Is it already too late to consider the ethics of mind control technology?

There seems to be a troubling uptick around “ethics” recently within scientific circles that are focusing on robotics, artificial intelligence, and brain research. I say troubling because embedded within the standard appeals for caution which should appear in science, there also seems to be a tacit admission that things might be quickly spiraling out of control, as we are told of meetings, conventions, and workshops that have the ring of emergency scrambles more than debating society confabs.

Yesterday, Activist Post republished commentary from Harvard which cited a 52-page Stanford study looking into what Artificial Intelligence might look like in the year 2030. That report admits that much of what the general public believes to be science fiction – like pre-crime, for example – is already being implemented or is well on the way to impacting people’s day-to-day lives. We have seen the same call for ethical standards and caution about “killer robots” when, in fact, robots are already killing and injuring humans. Really all that is left to be considered, presumably, is the degree to which these systems should be permitted to become fully autonomous.

The same dichotomy between properly addressing the role of future technology and “uh oh, I think the genie is out of the bottle” also appears in the following article from Arizona State University, which some readers might remember was the source of a whistleblower that came to Activist Post some years ago with extreme concern about a secret DARPA program being conducted at Arizona State that aimed to develop a form of remote mind control using the technology of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. One of the ways that this technology could become remote-controlled is via the use of “neural dust” or “smart dust” that literally would open a two-way connection between brain and computer. You will read more about where that technology stands today in the article below, as well as other forms of implants that are slated for development.

It used to be the case that I would highlight a select few words from university, military, and scientific press releases; this time, the entire article would have to be highlighted, as it runs the full gamut of open admission about what previously has been “conspiratorial” or “sci-fi” (there is even mention of geoengineering here).

Lastly, can we really entrust the exact same players who are developing these systems – many for profit and control – to be involved in the formulation of an ethical framework?

If you share a concern that the technology we have developed is beginning to take on a life of its own, please share this information as we try to keep pace and hopefully corral our own creations into the most positive functions possible.

Considering Ethics Now Before Radically New Brain Technologies Get Away From Us

By Andrew Maynard, Arizona State University

Imagine infusing thousands of wireless devices into your brain, and using them to both monitor its activity and directly influence its actions. It sounds like the stuff of science fiction, and for the moment it still is – but possibly not for long.

Brain research is on a roll at the moment. And as it converges with advances in science and technology more broadly, it’s transforming what we are likely to be able to achieve in the near future.

Spurring the field on is the promise of more effective treatments for debilitating neurological and psychological disorders such as epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease and depression. But new brain technologies will increasingly have the potential to alter how someone thinks, feels, behaves and even perceives themselves and others around them – and not necessarily in ways that are within their control or with their consent.

This is where things begin to get ethically uncomfortable.

Because of concerns like these, the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) are cohosting a meeting of experts this week on responsible innovation in brain science.

Berkeley’s ‘neural dust’ sensors are one of the latest neurotech advances.
Where are neurotechnologies now?

Brain research is intimately entwined with advances in the “neurotechnologies” that not only help us study the brain’s inner workings, but also transform the ways we can interact with and influence it.

For example, researchers at the University of California Berkeley recently published the first in-animal trials of what they called “neural dust” – implanted millimeter-sized sensors. They inserted the sensors in the nerves and muscles of rats, showing that these miniature wirelessly powered and connected sensors can monitor neural activity. The long-term aim, though, is to introduce thousands of neural dust particles into human brains.

The UC Berkeley sensors are still relatively large, on par with a coarse piece of sand, and just report on what’s happening around them. Yet advances in nanoscale fabrication are likely to enable their further miniaturization. (The researchers estimate they could be made thinner than a human hair.) And in the future, combining them with technologies like optogenetics – using light to stimulate genetically modified neurons – could enable wireless, localized brain interrogation and control.

Used in this way, future generations of neural dust could transform how chronic neurological disorders are managed. They could also enable hardwired brain-computer interfaces (the original motivation behind this research), or even be used to enhance cognitive ability and modify behavior.

