Slashdot Log In
Brain Scanning May Be Used In EU Security Checks
Posted by
timothy
on Tue May 12, 2009 07:59 AM
from the who-do-you-think-you-are? dept.
from the who-do-you-think-you-are? dept.
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from the Guardian: "Distinctive brain patterns could become the latest subject of biometric scanning after EU researchers successfully tested technology to verify identities for security checks. The experiments, which also examined the potential of heart rhythms to authenticate individuals, were conducted under an EU-funded inquiry into biometric systems that could be deployed at airports, borders and in sensitive locations to screen out terrorist suspects."
The same article says that "The Home Office, meanwhile, has confirmed rapid expansion plans of automated facial recognition gates: 10 will be operating at major UK airports by August."
I wonder what Bruce Schneier would have to say about such elaborate measures.
Related Stories
Submission: Brain scanning may be used in security checks by Anonymous Coward
[+]
Science: Device Reads Messages From Surface of the Brain 156 comments
Al writes "Technology Review has a story about a start-up company that has developed a more-accurate and less-invasive way to read a patient's thoughts. Neurolutions, based in St Louis, has developed a small implanted device that translates signals recorded from the surface of the brain into computer commands. The device, which is less invasive than implants and more accurate than scalp electrodes, uses a grid of electrodes placed directly on the surface of the brain to monitor electrical activity. This technology is currently used to find the origin of seizures in patients with uncontrolled epilepsy before surgery. But the company says it could also help paralyzed patients control a computer and perhaps prosthetic limbs using their thoughts. Tests involving more than 20 patients have shown that people can quickly learn to move a cursor on a computer screen using their brain activity."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Next up: thought crime (Score:5, Insightful)
Because we can (ab)use this technology to identify brain patterns of illegal behavior.
The identification would be fool proof, but who cares when you can catch terrorists and pedophiles.
Re:Next up: thought crime (Score:5, Insightful)
They seem determined to abuse technology as far as it can go. They need to learn that just because we now have ever more technology to abuse peoples privacy, that doesn't mean that's the right thing to keep on doing ever more. For example, just because we have the technology to knock down everyone's door, drag the people out of the house and strip search them in the road, that doesn't mean that's what everyone wants them to do. If they are just allowed to keep abusing technology as far as it can go, then we are walking into a horrific world. This abuse has to stop.
Parent
Re:In Soviet America (Score:4, Interesting)
They seem determined to abuse technology as far as *the abuse* can go.
Phrase: "Quantum of Terror"
"Hmm. Our ID test runs on heartbeats, measured in a comfy lab with plush seats and chocolate mints. But we Don't Like This Guy.
" 'Hey, you're a terrorist!!' "
(Subject's heart races)
"Oh look, he fails. He MUST be a terrorist! Wheee!"
It's Schrodinger's Nightmare.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we should revert back the the old ways of throwing suspects in the water with a stone tied around their neck. If they float, they're guilty and will be burned, and if they sink.. well at least they are innocent right?
Sure would cut down on the polluting business of air travel wouldn't it? :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
thank you. (Score:2)
I only looked at the comments here for this. I likes a good tinfoil hat!
while it's a bit screwy using brain scans, if they can eliminate false positives, it ain't so bad. We just need to make sure enough "good people" are descion makers in the new paradigm. We are all human.
without wanting to sound like a bad 80s rapper or 60s tripper... peace.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>it ain't so bad.
"The right of the People to be secure in their persons...... unless a warrant has been issued by oath....." The government is violating your body by making intimate scans of your internal organs. You might as well tattoo numbers on your skin, because the offense against your property (your body) is as severe.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First, we have not even been able to eliminate the false positives from facial recognition ! How in the world do you propose to eliminate false positives from a pattern set that is orders of magnitude less understood than optics? I mean really, patterns of consciousness vs. patterns of light reflection seems like quite a jump.
Second:
We just need to make sure enough "good people" are descion makers in the new paradigm.
The fact that you think this way scares me. Just re-read your own sentence a few times. Start thinking about Power and what types of people gravitate to power. Re-read your
Re:Next up: thought crime (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly.
All these attempts at automated biometric identification just need to stop, now. None of it works. Facial / Iris recognition is far too unreliable to be used in any sort of serious context. Not even fingerprint recognition works reliably (or we'd all be bloody using it).
They need to stop pouring money down this black hole right now.
Parent
Re:Next up: thought crime (Score:5, Insightful)
They need to stop now not because it doesn't work, but because eventually it will get to the point where it does work.
Parent
Re:Next up: thought crime (Score:5, Funny)
Since September 12, 2001, exactly zero passenger aircraft have flown into the World Trade Centre! That has to show that the system works!
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
That way they can stop wasting money on phrenology and similar pursuits, and start to really Catch Some Bad Guys.
Orrrr... the people who live there can stand up and say that enough is enough. Personally I'd suggest the latter, but h
Reality called (Score:3, Informative)
We can't read thoughts. Our current equipment is far too crude to even identify specific neural pathways. All we can do is detect electrical activity or oxygen use in *regions* of the brain. At best they might be able to determine you are (possibly) anxious or fearful. So about as useful for reading thoughts as a polygraph (aka not useful at all).
