Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe this is possible once the computer program has built up a detailed database from multiple scans of the same person's brain looking at the same material for weeks. But not everyone's brain is the same. Not everyone thinks of the same things when looking at a photo, or thinking about a subject.
This experiment most likely shows a possible future application, where we extensively train a computer program for one specific individual, that it may be able to help the disabled.
I do not buy into the notion that they can program the computer to work for Sally form Rhode Island, and then Sean from Ireland, and then it also works for Zhang in China.
The AI will build a database from various people's brainwaves and find matching patterns and then it WILL be able to tell between various people.
If this is making news then assume that governments have had this technology and it's a lot more developed than we think.
Status:
"81 Years, NOT 91 Felonies"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,597,197 times
Reputation: 5696
There's a whole lot more to this than just AI readings.
I expect this will be very expensive. That means the authorities won't use this for traffic tickets, or even most misdemeanors.
This will be used only for the most serious crimes, especially violent ones.
Also, if one can refuse to take a breathalyzer test, then I'm sure refusal to take a brain scan is also Constitutionally safe. This is particularly true if this AI-scan of brains seems no more reliable than a polygraph test from the 1960s or 70s.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 3 days ago)
35,613 posts, read 17,935,039 times
Reputation: 50634
Oh bummer.
I've always said, when the discussion comes up that high tech is watching you, yeah, don't care. I don't care.
If someone wants to track my movements between the grocery store, Target, and a friend's house, don't care.
If someone wants to read all my texts or listen in on my phone calls, don't care.
If someone wants to track all my buying habits and compile them into a consumer profile, don't care.
THIS, I care about. I was comforted by Ken's analysis that this isn't really reading minds, but rather, finding previous images and matching them up, ok.
But I surely don't want anyone decoding my thoughts and making a reasonable representation of what I'm thinking.
I've always said, when the discussion comes up that high tech is watching you, yeah, don't care. I don't care.
If someone wants to track my movements between the grocery store, Target, and a friend's house, don't care.
If someone wants to read all my texts or listen in on my phone calls, don't care.
If someone wants to track all my buying habits and compile them into a consumer profile, don't care.
THIS, I care about. I was comforted by Ken's analysis that this isn't really reading minds, but rather, finding previous images and matching them up, ok.
But I surely don't want anyone decoding my thoughts and making a reasonable representation of what I'm thinking.
Too late...there's no one left to care.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
