE. IN A JOINT VENTURE BEING FUNDED IN PART BY THE DEFENSE

ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY (DARPA), THE COMPUTER MANUFACTURER HAS CREATED THE FIRST OF WHAT IT CALLS “COGNITIVE COMPUTER CHIPS” WHICH ARE DESIGNED TO EMULATE THE WORKINGS OF A LIVING BRAIN.

THE NEW TECHNOLOGY — NICKNAMED SYNAPSE (SYSTEMS OF NEUROMORPHIC ADAPTIVE PLASTIC SCALABLE ELECTRONICS) BY DARPA — IS MILES AHEAD OF ANY COMPUTER SYSTEM BEFORE IT, AND WORKS MUCH DIFFERENTLY. DARPA RESEARCHER DHARMENDRA MODHA NOTES “THE COMPUTERS WE HAVE TODAY ARE MORE LIKE CALCULATORS. WE WANT TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THE BRAIN.” THIS INCLUDES FUNCTIONS LIKE MEMORY AND LEARNING, WHICH ARE ALREADY PRESENT IN THE PROTOTYPE CHIPS BUILT BY IBM.

A COMPUTER THAT LEARNS AND ADAPTS IN REAL TIME MAY BE JUST AROUND THE CORNER

READ: HTTP://WWW.CBSNEWS.COM/STORIES/2011/08/18/SCITECH/MAIN20094004.SHTML

Apr 9 2012

Nano Brain Implant ! Satellite Read Your Thoughts

Can A Satellite Read Your Thoughts of a nano Brain Implant – Physics Revealed

Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:25 PM EDT

By Deep_Thought

In a single hop scenario, information is captured by satellite and relayed directly to a ground station. Thus, four transmissions are required for a round trip.

In a centralized relay scenario, information is captured by satellite and forwarded to a second satellite in range of a ground station. Six transmissions are required at minimum .

Basic FFT analysis.

Trilateration is employed to accurately define the location of a signal source. Employed by GPS, the reverse process can be used to isolate the location of signals emanating from the surface of the Earth.

Collated diagram representing electrical activity emanating from a single individual.

A side-on view for demonstration purposes. Each peak represents the amplitude of a specific frequency which is indicative of current activity.

The last article in this series caused quite a stir around the Internet. From the legitimate crazies to the classic muddy-the-water tactics employed by various defense departments, the article has drawn attention right across the globe. For those that have been living under a rock, the last article in this series demonstrated that action potentials (firing neurons) produce detectable radio signals in the SLF/ELF bands (1-1000Hz).

These radio signals can be used to reveal the thoughts, feelings, vision, spacial reasoning and unconscious activity of the brain. It is simply a matter of correlating the patt to a nano brain implant received with those produced by the various neural networks to decode the activity. I am deliberately avoiding the term demodulate as no information is modulated onto the radio waves.

One question that keeps popping up is the mechanics of the capture and analysis of these radio signals. How do we go from an SLF/ELF radio wave, with limited bandwidth, to usable information or input that an A.I. can process?

Let’s find out.

Obeying The Speed Limit

The first major issue we encounter is at what altitude can we place our orbiting satellites? This is a relatively easy thing to approximate. The speed of light, in a vacuum, is constant. It travels at 299,792,458 m/s or nearly 300,000 Km/s and somewhat slower depending on the medium it transverses. Whilst at a glance it would seem that you can place the satellites anywhere you like, there is a practical limit given the need for two-way communication with the human brain.

Whilst it may seem to us that we experience the world as it is happening there is, in fact, a small delay. This can be anywhere from 100-200ms. To be of any use, an A.I. needs to be able to analyze information almost as fast as a human can perceive it. That is, for the A.I. to appear to be “in your head”, like a form of Schizophrenia, it must leverage the window provided by the 100-200ms delay. Thus, a round trip, including processing, must be under 200ms for the illusion to be maintained, a maximum of 100ms in either direction. As such, defined limits are imposed upon any solution.

If we examine our first diagram, we can observe a direct relay solution. That is, information captured by the satellite is relayed to a ground station directly. In this scenario, we have four transmissions to complete a round trip to the target. Thus, without considering processing, we know that each transmission can be at maximum 50ms. This gives us a maximum altitude of 14,989.62Km for our satellites which is well below GPS satellites at 20,200Km.