I doubt we will ever be able to read thoughts because of the difficult of isolating neural pathways, and the fact that thoughts aren't encoded in a way we even und
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Please, think of Natalie Portman.
Terrorist Brain Patterns (Score:5, Insightful)
Do terrorists have distinctive brain patterns that would cause an alarm to go off?
All this does is help to confirm that the passport holder is the person to whom the passport was issued. The 9/11 bombers would all have passed this test, as they were travelling on their own passports.
Re:Terrorist Brain Patterns (Score:5, Insightful)
And even if they hadn't, passports are hackable anyhow. They can change all that information on both the paper and the chip.
Also, how much work is it to keep thousands of brain scanners all calibrated the same?
And finally, what about false positives/negatives? Sure, fingerprints are 'unique', but we only sample a few points... It's actually possible to be wrong. Same with DNA, etc etc. Why is this any different? In fact, it's worse... Brains CHANGE over time.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Fingerprints can be wrong, but it's unusual. Unfortunately, you don't really know just how unlikely it is. A decent DNA test today uses so many points of comparison that the error rate is tiny, and, perhaps more importantly, can be precisely quantified.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, how much work is it to keep thousands of brain scanners all calibrated the same?
And how much does it cost? Over here (some country in the EU), running some old brain scanner in the hospital costs just over $300/scan.
Re:Terrorist Brain Patterns (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't even think this is an invasion of my privacy. I do, however, realise that it's a money soak, a sham, another prop in the security theatre.
Sometimes I wish I didn't realise it. Then I wouldn't feel so ashamed to be part of this nation.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
"...but keep your finger out of my ass and your scanner away from my brain."
That first one has already been and gone. You could be hiding pirated films up there!
The Hole [imdb.com] indeed.
Yes! Psi cops! (Score:5, Funny)
No fly list (Score:4, Funny)
This passenger has the sloping brow and cranial bumpage of a plane-jacking terrorist.
Video Games FTW! (Score:3, Insightful)
Distinctive brain patterns could become the latest subject of biometric scanning
Time to start journeying to Wild Divine [wikipedia.org]. Learn to change your mental state for fun and profit.
Enough is enough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Enough security at airports, we get it, they're "safe." The real security threats are against soft targets with no protection at all. Any location with a large crowd is a target and they're also impossible to defend.
I can see why you want fingerprints on passports, but all the insane stuff since then (e.g. "makes you naked" (Backscatter) child porno vision) is just over the top and adds an insanely small amount of additional protection.
Let's remember:
- All 9/11 passengers used valid ID
- All recent terrorists have also used valid ID
Re:Enough is enough... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Enough is enough... (Score:4, Insightful)
Any location with a large crowd is a target
Indeed - such as the queue of people waiting to be fingerprinted and brain-scanned...
Parent
Yet they won't even take simple measures (Score:2, Insightful)
A former coworker who is a Syrian expatriate and I were talking about Islamic terrorism, and the conversation turned to Saudi Arabia. If you look at the profile of international Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia is disproportionately represented in terrorist groups around the world. I don't know if it's still true, but at its peak, half of the insurgents we killed in Iraq on any given day were Saudis.
If Western countries simply prohibited Saudi nationals from staying for any length longer than a vacation or b
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That won't change the fact that their most fertile recruiting grounds are in Saudi Arabia. In addition, forged identities have always been a problem. There isn't much that we could do now if Saudi terrorists went to Jordan and paid off a government
Re: (Score:2)
Would create a serious barrier for all but the most connected terrorist groups.
The problem is that these are the ones that we have to defend ourselves against, the ones that fly planes into buildings. Racial profiling provides a very false sense of security as it only stops the small time and amateur people. Further more, the mere act of treating a group of people in that way can push them towards the well connected recruiters. To quote Benjamin Franklin
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
If we become the persecutors here, all we're doing i
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yet they won't even take simple measures (Score:5, Informative)
Hardly. If he called for the total, world encompassing genocide of all Muslims, he could in theory get 14 years maximum. In theory. As it stands, he was not calling for genocide, of Muslims, or even the deportation of Muslims, simply limiting the time they can stay in the country legally. So, baring calling for genocide, you'll have to settle on the lesser charge of inciting hatred. Since in Canada, truth is a defense, you cannot complain about his statement about the proportionality of Saudis involved in terror attacks, unless of course he's lying. Further, discussions about public policy or religious doctrine are also exempt. Since he's calling for a discussion on how to deal with the issue, he'd be immune even if he were more hard line.
I'll summarize for you. In Canada, you cannot make speech that is "incites hatred". What does that mean? It's up to the courts to decide what inciting hatred means exactly. The courts have held that saying "The jews are a disease and Hitler was just trying to clean up the world" is "revolting, disgusting, and untrue" but not inciting hatred, and therefore overturned the $1000 fine against the journalist who wrote that.
People love to rail against the hate crimes laws in Canada. The worst are the provincial ones. Saskatchewan's law is notoriously encompassing, and basically says you can't even say something that makes another group "uncomfortable" or feel "undignified". Fortunately, their provincial courts don't care about that bit, and tend to overturn anything that makes it to their desks. The only real issue is that you're not entitled to council during the tribunal, though of course you are if you want to appeal it to the courts, which is highly recommended.
