|
iPlant
|
Safety and ethics A number of theoretical, practical, ethical and societal concerns have been raised about the development of iPlants (see the graph to the right). Roughly, these concerns can be divided into three categories: Hacking (abuse by the user or by others). iPlants depend fundamentally on rewarding brain stimulation being delivered if and only if the user performs some pre-specified, beneficial behaviour or task. Concerns have been raised that users might find ways to circumvent such restrictions and self-stimulate unconditionally and endlessly. Similarly, concerns have been raised that malicious individuals would find ways to circumvent restrictions and take control over the behaviour of the iPlant user. Successful use of iPlants may therefore require that users have limited access to the settings of their implants; that such limitations are subject to sophisticated encryption and enforcement; and that an accountable implant manufacturer/hospital/doctor is able to maintain access control without abusing the trust of the user. Abuse by governments or cultures. iPlants could, if widely adopted, produce significant changes in society. Concerns have been raised that authorities might abuse iPlants by artificially motivating citizens to engage in demeaning or dangerous behaviour. Concerns have also been raised that cultures could abuse iPlants by pressuring individuals to conform, e.g. to unreasonable standards of productivity. These concerns indicate that the development of iPlants, if it is to take place, must occur in the context of transparency, public participation and debate, and under rigorous oversight by civil rights groups such as Amnesty, the CCLE, and the UNESCO bioethics council. Damage to natural self-discipline. Concerns that iPlants would have a negative impact on users have been expressed. Some report fear that users would become excessively dependent on their iPlant, possibly to the detriment of their own self-discipline. For instance, a person who exercised 1 hr per week before being fitted with an iPlant might able to exercise 1 hr per day with the aid of the implant, but would be tempted to always use the implant for motivation when exercising. Removal of that 1 hr per week of iPlant-free exercise might be psychologically damaging, since exertion of effort is necessary for the maintenance and growth of self-discipline. This indicates that iPlant-driven behaviour should only be engaged in when the user would normally be idle (or engaged in destructive behaviour). Again, the need for a manufacturer/hospital/doctor capable of enforcing proper use of the technology without abusing the trust of the user appears crucial. 
At the International Neuromodulation Conference in Seoul,
Does secularism
fuck you up? (pt.2, pt.3),
What we need to accelerate biomedical research and fight aging,
I can has freedom and dignity,
Wired-article-induced neuroscience rant, How compliant do we want our children to be?,
Aging, iPlant in embryo,
Existentialism on a Saturday morning
Relevant material published elsewhere Why we should develop electronic regulation of monoamines for human use (IEET) Deep brain stimulation and exercise (IEET) iPlant philosophy: a model of the singularity (FutureBlogger) Deep brain stimulation ethics in the litterature Synofzik & Schlaepfer (2008) Stimulating personality - Ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients for enhancement purposes Heller et al (2006) Surgery of the mind and mood: a mosaic of issues in time and evolution Fins (2004) Neuromodulation, free will and determinism - lessons from the psychosurgery debate Fins et al (2006) Psychosurgery - avoiding an ethical redux while advancing a therapeutic future Ford & Kubu (2006) Stimulating debate - ethics in a multidiciplinary functional neurosurgery committee Kringelbach & Aziz (2008) Deep brain stimulation - avoiding the errors of psychosurgery Hughes (2005) Group Pressures for Technological Mood Management |
|||
|
Connect Follow @iPlant on Twitter Subscribe to the iPlant channel on YouTube Join the iPlant group on FriendFeed Become a fan of the iPlant on Facebook 
|
|||
|
Content |
|||
|
Home About Fiction Monoamines and the reward system Rewarding brain stimulation Implant technology iPlant programming Safety and ethics Forum Store Video |
|||
|
Poll |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Google Friend Connect |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Realtime |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Blog |
|||
|
At the International Neuromodulation Conference in Seoul
(September 2009) Does secularism fuck you up? (pt.2, pt.3) (June 2009) What we need to accelerate biomedical research and fight aging (May 2009) I can has freedom and dignity? (April 2009) Using Medtronic's Reclaim implant to generate artificial motivation (March 2009) Wired-article-induced neuroscience rant (March 2009) Riding a bike (December 2008) How compliant do we want our children to be? (December 2008) Thoughts on forks (December 2008) Aging (November 2008) Brainbeat (October 2008) |
|||
|
What the blogs say |
|||
|
The iPlant: Making life easier for the lazy?
(June 2009)
Enogamez iPlant (June 2009) Something Awesome iPlant Brain Implant Advocated for Self-Improvement (June 2009) Technovelgy iPlant - the motivational implant (June 2009) Futurismic A prosthetic motivational system (April 2009) Emerging Ideas Self-determination for the 21st century (April 2009) psique The iPlant (May 2008) Brain Stimulant |
|||
|
Zazzle items |
|||
|
|