Musk’s Neuralink is hardly the first company to use BCI technology. So, why is it now making headlines? Perhaps because its CEO intends to expand its use beyond the realm of the therapeutic,e.g., improving the life of the person with quadriplegia, marketing it to anyone sufficiently cash-worthy seeking to up-grade mental function. The implications transcend dystopian science fiction.
Once Upon a Time
Cyborgs, modern mythological creatures merging machine and man, were a fictional creation of novelist Martin Caiden, reminiscent of the half-human-half-horse centaur. The most life-like it got were two TV shows, The Six Million Dollar Man and The Bionic Woman, in the 1970s. These imaginary iterations involved upgrading human physical prowess with technologically advanced bionic limbs. By 2004, the first human cyborg-machine-man interface made history when an antenna was attached to the skull of the color-blind Neil Harbisson, enabling him to "hear" colors through vibrations [1].
In 2014, the FDA approved the first BCI-enhanced “exoskeletons” – goliath suits that patients with spinal cord injuries could don to facilitate walking. Improvements continue. On March 13 of this year, the FDA approved Lifeward’s ReWalk Exoskeleton 7 for navigating curbs and stairs. However, like most technology, in addition to therapeutic benefits, the device has potential uses, including body armor - providing unrivaled strength, speed, and power for military ground forces in battle.
Current “cyborg” research centers on brain implants. The first BCI was implanted in the 1990s. The technology involves inserting a chip or electrodes inside a brain or affixing them to the scalp to convey signals to paralyzed users. It enables the direction of limited (primarily upper body) movement and speech through thought-interfaced computers or robotics.
In 2016, Elon Musk launched Neuralink, its technology centered on the robotic implantation of tiny electronic “threads” capable of transferring a high volume of data via thousands of electrodes. It took another seven years for Neuralink to secure FDA approval for human experimentation. Three people have had Musk’s device safely implanted (with some slight glitches). The first could play video games, browse the internet, post on social media, and move a cursor on his laptop using thought alone. The second patient graduated to creating 3-D images. Last month, Neurolink’s third patient entered its new CONVOY study, testing the feasibility of brain-controlled-assistive robotic devices to allow folks who are paralyzed to feed themselves and move personal objects.
Neuro-link’s Dilemma - An Apprentice Out of Control
The research sounds relatively benign; however, the technology moves in both directions – brain to computer and computer to brain, and therein lies potential ethical dilemmas. By
“eavesdropping on the activity of nearby brain cells and transmitting the information gathered to a computer, the brain chip can control a computerized robot or a voice synthesizer.”
That means that not only can the brain direct a computer-mediated response, but the computer can direct the brain – potentially mediating the human hosts’s thoughts and feelings, which may in turn “direct” a computer or robot – conceivably to perform unsavory feats.
Neuroscientist Rafael Yuste, Head of Neuroscience Center at Columbia University, suggests the technology can manipulate brain activity to make the mind believe it was seeing things it wasn’t (this used to be called psychosis), akin to implanting hallucinations directly into someone’s consciousness.
Faster Than the Eye Can See
“Imagine if you could think into the machine, like a high-speed connection directly between your mind and your machine.”
With a computer interface capacity of astoundingly high velocity and data-volume transfer, Musk claims “augmented intelligence” is in reach, along with the capacity for humans to control robots – or even other humans - with lightning speed. As Musk writes,
“[T] his means humans could interact with technology as fast as we think… far beyond the speed of typing or speaking. Neuroink users wouldn’t just control devices with their thoughts… with precision and speed, approaching natural brain function. …. It’s not just about restoring lost functions but creating a new kind of human-machine symbiosis…. where humans don’t just use devices but integrate with them. Where we directly control computers and collaborate with artificial intelligence using only thought. This is not just an evolution of technology, but a redefinition of human capability.”
Future Super-Shock
Musk is no longer concerned solely with people with disabilities; he has the human species in sight, boasting that his long-term goal is to achieve "symbiosis with artificial intelligence.” Within five years, he forecasts one million (healthy?) human users; within two decades, he foresees “hundreds of millions” of people with implanted Neurolink with “superhuman abilities.” Indeed, work has been done to stimulate cognition in Alzheimer’s patients, with cognitive enhancement of 30%.
Legalities and Ethics of the Augmented Human
The staggering ethical and legal implications are reminiscent of issues triggered by gene editing for cognitive “enhancement” to unleash human potential rather than therapeutic purposes. The problems are diverse. Here are some:
- Selective Availability: The technology will be pricy, affordable only by the wealthy, creating disproportionate “cognitive enhancement” by social and economic class.
- Algorithmic Bias: The training is based on a subset of society and designed by another (primarily young white men). It raises concerns that implantees may begin to “think” like their programmer or the underlying data model, implanting social biases directly into our minds. Perhaps the concern epitomizes the refrain: Garbage In-Garbage Out.
- Privacy: These concerns will exponentially explode as outsiders gain access to our neural data. Current commercialized technologies exploiting only our actions often contain- unread user agreements allowing the information to be sold to the highest bidder, “,…[like] an insurance company, or the North Korean Army.”
- An assault on someone’s psyche (a subset of bodily autonomy) would be considered an intentional tort, even a battery. Somehow, that concern isn’t even raised.
- There is concern about hacking by “dark forces.” Cyber-attacks on our health systems and medical devices, like fetal and baby monitors and even the ubiquitous Apple Watch, have already happened. [2] Sabotaging neural computer security is not a matter of if; it’s a when.
The dangers of enhanced memory transcend social justice concerns, demonstrating the siloed thinking of entrepreneurs not versed in neurobiology. The goal, as apparently envisioned by Musk, is total recall. This is neither good nor healthy.
“Active forgetting, along with attention, acquisition, and consolidation, is … part of the brain’s biological system for managing memories.”
The biological role of forgetting remains under scientific investigation. Recent sleep studies demonstrate the brain must purge unnecessary memories to keep from overloading, like a hard drive exceeding its memory capacity. Computerized memory enhancement does not discern which memories to keep and which to jettison, not only for optimal cognitive processing but for the sake of salvaging the psyche. Total recall would likely be a curse rather than a benefit Musk conjures.
We are entering the “Brave” unregulated new world of mind control without legal restraint or international limitations. Technologists argue that regulation will hamper innovation, but once created, technology is akin to Pandora’s box, a gift carrying the curse of curiosity, unwittingly unleashing unimaginable horrors.
The goal of human enhancement is riddled with noble aspirations and anticipated profits —along with an alarming lack of oversight. Will the same companies enlarging their coffers by tracking our every click, swipe, and purchase, control the technology that can rewrite memories, influence thoughts, and manipulate emotions?
In the rush to marry AI, we risk becoming something less human, not more. Perhaps more ominous is the accompanying hubris. In the future, techologically enhanced thinking will make it so. It seems we are about to one-up God. Even He had to use speech to will things into existence.
[1] In 2010, Harbison created The Cyborg Foundation to assist humans in becoming cyborgs, “promot[ing] the use of cybernetics as part of the human body and defend cyborg rights”
[2] Because of concerns over cyberattacks, Vice President Cheney’s “heart defibrillator had to be modified before being implanted to avoid the risk of it being hacked by terrorists who targeted his life.”