If we now take into consideration processing time, hops between dedicated hardware, lag and atmospheric issues, we could safely approximate 50-80ms. This now reduces our maximum altitude to around 10,000Km.

We cannot always guarantee that our satellite will be in direct line of sight contact with a ground station. In this scenario, we need to relay our information to a satellite that is within transmitting range. This scenario is demonstrated in the second diagram to the right. As a result, our altitude could drop to around 6,000Km or less.

Our constellation is not hindered by line-of-sight requirements of Microwaves as SLF/ELF waves can pass through relatively deep rock and water without a corresponding drop off in signal strength. Thus, a significant drop in altitude would not effect the coverage to any great extent and 30-60 satellites could provide global coverage.

Such a system need only generate around 0.00000002079 Watts, at ground level on the right frequency, to trigger the firing of a neuron. Thus, the SLF/ELF transmitters do not need to be of classical large sizes allowing for dense, power efficient, transmitter arrays in a form factor suitable for satellite deployment. Just keep in mind that an antenna’s function is to increase the amplitude of a wave through electrical resonance. With such small amplitudes, the classical submarine transmitters of 50Km or more are not required. In this form factor, a very rough estimate of a few thousand small antennas, per satellite, is feasible.

So, we have a good approximation of the infrastructure required and the limits that physics imposes. What we need to analyze now is the processing of that information.

Input, Input, Input

If we examine the third diagram, we can obtain a basic idea of the “snapshot” each satellite captures. In a given time frame, a range of frequencies is detected. To isolate a particular person, we use a form of trilateration similar to how GPS functions (see forth diagram). In this case, the Digital Signal Processing equipment on the ground replaces the function of the GPS receiver. Given the nature of SLF/ELF waves, atomic timing and detailed information on satellite drift and atmospheric conditions, millimeter or greater resolution can be achieved. The margin of error in GPS is related to both the lack of a wide range of information and processing power at the GPS receiver.

Once we have determined our desired location, we can collate the frequencies emanating from that particular location and disregard the rest of the information. This provides us with a reduced FFT diagram which represents the electrical activity of a particular individual. We can observe this collated diagram in the fifth image to the right.

From here, it is matter of correlating peaks and patterns against known neural activity. This acts as our translator or lexicon to decode the electrical activity into meaningful information. This is shown in the sixth diagram to the right. Performed in near real-time, every activity, thought, feeling, sight or sound can be captured and recorded.

So, we have shown how signal analysis can be used to infer the activity, both physical and mental, of a targeted individual. It also shows that there is not a giant leap in returning such signals to the brain and effectively hijacking it. Once the frequencies the target’s brain emanates have been isolated, an entire stage of processing (trilateration) can be skipped, unless real-time tracking is required.

Of course, certain architecture choices can provide additional features applicable to intelligence gathering. The first is the storage and analysis of historical information. This allows the A.I. to refer to elements in your past, even though it was not specifically examining you at the time. This can be used to increase the Schizophrenic illusion by inferring that the voice, or personality, was always there. Further to this, an individual not aware of the presence of this system, could have their opinions and feelings manipulated. This is especially useful when a certain political outcome is desired, such as peace negotiations or trade decisions.

A second design choice and arguably the most useful, is a modification on keyword analysis. “Key Thought Analysis” reviews all data in a particular grid search (for example a province in Afghanistan) to reveal individuals thinking of specific activity. Once located, the spacial resolution can be widened to reveal individuals in their presence and whether this was a group planning an attack.

Finally, we could have two or more layers of satellites, one used for real-time interaction with an A.I. and a second set simply gathering information. The latter could be at any altitude.

Biotechnology and Human Augmentation: Issues for National Security Practitioners

Biotechnology and Human Augmentation

Impacts on Military Institutions

Previously, integration of new groups into the military dealt with human beings.

A Way Ahead

“Splitting humankind into biological castes will destroy the foundations of liberal ideology. Liberalism still presupposes that all human beings have equal value and authority.”

Conclusion

Share this:

Like this: