New Delhi: When I first read that Elon Musk aimed to implant computer chips in human brains, I thought him crazy. Even if the medical risks could be overcome, even if there were advantages, would humans consent to giving up free will and their ability to think for themselves? Would they entrust their emotions and career to a chip? Surely not.
My views changed after reading a WSJ article, ‘Are You Ready for a Brain Chip? It’ll Change Your Mind’, by Daniel Gelernter, head of the hedge fund RG Niederhoffer Capital, and a computational neuroscience expert. He asks: if a brain chip (BC) gives you an advantage over others, will you not rush to maximise that advantage? If not, you risk falling behind your rivals and becoming obsolete, regardless of how brainy or hard-working you are.
Remember, a few decades ago, the internet or smartphones sounded like science fiction. Today, they are so commonplace that semi-literate villagers have them. Life without them has become unthinkable. Anyone without them will lose out to those who do.
Will the same thing happen with BCs? Can they become as indispensable and common as the smartphone today?
Musk is pitching BCs as a medical device for patients who have failed to respond to traditional remedies. His company Neuralink completed its first human implant earlier this year and says the patient has responded well.
BCs have already shown that people can control technology with their thoughts. Paralysed patients have been able to control a robotic arm or move a cursor. One patient controlled a video game through thought. BCs could be used to treat depression, schizophrenia, dementia and other ailments of the mind. These are big problems in richer countries that have overcome the diseases of the poor.
Even if clinical trials are successful, no country will give clearance to BCs for years, given the grave implications. But it will happen. BCs clearly have medical potential.
But will it stop there? Once the genie is out of the bottle, it cannot be put back. Amniocentesis and sonography were invented to detect possible defects in foetuses. But once licensed, they were used for detecting female babies and aborting them. Trying to restrict the use of any tech is difficult. If violating rules yields a big advantage to users, regulation has no chance of succeeding.
That is the major risk of BCs. They cannot, and must not, be viewed as mere medical devices. They are devices to control the mind. And that is frightening.
Private capital is waiting to pour billions into this industry, just as they did into internet and smartphone companies earlier. BCs could be the next big thing.
Gelernter writes, ‘It is a matter of years, not decades. These won’t be chip implants permitting paraplegics to regain their independence. These will be implants marketed to everyone, as smartphones are now. And if you decline to have a chip grafted onto your brain, you’ll be a backward, out-of-touch misanthrope.
‘The benefits of brain chips will be vastly beyond what external devices offer today. We will be able to take ‘photos’ of anything we see with our eyes, just by thinking. Ditto video – in 3-D. We will be able to send messages to friends by thinking them, and to hear their replies played in our minds…. We’ll be able to talk to anyone in any language. We’ll be able to remember an infinite amount of information, to retrieve any fact…. To take part in movies. To be totally entertained in new virtual worlds.’
Governments will seek to use BCs to control citizens, and that is the most frightening outcome of all. Gelernter says our memories will be organised for us by AI under policies crafted by experts with society’s best interests at heart. ‘If we have criminal ideas, or perhaps just countercultural notions, they will be referred to the proper authorities before it’s too late.’
This sounds like Orwell’s 1984. Most of us would feel helpless and deprived if suddenly we lost access to the internet or cellphones. In the future, lack of access to a BC may be equally devastating. All ambitious individuals will want it. Even countries that ban BCs on the grounds of moral or societal risk may relent if rivals licensing BCs gain a big advantage.
Sooner than you think, an unholy rush for BCs could begin. That means those producing the hardware and software will have an unprecedented way of controlling the minds and actions of billions of humans. In some fundamental manner, we may no longer be humans any more.
Is this doomsday-ism? Through history, new scientific advances have raised horrific visions of misuse that have proved unwarranted. Yet, I can’t get rid of the feeling, ‘This time is different.’
