Why We Need A Right To Privacy For Brain Data

Umm, say what?!?!

Aside from commercial uses, Wolp and others are concerned that government agencies and law enforcement will attempt to make cases against people based on what their brainwaves reveal. Right now, fMRI lie detection is still in sketchy legal territory, but if the technology advances, there could be scenarios like the one described in the video, where a potential terrorist is "interrogated" by reading and analyzing their brain waves.

Click to expand...

The Founders never envisioned this, so obviously we have no rights so far as brain scans are concerned.

To be honest I'm not sure where I stand on this. On one hand, your "Forced" to tell the truth in a courtroom anyways, so this way it just proves your validity (or invalidity); on the other, I would say hooking up to a machine and knowing what goes through your brain, even just a little bit, is a severe invasion of privacy, which afaik is an American right.

Huh. It is an interesting thought.

PCunicorn said:

To be honest I'm not sure where I stand on this. On one hand, your "Forced" to tell the truth in a courtroom anyways, so this way it just proves your validity (or invalidity); on the other, I would say hooking up to a machine and knowing what goes through your brain, even just a little bit, is a severe invasion of privacy, which afaik is an American right.

Click to expand...

More importantly, IMHO, are the fifth amendment concerns in involuntary questioning scenarios.

The article makes an interesting point. Automatic responses to questions, answered or no, and the ability to notice and interpret them is what makes a great interrogator.

The solution is the constitutional right to wear tinfoil. The day the tin foil hat brigade was right, the day the foil mattered.

PCunicorn said:

To be honest I'm not sure where I stand on this. On one hand, your "Forced" to tell the truth in a courtroom anyways, so this way it just proves your validity (or invalidity); on the other, I would say hooking up to a machine and knowing what goes through your brain, even just a little bit, is a severe invasion of privacy, which afaik is an American right.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing this is going to be handled just as polygraphs are - it's a request, you can deny it. If it's done involuntarily, then it's not admissible because you can't be made to give evidence against yourself (5th amendment).

If it's proven accurate to a high-level, it might be admissible if it's done voluntarily. But who the hell would agree to that.

All the more reason to wear my tin foil hat.

'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.' -- The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution