Note & Op-ed | Ramola D | May 16, 2023
While many of us have been reporting the great harms to humanity and ourselves from so-called emerging or innovative technologies including neurotechnologies, nanotechnology, and directed energy technologies, as covered for instance at last October’s DEW/Neurotech conference posted here, conversations at EM Tech Digital 2023, a recent mainstream conference hosted by MIT Technology Review points to the continued upholding of Artificial Intelligence–a technological, machine-intelligence overlay apparently intending to override human agency and brains–as a supposed stable fixture in our future.
Clearly not enough thought, time, space, or public consideration has been given to the place of humanity in this vast and nebulous scenario where most people do not understand the basic subject matter here. Perhaps because the creation and development of AI and Machine Learning seems to be quite intricate, encompassing various fields such as cognitive neuroscience, computational linguistics, and software programming, behind which seem to lie more buried fields such as nanobioelectronics and optical imaging.
IBM’s program manager Eda Kavlakoglu has a blog post offering insights into some of these terms using a Russian nesting doll concept to explain the connections between them: Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Neural Networks, and Artificial Intelligence.
Some associated subjects have been covered in the journalism at this site, some profoundly human-rights-violative, especially in surveillance and mil/Intel coverage, COVID vaccine coverage, and nanotechnology posts.
Is it possible that Artificial Intelligence development and brain or natural language processing research could involve human rights violations?
Dr. David Salinas Flores, whose highlighting of the illegitimate use of nanotechnology in the exploitation of humans has been featured here before has drawn attention to such futuristic scenarios as brain internets, cerebral internets, brains on a chip and so on, subjects I too have raised in some interviews and panels, especially those with TradCatKnight Radio’s Eric Gajewski, posted at his site and my video platforms. Ethical problems in the study of human brains including IP theft are noted here–Dr. David Salinas Flores | The Fourth Industrial Revolution: The First Robotization of Africans–and here: Professor David Salinas Flores, MD |The Nanomafia: Nanotechnology’s Global Network of Organized Crime.
IP theft (Intellectual Property theft) in itself has long been discussed in the form of EEG heterodyning and EEG cloning by American scientist Dr. Robert Duncan in The Matrix Deciphered, numbers of Russian, European, Indian scientists and journalists, military and intelligence whistleblowers, and others in podcasts and articles here and at my video platforms (the ones left standing that is, past Youtube’s 2021 takedown of my Reports channel there.) This is, shockingly enough, brainwave harvesting, mixing, and/or replacing–forms of read-write remote access to the human brain achieved through a variety of intricate neurotechnology, nanotechnology, and computational means some of which neuroscientists in the military space have recently taken to disclosing publicly, as partially reported here:
Neuro ethics in itself is a contested space, and many know it. Neuro rights, first established at the government level in Chile, as well as AI via what has been termed non-invasive BCI (brain computer interfaces) at the nano and micro levels, were discussed by Dr. Rafael Yuste, Director of Neurotechnologies at Columbia University, head of the US Brain Initiative Project, on Report #197 at my channel Ramola D Reports in 2020. Neuroethics and neuro rights were also discussed in various other interviews, panels, articles, and podcasts here, some listed below.
Questions remain therefore at every level from the standpoint of human rights.
This virtual Em Tech Digital 2023 conversation with former Google computer scientist and cognitive psychologist, Geoffrey Hinton, titled The Future of Intelligence, while striving to address some of the problems associated with AI doesn’t quite address the invasive and human rights issues surrounding neuro privacy, neuro rights, and brain and body autonomy which must inevitably arise in any kind of Artificial Intelligence development seeking to replace or augment human cognitive or communication processes.
Part of what’s being hidden behind public surfacings of Artificial Intelligence powers therefore are the disclosures made by DEW/neurotech-assaulted or “targeted individual” whistleblowers, which include the psychological terror games played by Synthetic Telepathy operators, Neuro Linguistic Programming echo-stalkers, neural network mappers and others in eliciting people’s individual cognitive processes via decision-tree choices which make up our separate human brains and personalities.
These are large and very troubling subjects for ethicists, neuro ethicists, human rights advocates, animal rights advocates, psychologists, psychiatrists, and everyone else to discuss openly together, along with those reporting harm in non-consensual brain or AI research–the only way, as often discussed here, to transparency and human harmony going forward.