Never the less, in 32 years of Human Rights tribunals, there are perhaps a handful cases of them making a ruling against somebody for hate speech, and only 1 has held on appeal to the courts. People make a big hubbub about various Muslim groups filing complaints. Yes, the filed the complaints. Yes, the Human Rights Commission looked at the complaints. But they always dismiss it. Always! Besides that one neo-nazi who didn't even have to pay his fine, a few religious groups have been fined and had their fines overturned as well, all also in Sask. And the only hate speech conviction to ever be upheld, also in Sask, for distributing fliers showing various gruesome diseases saying they were God's punishment for homosexuality, and calling for the deaths or imprisonment of all gays. He also had fliers showing decapitated corpses saying "Islam is a religion of murder and Muhammad was a man of violence" and calling for preemptive violence against them, as well. I think he made it on the Daily Show after he finished 4th of 8 in a run for Mayor of Regina? Whenever people file complaints about magazine articles etc, the magazine doesn't care, the author doesn't care, and the Commission throws it out before it reaches the Tribunal. Despite the obnoxiously broad wording, the courts have always held the law to a much more reasonable standard of hatred. You'd be hard pressed to get in trouble over less than calling for actual violence and murder. Yes, if the OP had put his post in a magazine, then maybe the Muslim Council would file a complaint, just like if he said we should kick all the Jews out the ADL would file a complaint. But if history is any indication, the Human Rights Commission would dismiss the complaint before it ever got to the point where the magazine or author had to show up anywhere. And if for some reason they thought his post was MORE hateful than "Hitler was a hero and a saint!" the courts would certainly toss out the ensuing fine.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We think we're taking the moral high ground when all we're doing is importing people who want to tear down our societies
The point of a cultural melting pot is to take those people in and make them a part of the society, changing it and making it more worldly in the process. Unfortunately, we have done everything we can to be as isolated and insulated a global citizen as we can (as a nation) and most people still think affirmative action is something being done to benefit minorities.
>
Re: (Score:2)
Uhhh no. If you believe that, then you're seriously uninformed about the traditional justifications of the melting pot. The point of a melting pot is that it melts down the incoming materials and makes it part of the mixture. What you're describing is what is derisively called the "beef stew immigration policy" in which immigrants come in, don't really
Re: (Score:2)
Nations that go that route usually don't fare well once there is a serious downfall in the economy.
It's a good thing that'll never happen here.
Oh crap.
Re:Yet they won't even take simple measures (Score:4, Insightful)
If Western countries simply prohibited Saudi nationals from staying for any length longer than a vacation or business trip, it'd be easier to keep out suspected Islamic terrorists. If Western governments would also start shutting down Saudi-financed mosques and Islamic schools, that'd be even better.
We can't do that. Do you know how much oil comes from Saudi Arabia?
Parent
That's how theocracy works (Score:3, Insightful)
hmmm, I wonder how could that be [countrystudies.us]?
The problem is that a "moderate Muslim" is really an oxymoron. Islamic law very explicitly says that it *must* be applied to every circumstance in life, without exception.
This situation is very well analyzed in this book [wikipedia.org]. Islamic scholars like Sayyid Qutb [wikipedia.org] have put the situation in the following terms:
1) One must
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH if you start doing this, you would loose the thing you wanted to protect in the first place.
Could brain formatting be next? (Score:4, Funny)
What if airport security accidentally invokes brainscan with the --format flag? Also, does this mean brains are open source now?
--
Slow Poke [pair.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You can't format wirelessly, you have to attach a cable [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
On second thought, maybe that's not such a good idea.
Medical benefits? (Score:4, Funny)
They'll have to up the minimum requirements for being the security check person from "some highschool" to "med school graduate"
Now offering free prostate exams with every flight!
Don't care (Score:2)
Not a big deal (Score:2)
Maybe this is different in EEG, but in the context of fMRI, subject is likely the easiest variable to classify on. I've done some experiments on it myself as part of my doctoral work. Even something as simple as wavelet processing the data and performing k-nearest neighbor classification yielded 96% accuracy on a motor task fMRI dataset of moderate size, and that was just a baseline method I was using to compare a better one to! In fact, the effect of the task was being obscured by the subject, and we had t
health info? (Score:2)
Presumably it fails when (Score:2)
Thought Crime (Score:2)
Convicted by no action of their own, just observation of a brain scan.
This has serious consequences. Anyone can observe an action. Only a few can read brain scans. We must trust those that can read brain scans that what they say about them are correct.
We can now be a criminal due to a technology so advanced that the defendant has no ability to defend himself. It is essentially guilt by decree from the gifted (aka royalty).
US already uses this technology at the Capitol (Score:3, Funny)
If brain activity is detected, then you are not a Senator.
Waste of money (Score:2)
Even if it wirks. The reason is simple: If you do know the terrorists, you just pick them up and put them in prison. If you do not know them, no amounth of identification technology will help.
Quite obvious, I would think.