Instant Genius - The fight to keep our brains private, with Nita Farahany

Episode Date: April 20, 2023

In the not too distant future, we could all be wearing wearables that scan our brain waves, understanding how we feel, think and act. Before then, author Nita Farahany argues that we need to rethink our rules to privacy to include our brains. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Just two wheels, two pedals, and you. At Bikes Online, we share your passion for everything cycling. Whatever bike you're looking for, from mountain to road, either pedal powered or electric, we've got what you want ready for super fast delivery. Quality gear at prices you won't find in your average bike shop. All bikes are pro-built and tuned before shipping to get you riding quickly. If you find a better deal, we'll beat it by 5%. Shop now at Bikesonline.com and ride more for less.

You're great at protecting your data, But lots of places could still expose you to identity theft. I thought it was safe. If that happens, LifeLock gives you a U.S.-based restoration agent who will stick by your side from start to finish. Phone calls, filing documentation, preparing insurance claims. Your agent handles it all. In fact, we're so confident restoration is guaranteed.

Pour your money back. Isn't it nice to have someone like that on your side? Save up to 40% your first year at LifeLock.com slash Spotify. Terms apply. I wrote a little song to remind you. choice hotels get you more of the experiences you value. The Canberia hotels got it all. A rooftop ball.

Have a ball. Bring a date, your squad or even your mom. Book direct at choiceotails.com. This podcast is sponsored by name, audio, and focal. Streaming has made music more accessible than ever, but true listening is about more than ease. It's about quality. British audio experts name audio,

alongside French acoustic specialist focal, Combine handcrafted tradition with cutting-edge innovation and high-end materials, delivering digital precision with analogue warmth. So you can experience exceptional sound at home. Music just as the artist intended. Visit name audio.com to learn more. From BBC Science Focus magazine, this is Instant Genius, a bite-sized masterclass in podcast form.

I'm Alex Hughes, staff writer at BBC Science Focus magazine. This week, we're talking about the right to the privacy of our brains. As the technology to scan our brains becomes more advanced and companies move to create wearables to access this data, should we be rethinking our right to privacy to include our brains? I'm joined by Anita Farahani to discuss this topic. She's the author of the new book, The Battle for Your Brain. She argues that laws and guidelines need to be reconsidered

to keep up with the modern era as our thoughts, feelings, and brain activity become accessible to companies, employers and health professionals. In your work, you use the term cognitive liberty, explaining how it's something that we should be looking to protect. Could you explain this a little bit further? In the digital age, I think one of the areas that is most at risk, one of the things that people have a lot of anxieties about whether that's what generative AI or social media platforms or neurotechnology is the risk to our brains and mental experiences. And what I mean by that is the sense in which our brains are being accessed, tracked and hacked by technologies in ways that

really are contrary to human flourishing and contrary to what it means to be free. And so cognitive of liberty is the idea of a right to self-determination over our brains and mental experiences, is an update to the concept of liberty but for the digital age. And it includes within it a kind of direction to update three existing international human rights, which is the right to privacy, to explicitly include the right to mental privacy, the right to freedom of thought, to be updated, to be interpreted beyond questions of religion and belief, but to protect our robust thoughts and images in our mind from being punished and accessed and manipulated, and the right to self-determination as a right to access and to change our brains if we should

choose to do so. And it's something that I guess we've been seeing in science fiction for years now, but there is actually a movement where we are getting nearer to this idea of being able to read brain signals and use these brain machine interfaces. All of these things are becoming more prevalent with certain companies pushing for it. How likely is it that we're soon going to see technology that can actually interpret our brainwaves and take information from that?

I think it's already here. It's just a question of both scale and precision. There are already millions of consumer brain wearable devices that have been sold worldwide, and these are in the form of headbands or sensors that can be embedded into a hard hat or a baseball cap that allow people to track their own. brain activity and the algorithms interpreting that activity right now are somewhat limited in what

they can actually decode so they can decode things like if a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering, boredom, engagement, if they're meditating or if they're not in a meditative state, stress, things like this, happy, sad, basic emotions. And a lot of major tech companies are investing in integrating brain sensors, much like heart rate sensors or temperature sensors that are already in watches and rings to integrate brain sensors into everyday devices like earbuds and headphones or watches or even wearable tattoos. And those are devices that are already launching this spring. Some of the bigger tech companies like META announced that they plan to launch their neural interface as a way that we interact with the rest of our

technology and augmented reality and virtual reality in early 2025. And so the technology is already here. I think it's just a question of scale. And over time, as the machine learning algorithms become more and more powerful, as the sensors and devices and the kind of form factor of being able to integrate them into everyday devices becomes more mainstream, I think it's something that is a future that will be quickly upon us. And when we're talking about these scans of brains through wearables or different devices,