The BRAIN Initiative is one of the Obama administration’s ‘Grand Challenges.’ Jason Reed/Reuters

In 2013, President Obama launched the multi-year, multi-million dollar U.S. BRAIN Initiative (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies). The same year, the European Commission launched the Human Brain Project, focusing on advancing brain research, cognitive neuroscience and brain-inspired computing. There are also active brain research initiatives in China, Japan, Korea, Latin America, Israel, Switzerland, Canada and even Cuba.

Together, these represent an emerging and globally coordinated effort to not only better understand how the brain works, but to find new ways of controlling and enhancing it (in particular in disease treatment and prevention); to interface with it; and to build computers and other artificial systems that are inspired by it.
Cutting-edge tech comes with ethical questions

This week’s NAS workshop – organized by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and supported by the National Science Foundation and my home institution of Arizona State University – isn’t the first gathering of experts to discuss the ethics of brain technologies. In fact there’s already an active international community of experts addressing “neuroethics.”

Many of these scientific initiatives do have a prominent ethics component. The U.S. BRAIN initiative for example includes a Neuroethics Workgroup, while the E.C. Human Brain Project is using an Ethics Map to guide research and development. These and others are grappling with the formidable challenges of developing future neurotechnologies responsibly.

It’s against this backdrop that the NAS workshop sets out to better understand the social and ethical opportunities and challenges emerging from global brain research and neurotechnologies. A goal is to identify ways of ensuring these technologies are developed in ways that are responsive to social needs, desires and concerns. And it comes at a time when brain research is beginning to open up radical new possibilities that were far beyond our grasp just a few years ago.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation uses a powerful and rapidly changing electrical current to excite neural processes in the brain, similar to direct stimulation with electrodes. Eric Wassermann, M.D., CC BY

In 2010, for instance, researchers at MIT demonstrated that Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, or TMS – a noninvasive neurotechnology – could temporarily alter someone’s moral judgment. Another noninvasive technique called transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) delivers low-level electrical currents to the brain via electrodes on the scalp; it’s being explored as a treatment for clinical conditions from depression to chronic pain – while already being used in consumer products and by do-it-yourselfers to allegedly self-induce changes in mental state and ability.

Crude as current capabilities using TMS and tDCS are, they are forcing people to think about the responsible development and use of technologies which have the ability to potentially change behavior, personality and thinking ability, at the flick of a switch. And the ethical questions they raise are far from straightforward.

For instance, should students be allowed to take exams while using tDCS? Should teachers be able to use tDCS in the classroom? Should TMS be used to prevent a soldier’s moral judgment from interfering with military operations?

These and similar questions grapple with what is already possible. Complex as they are, they pale against the challenges emerging neurotechnologies are likely to raise.
Preparing now for what’s to come

As research leads to an increasingly sophisticated and fine-grained understanding of how our brains function, related neurotechnologies are likely to become equally sophisticated. As they do, our abilities to precisely control function, thinking, behavior and personality, will extend far beyond what is currently possible.

To get a sense of the emerging ethical and social challenges such capabilities potentially raise, consider this speculative near-future scenario:

Imagine that in a few years’ time, the UC Berkeley neural dust has been successfully miniaturized and combined with optogenetics, allowing thousands of micrometer-sized devices to be seeded through someone’s brain that are capable of monitoring and influencing localized brain functions. Now imagine this network of neural transceivers is wirelessly connected to an external computer, and from there, to the internet.

Such a network – a crude foreshadowing of science fiction author Iain M. Banks’ “neural lace” (a concept that has already grabbed the attention of Elon Musk) – would revolutionize the detection and treatment of neurological conditions, potentially improving quality of life for millions of people. It would enable external devices to be controlled through thought, effectively integrating networked brains into the Internet of Things. It could help overcome restricted physical abilities for some people. And it would potentially provide unprecedented levels of cognitive enhancement, by allowing people to interface directly with cloud-based artificial intelligence and other online systems.

Think Apple’s Siri or Amazon’s Echo hardwired into your brain, and you begin to get the idea.

Yet this neurotech – which is almost within reach of current technological capabilities – would not be risk-free. These risks could be social – a growing socioeconomic divide perhaps between those who are neuro-enhanced and those who are not. Or they could be related to privacy and autonomy – maybe the ability of employers and law enforcement to monitor, and even alter, thoughts and feelings. The innovation might threaten personal well-being and societal cohesion through (hypothetical) cyber substance abuse, where direct-to-brain code replaces psychoactive substances. It could make users highly vulnerable to neurological cyberattacks.

Of course, predicting and responding to possible future risks is fraught with difficulties, and depends as much on who considers what a risk (and to whom) as it does the capabilities of emerging technologies to do harm. Yet it’s hard to avoid the likely disruptive potential of near-future neurotechnologies. Thus the urgent need to address – as a society – what we want the future of brain technologies to look like.

Moving forward, the ethical and responsible development of emerging brain technologies will require new thinking, along with considerable investment, in what might go wrong, and how to avoid it. Here, we can learn from thinking about responsible and ethical innovation that has come to light around recombinant DNA, nanotechnology, geoengineering and other cutting-edge areas of science and technology.

To develop future brain technologies both successfully and responsibly, we need to do so in ways that avoid potential pitfalls while not stifling innovation. We need approaches that ensure ordinary people can easily find out how these technologies might affect their lives – and they must have a say in how they’re used.

All this won’t necessarily be easy – responsible innovation rarely is. But through initiatives like this week’s NAS workshop and others, we have the opportunity to develop brain technologies that are profoundly beneficial, without getting caught up in an ethical minefield.

Andrew Maynard, Director, Risk Innovation Lab, Arizona State University
This article was originally published on The Conversation.

Via Activist Post

The post Is it already too late to consider the ethics of mind control technology? appeared first on Intellihub.

Article source link :



5G telecomm radiation the perfect tool to mass modify human brain waves

On 14 July 2016 the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA made space available in the radio spectrum for consumer devices to operate within the 25 GHz to 100 GHz of the electromagnetic spectrum.

It went on to say:

“The Commission has struck a balance between new wireless services, current and future fixed satellite service operations, and federal uses. The item adopts effective sharing schemes to ensure that diverse users – including federal and non-federal, satellite and terrestrial, and fixed and mobile – can co-exist and expand.”

Nowhere in its document is mention made of consumer safety or well-being. I guess that is fair of the FCC because historically, it is not interested in matters of microwave radiation and consequent thermal and non-thermal effects on the population. Let’s face it, and most people find this hard to believe, the FCC works purely on behalf of the telecoms industries in granting them access to the airwaves, no more and no less.

Industry was very happy to hear the FCC announcement on granting access of large portions of the radio spectrum for yet more of its toys and other consumer devices. Qualcomm for example talks much about ‘the massive internet of things’, yet nowhere on its 5G musings is mention made of consumer safety or well-being.

That ‘pink elephant’ in the living room regarding safety brings me to the point of this article. The FCC and the telecomms industry rub their hands with glee because lots of money is going to be made as 5G devices rollout yet no recent safety studies have been carried out on consumer safety. No doubt both the FCC and industry will point regulators to the old, out-dated and one-dimensional so-called ‘safety studies’ (thermal effects) produced by the ICNIRP. This private organisation is comprised of people and individuals who work in the telecommunications industries with no background in epidemiology, toxicology, radio frequency safety or medical practice.

The implications of 5G on consumer well-being and safety do not look good for one reason: devices that will operate within the 5G electromagnetic spectrum will use antennas that are physically small i.e. from a few millimetres to a centimetre in length. This means that industry will produce a variety of different antenna systems to do different things. The weird fact of operating within this very high frequency range is that signals are mostly line of sight or they are easily reflected, refracted or ‘lost’ within the differing build composition of urban environment structures. In other words, without careful antenna design and recognition of many of the pitfalls trying to propagate microwave signals within urban environments, the signal can be easily degraded or completely lost. In response to these challenges, the advantages in using very small physical size antennas in the millimetre wavelength is you can feed many antennas in various configuration arrays e.g. vertical or horizontal arays, waveguide, coned or highly directional beam type designs. These types of antenna designs focus most of the transmitted power into specified directions. This is bad news for consumers because these very small physical size antennas will pack a mighty punch to our biological systems if we step into them.