what is it that we're actually, what is the data that it is producing? Is it, as you say, more an idea of this person's current mood or is it that we can actually determine, I don't know, someone's beliefs, contentions, get a deep look at their mind? So it really depends on how the devices are used. So if, you know, I think it's better to think of these not as mind-reading devices because they can't literally just by picking up brainwave activity. And brainwave activity we're talking about here refers to one particular kind of the technology, which is electroencephalography or EEG. And what that picks up is electrical activity in your brain as you are thinking or, you know, experiencing anything. Neurons are firing in your brain. And hundreds and thousands of them are firing in character. characteristics patterns that give off tiny electrical discharges that can be picked up by these sensors, these EEG sensors, and then powerful algorithms are used to decode what those patterns mean. Today, what the literally the raw brainwave data, that's the electrical activity that's collected by the sensors, what can be analyzed using AI from those patterns, is limited to broader brain states like attention and mind wandering and feeling. and emotions that a person has. But when you start to pair that with something like a computer

screen that a person is looking at, it's also brainwave data can be collected that is responsive to that environment. So, for example, if you were to flash up a series of images of different political candidates from different parties on my computer screen and I had a brainwave or brain sensors on that were picking up my brainwave data, you could then class my response to those to say positive associations with all of a particular party, negative associations with the other party. Likewise, if you had messaging that you were flashing in front of me and you wanted to see my reaction to that messaging or as some researchers have done if you want to try to identify recognition of particular things. So researchers have done things like subliminally embedded in a gaming environment, a neurogaming environment, pin or addresses to see if recognition of that information could also be reliably detected from brainwave data. So there you start to be able to through a different way, through stimulus that's presented to a person, be able to probe the brain for far more what feels like thought or content or information in the brain.

I'm intrigued what you think about how this interacts with the growing conversations that society seems to be having around mental health in the sense that a lot of times these companies will look for something that can be monetized through this and the digital therapy and mental health is a big new avenue for a lot of them. Do you think this is something that would end up as it becomes more common seeping into things like therapy and relationships, almost like a, I don't know, a crack your brain open and see what's inside kind of thing? I think so. I mean, I think it's already going in that direction. There are already devices that have been approved for the treatment of depression, both through neurofeedback, but also through direct electrical stimulation of the brain. There are, I think, the possibilities

that people will use the data to detect earlier stages of mental health disorders or earlier stages of neurological disorders in much the same way that people track their heart rate and track their breaths and their body temperature and the number of steps they've taken. I think they're probably will become an increased normalization to having objective data from the brain that people use to inform themselves of everything. Where do they work best at home or at work based on their focus levels and attention levels to how well did they sleep to how did that glass of wine the night before affect both their sleep and their ability to focus the next day to their stress levels and addressing their stress levels and addressing depression and other mental health

disorder. So I think it will become both a product that a lot of companies are investing in as a way to crack open the brain, as you say, to have it be part of those. And I think, you know, if quantification of other parts of the body are any indication, I think consumers will likely go into that world buying a lot of these devices, even just for the novelty of having access to their own brain data. This podcast is sponsored by name, audio, and trocal. With over 100 years of combined expertise, name and focal have been bringing music to listeners just as the artist intended. Since day one, this mantra has shaped every innovation in high-fi design, technology and acoustic engineering, balancing craftsmanship and tradition with pioneering thinking.

Name audio pushes cutting-edge technology to ensure digital precision whilst sustaining Pratt, pace, rhythm and timing. the elusive quality that makes music feel alive and gives it emotional texture. Today, in partnership with French acoustic specialist focal, name audio creates systems that deliver exceptional sound and unforgettable listening experiences at home. Try it for yourself at a focal powered by name boutique. Visit focal powered by name.com for more information. I guess in a similar vein, does that raise the risk of what I think doctors

and medical professionals have seen with other wearables of, I guess, brain hypochondriacs that, you know, once you open up all this new data that hasn't existed before, there's suddenly a conversation of, well, this certain statistic of my brain has spiked, is that's thing I should be worried about. And then people starting to be concerned about that as another thing in their life. I think that's definitely a possibility. You know, there's very little we know about brains and what we do know is that there is diversity between brain and brain activity between, you know, different people. And so especially, I think, in the early days of this, to the extent that the algorithms misidentify people as having something neuro atypical happening

in their brains to even people just studying it and saying like, okay, well, what's happening there in my brain? And is that something I should worry about? I think there's certainly a possibility that people, as they start to, you know, I guess the phrase is like navel gazing, but this will be brain gazing as they engage in greater brain gazing, that they may start to become worried about what they see there and potentially needlessly worried in ways that could be problematic. So is this the whole ability to scatter brain and better understand our brains? Is it a good thing or is it something we should be worried about or is it a bit of both like most big things in tech. So, I mean, I think that this could be revolutionary and it could be terrifying for humanity.

That's true of most things. I think it's particularly true in a context like this. And I say that because our brain activity data reflects our preferences, our beliefs, our memories, our intentions, even our very thoughts. And that inner space for mental reprieve isn't something that anyone else has had access to until now. And while the possibilities are exciting, if we have access to our own brain data and what we can do with it ourselves, I think the possibilities become quite terrifying when you start to think about other people having access to that same information, the chilling of freedom of thought, the misuse by authoritarian governments for everything from interrogating criminal suspects brains to looking for, you know, kind of oaths of loyalty in the brain to, you know,

just the fact that already in employment settings, you know, some employers are requiring employees to have their brain activity monitored in the workplace, creating really a very Orwellian kind of panopticon. I think a world in which we misuse this data could truly profoundly impact humanity in unprecedented ways, but also treating our brain health and wellness as seriously as we treat the rest of our physical wellbeing could have profound implications for human flourishing in very good ways. So it's really about how do we realize that future, that hopeful future, without also unleashing that very dystopian future. It's interesting you say that because I think often when these kind of technologies come around, the first conversation is about how it will

affect your personal life, whether it's, I don't know, the metaverse or the internet or any of these kind of things, it's about the personal issues first. But this feels like something that would end up in the workplace, you know, with the ability to monitor your attention span and how much work you're doing when your time period where you're working the least. Is it information that should, the company should be given or is that maybe pushing it too far? No, I worry, I worry very deeply about companies having access to the data. Unlike other brain data of the past, which has been collected in clinical settings or in traditional research environments by scientists and by physicians, the data that will be collected by these devices are being collected by the very same companies

who've been commodifying personal data from individuals for years. And their interests are not necessarily aligns with overall interest in human flourishing and improving and securing to us our own brains, you know, trying to keep people, for example, on device or on platforms to occupy their attention to keep them from being able to focus on other things that may serve the bottom line of a company well, but it definitely doesn't serve the individual well over the long run. And so recognizing that brain data, if collected in that environment, could be used for micro-targeting of advertisements or worse, rather than treating dementia or mental health disorders, I think we need to be quite concerned about allowing personal brain data to be commodified in the same way that so much of the rest of our personal information has been. I think this is something that I imagine you are very familiar with in your work. but you find that often the race is to first develop a technology,

and then once it's up and running and all of the issues pour in, then you deal with the ethical concerns in the aftermath. How is it that we should be preparing for all of us before it starts and before it gets big? Well, I think that the pathway forward that I advocate for is recognizing a right to cognitive liberty now as an international human right that requires that we update our existing human,

rights and our interpretations of them. And I think that's a good first step because it sets both a global legal framework, but also a norm worldwide that recognizes that self-determination over our brains and mental experiences is fundamental to liberty in the modern era. It also then directs a flipping of the current approach to personal data in that it would give consumers the right to their data and the right to control their personal information by saying that the terms of service puts that data in the hands of individuals and in favor of individual rights, not a default rule where corporations can collect and commodify and mine and analyze that data for any purpose that they wish. And then if consumers want to share that

data with researchers or scientists for purposes that are, you know, toward the common good, that's something that people could choose to do. So I think the starting place really is to flip what has been a system that really favors corporations over individuals to favor individual rights over our own brain data. So in a similar way to what exists with digital data now, that it's, I guess, more of an opt-in situation. Do you see it being that conversation? I don't even think it would be opt-in with the companies, right? It would be opt-in to sharing with some third-party. But instead of kind of the monopolization of siloing of data within corporations who use it for purposes of, you know, advertisement and targeting or improving their own products to be able to bring people back to their

platforms over and again in habitual ways, it would be a question of how do consumers opt in to sharing that data with the parties that they want to share the data with if they do it all, right? And that would be, I guess they could choose to share it with companies under certain circumstances, but rather than an opt-in, which is part of the terms of service, right, you're opting in simply by using their service, we have to separate that and say you can't make contingent the use of the service based on sharing and collection of the data itself. Once that first stage of, I guess, changing how we see it

and changing the legality of it or just the general ruling of it, do you think that's something that then going forward that we, once these become, I guess, wearables and they become part of our everyday life would leave us in a situation where they could be more ethically used by consumers. I hope so, right? I mean, I hope if consumers have control over the data that's being collected and the purposes for which they share, if at all, that data, or if they have the choice to opt out of their data being collected,

if it was simply being overwritten on device or, you know, kind of just the interpretation of it stored on their own personal devices and not on cloud servers that are accessed and used by others, I think it could usher in a new era of brain health and wellness. It could be the kind of golden era for the brain, but there, again, are these profound risks that unless we get out ahead of, it's hard to imagine that more utopian version of the direction and development of the technology. I'm touched on it a little bit there, actually.