Getting back to consumer safety and well-being and all things microwave, it is clear that the latency period for adverse biological effects from devices using microwave frequencies from say 1 GHz to 5 Ghz is approximately 10 – 20 years. In 2016 there are now many thousands of peer-reviewed medical and epidemiological studies that show, illustrate or correlate, adverse biological effects with use of mobile phone technology or WIFI. Using frequencies even higher than 5 GHz (and up to 100 GHz) will compress the timeframe in which cancers and other biological effects show themselves within society. It is anyone’s guess on what might happen in terms of biological safety yet it is clear to see that the pulsed nature of these high frequency, high signal intensity signals do not harbour good news for humanity, particularly in relation to the functioning of our DNA.

Nowadays, exposure to microwave radiation or frequencies used by WIFI, mobile phones, smart phones, smart meters, WIFI-enabled audio devices, WIFI-enabled fridges, most baby monitors and a whole host of other ‘esoteric’ electrical devices were recently classed as Class 2B carcinogens. Point of sale literature excludes this fact on any advertising blurb and it is also fascinating that the small print embedded deep within mobile phone product literature say that you should not put these devices directly to your skin, body or face. If you do, you exceed the so-called ‘safe’ exposure thresholds put in place for these devices.

Getting back to the very small physical length of the antennas that will be used for 5G devices, it is very clear to surmise that if these devices talk to each other using highly efficient, directional antennas, the ERP (effective radiated power) will be huge. If you happen to walk into this intensely focused beam of microwave radiation, what will this level of signal intensity do to your biology? Yet again, time will tell unless we get our arses into gear and demand proper safety studies from industry and independent academia that focus on thermal and non-thermal effects on our biology.

Just like the advent of modern mobile phone technology, it is us, the consumers, who provide the guinea pig role in terms of safety. Sufferers of EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) will need to be aware of any 5G device simply because the electron volt assault on their compromised bodies will be easily and instantly felt. It is they who will suffer first and in time, everyone will be affected because one other fact the telecoms industries have not mentioned is that in order to develop an efficient network of signals within an urban environment, many thousands of new transmitter sites will need to be installed. The physical small size of these antennas means they can be covertly installed into all sorts of urban structures which suggest that for urban dwellers at least, there will be no escape from exposure to these highly damaging microwave frequencies. I also feel that when these antennas are in place, it will be relatively easy to alter and manipulate brain wave function of its users and others close by.

The amount of ancillary information that can be piped or attached to the main carrier frequency of such a telecommunications network system is potentially, huge. Police forces the world over use ‘Tetra’ as a systems of communication. This system also includes a sub-carrier frequency of about 16 Hz which is very close to our natural brainwave patterns. Could this 16 Hz ancillary pulsed ELF (extremely low-frequency) be responsible for instilling aggressive behaviors in our police force personnel? The ‘zombie apocalypse’ might just be around the corner unless of course, we refuse to comply. That is our choice.

Via Waking Times
Dr. Ellis Evans underwent a significant spiritual awakening in 2014 in which many things in his mind fell like pins. One of the fruits of his awakening was an increased sensitivity to microwave radiation which is real and can be felt adversely within various organs of the body. He has a website dealing with these issues:  He is also a spiritual counsellor for those undergoing deep spiritual awakening including spiritual emergency. His website can be found here:
This article (5G Telecomm Radiation the Perfect Tool to Mass Modify Human Brain Waves) is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

The post 5G telecomm radiation the perfect tool to mass modify human brain waves appeared first on Intellihub.

Article source link :



DARPA and the JASON scientists – The Pentagon’s maladaptive brain

An uncensored look into DARPA, the US government’s secretive agency, reveals exactly how the brain of the military industrial complex operates. Utilizing the super-scientific intellects of men, the agency may have stumbled upon the ultimate code to utterly control the human race, making all other DoD achievements pale in comparison.

DARPA’s arms reach far and wide – touching universities, small businesses, the public, of course, and also the established media. Despite its collaborative success, the brain running the show is acutely flawed, for its aim is not to protect and serve, but to control.

As George Orwell once pointed out, “All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.” It comes from the minds of men hell-bent on creating a controllable population through a New World Order.