I'm intrigued what you think. Obviously, we've spoken a lot about the negative quotations here. But what is it the you see, I guess, as the perfect version of a future of neuro technology? How is it that the technology could be used in its best format going forward? Well, so for example, people have virtually no access to their own brains, other than through self-reflection, which is often inaccurate. So everything from how well do I think I slept last night to, you know, where do I focus the best or what time of day do I focus the best,

to what practices help me focus better, to what treatments seem to work best to control my migraines and to do so most quickly. All of that, we only have a way to subjectively access through our kind of internal software, but we don't have a way of objectively seeing any of that. Or, you know, I'm feeling quite stressed. How does it compare to when my last paper was due? And what's my relative stress level and how do I better bring it under control? or if I suffer from epilepsy, can I get an alert minutes to an hour before suffering from an epileptic seizure, which could be a life-saving alert, since my mobile device based on brain sensors? Or is it possible that the earliest stages of what is now the deadliest brain tumor, which is glioblastoma, can that be picked up by continuous and longitudinal monitoring of the human brain so that we could? have earlier interventions and can we can figure out what the earliest electrical changes are that

occur with Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease and PTSD and ADHD and ADHD and traumatic brain injury and develop more effective treatments on it based on the larger data sets that we're able to develop and use for purposes of trying to address brain health and wellness. So I see a future in which we could really, you know, unlock our own potential with respect to our brains learn a lot more about ourselves, everything from our biases and preferences and desires to brain health, and be able to intervene and use that for ways that could really improve human flourishing. I might be alone in this, but I think I often, when I hear about this kind of technology, have the image in my head of, I guess, old school science fiction where I'll, you know,

be blinking my eyes and there'll be a screen inside my head somehow and I'm controlling a computer or I'm able to process all these different thoughts at rapid speeds. But I think it is very interesting to just think of it as an extension of a wearable where you can track a part of you that you've never really been able to understand before and something that's so complicated in itself and affects how many parts of your day. I think so, right? I mean, I think it normalizes it treating brain health as seriously as we treat all of the other things we track about ourselves, even though for most people, it's probably more fundamental, more important to them. And so I am not somebody who is a ludite about the tech, right? I believe that it actually has

extraordinary potential and that it's extraordinary potential that we have to try to harness and realize in ways that really limit the downside risk, because the downside risks are also tremendous. I mean, Tud, what you think, looking at this technology as wearable in this sense, whether or not you think it will take off or whether or not there's a chance that it will become the next, I don't know, the next Google Glass or, dare I say it, the next Metaverse or one of these kind of things that there's a lot of talk around it and then it sort of slightly disappears down the side. I'd be very surprised if it does and I say that because it doesn't make sense for us to know so little about our own brains. It's just like it's

neurological disease and suffering continue to rise. The toll on individuals and on humanity is really extraordinary. Our physical health and longevity are improving, but our mental health and wellness are not. And that can't persist. We can't keep going in that direction. We have to do something to address the increasing cost of neurological disease and disorder and suffering for humanity. And if this gives us the tools, if it puts it in the hands of individuals to be able to be empowered, to take charge of their own brain health, it's just not one of those things that are a gimmick or a creepy thing of going into a bar with glasses that are recording everybody, right? So I just think it's different and kind. It's not, it's not like a novelty we just may not need.

It addresses something fundamental that we do. Thank you for listening to this episode of Instant Genius. That was Nita Farahani, talking about the right to think freely in the age of neurotechnology. The Instant Genius podcast is brought to you by the team behind BBC Science Focus magazine, which you can find on sale now in supermarkets and newsagents, as well as on your preferred app store. Alternatively, you can come find us online at sciencefocus.com. is sponsored by Name, Audio and Focal. The texture and emotional depth of music

can be lost through digital sources or poor signal. Name Audio believes you can have digital precision with analog warmth. Alongside French acoustic specialist focal, Name creates high-end audio systems combining innovation with craftsmanship so you can listen to music, just as the artist intended.

Discover more at nameadio.com. In a place like Los Angeles, people don't stop being who they are. Writers, thinkers, creators, people with stories still unfolding. That spirit lives on at Kingsley Manor, a community shaped by individuality, creativity, and lives well-lived. So when the conversation turns to what's next, it isn't about stepping away. It's about continuing the story. Explore your options at kingsley Manor.org, a nonprofit month-to-month senior community. within the Front Forch family.