DARPA has been credited with creating the internet, global positioning devices, and as investigative journalist Annie Jacobson describes it, “the future.” For anyone who has lurked on DARPA’s pages, they only hint at the sci-fi reality that the list of alphabet agencies it employs, create. Operation Paperclip and Area 51 are just the beginning of secrets that DARPA continues to smother while creating bullets that can change direction mid-flight, high-energy liquid-laser systems, robotic pack animals, flying trucks, and drones that can stay airborne for years — but even these do not reveal the true workings of the Pentagon’s dysfunctional aims, supported by the JASON scientists.

In an interview describing DARPA’s omniscient presence Jacobson says that,

“. . .those who follow conspiracy theorists probably know that the JASON scientists are considered to be right up there with the Illuminati, in terms of, you know people see them as these wizards behind the curtain doing all these bad things. . .”

A deeper investigation into the JASON Group reveals that they may be even more important than the Bilderberg group as far as controlling worldly chaos.

Jacobson goes on to say that she interviewed one of the co-founders of the JASON physicists, Martin Goldberger, who was an adviser to the Pentagon for decades. It is thought that he and other scientists discovered a secret code for the human brain. The implications of this discovery are enormous, considering that DARPA has inserted itself into nearly every aspect of our daily lives.

For a tease for how this kind of discovery could be used to control humanity, consider this headline, which doesn’t refer directly to humans, but to computers designed to behave like us:

Soon We Won’t Program Computers, We Will Train Them Like Dogs

Though there is little data to prove that these scientists indeed found a code which would control human thought, the JASON scientists have been linked to the creation of sinister secret government programs that further the aims of the Illuminati.

Among these men, there are CIA ties, links to private corporations paid trillions to create defense technologies, and…

“… stronger links to the defense industry than the roughly 1,600 Pilgrims Society members of which ISGP has put together biographies until this point. That says something. It says that unless something changed in the past 30 years (the last fullPilgrims Society list dates to 1980), high technology and the defense industry remain the domain of the CIA and the Pentagon – not of the liberal eastern establishment running the CFR, Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission.”

The JASON scientists are essentially considered the best and brightest, paid to conduct research on the cabal’s destructive aims. Among its members are:

Luis W. Alvarez – responsible for helping to create detonators for the ‘fat man’ during the Manhattan Project. He also x-rayed the Great Pyramid of Giza to try to find hidden chambers. He received a Nobel Prize and helped to publish a paper that theorized the dinosaurs were wiped out by an asteroid over 65 million years ago. He was well known early in his career for his work in optics and cosmic rays – some of the same areas of interest which caught inventor Nikola Tesla’s attention.

Lewis M Branscomb – This scientist received the Vannevar Bush Award of the National Science Board and the Rockefeller Public Service Award in 1957. The Rockefeller family is well known for its funding of think tanks, academia, government, and private business with the well-established goal of depopulating the planet. It is thought that this single foundation is greatly responsible for establishing the Trilateral Commission.

Sidney D. Drell – Known among government circles in his time for greatly influencing decisions made about the US’ nuclear weapons arsenal. He was a member of the National Security Council. He has also worked closely with Jacob Rothschild, and was a co-founder of the Jason Group.

Murray Gell-Mann – A member of the CFR and the Masonic-based Royal Society of London. This is a center of the international banking cabal. Gell-Mann often advised the US government on population growth. Dr. Gell-Mann was listed on the United Nations Environmental Program Roll of Honor for Environmental Achievement, the very same international agency known for promoting the elimination of us ‘useless eaters.’

These are but a handful of the ‘brilliant’ minds which have led our world toward imminent doom, operating as the dysfunctional brain of DARPA, the Pentagon’s deluded consciousness.

Others have helped to create worldwide spying devices, deconstructed UFOs, and kept the true aims of our government’s black-budget projects just out of our understanding. The world-wide spying machine may not yet have unearthed a way to control our every thought, but there is speculation that even this technology has already been discovered. These men of the JASON Group are likely nothing more than war criminals, but their brains are running the show.

Via Waking Times

Nathaniel Mauka is a researcher of the dark side of government and exopolitics, and a staff writer for Waking Times.

The post DARPA and the JASON scientists – The Pentagon’s maladaptive brain appeared first on Intellihub.

This article first was seen on :