Scan barcode
bigcitydreamer's review
adventurous
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
I deliberated mentally while reading the book about how I would review this. On the one hand, a really useful conversation starter / thought provoker which may simplify complex ideas on neurotechnology for the layperson. On the other hand, I found myself with eyes glazing over in her more philosophical and technical bits (despite what I observed as a lack of medical consideration for things like the rights of all people to access drugs like Adderall, in hypothetical ). I found myself seeking out podcast episodes where the author was a guest, though, and look forward to discussing with my book club. So overall, a great read!
mkesten's review
3.0
The prospect of corporations integrating buyer and brain experiences sends shivers down my spine, but that, indeed is what we can expect in the coming years.
The technology is evolving whereby we can better understand what our brains are doing and hence manipulate it and change what’s going on up there.
Author Nita A. Farahany wisely counsels us to update our laws and conventions of commerce to assert the primacy and sanctity of human thought before the technology outruns our capacity to contain it.
Already police and security agencies are adapting EEG data to catch crooks. Advertisers are calibrating campaigns against datasets of brainwaves. And software giants are testing new means of capturing our attention.
But this is only the beginning.
This book offers updates on the frontiers of human-machine interface, or rather brain machine interface (BMI). It includes experiments of manipulating computer games with collaborative thought, also managing groups of drones with thought…now THAT is chilling!
It also takes the idea of surveillance capitalism to another level.
The technology is evolving whereby we can better understand what our brains are doing and hence manipulate it and change what’s going on up there.
Author Nita A. Farahany wisely counsels us to update our laws and conventions of commerce to assert the primacy and sanctity of human thought before the technology outruns our capacity to contain it.
Already police and security agencies are adapting EEG data to catch crooks. Advertisers are calibrating campaigns against datasets of brainwaves. And software giants are testing new means of capturing our attention.
But this is only the beginning.
This book offers updates on the frontiers of human-machine interface, or rather brain machine interface (BMI). It includes experiments of manipulating computer games with collaborative thought, also managing groups of drones with thought…now THAT is chilling!
It also takes the idea of surveillance capitalism to another level.
apurpleyuan's review
reflective
4.0
It was interesting to dig into the nuances of cognitive enhancements: her thoughts align much along my own, which is to say that enhancers such as ritalin or other ADHD drugs shouldn't necessarily be banned given other side effects are acceptable. There's little difference between using ADHD drugs or caffeine, for example (medical side effects properly managed, of course). There's quite a bit of sci-fi where cognitive enhancements are a norm and not necessarily a bad thing.
However Farahany provided very few answers on what point psychological exploitation derived from neuroscientific study interferes with free will. I agree there needs to be caution around interfering with personal autonomy, but Farahany seems to suggest social media designing their sites to be addictive crosses the line whereas "however begrudgingly, we must admit that neuromarketing per se does not violate cognitive liberty, so long as the research is conducted ethically and the findings are not used to intentionally cause us harm." It seems that she believes that one causes more harm that the other, and that is where the line needs to be drawn. However, defining what is considered harmful is... extremely complicated. Is McDonald's and Coca-Cola advertising considered harmful, given its effects on societal health? How can we say that infinite scrolls via social media is worse? Because of the impossibility of distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable manipulation, there's zero opportunity for regulation.
It's a great read to demonstrate how our free will is not our own. But I think it may be more important to think beyond the technology and neuroscience to really consider what kind of society we want to build. Without defining our values and how we as humans want to interact with technology, without determining what an "existential threat" to our humanity and free will actually is, we can't move forward. And unfortunately our technology and power to shape those things mindlessly is moving faster than we can handle.
However Farahany provided very few answers on what point psychological exploitation derived from neuroscientific study interferes with free will. I agree there needs to be caution around interfering with personal autonomy, but Farahany seems to suggest social media designing their sites to be addictive crosses the line whereas "however begrudgingly, we must admit that neuromarketing per se does not violate cognitive liberty, so long as the research is conducted ethically and the findings are not used to intentionally cause us harm." It seems that she believes that one causes more harm that the other, and that is where the line needs to be drawn. However, defining what is considered harmful is... extremely complicated. Is McDonald's and Coca-Cola advertising considered harmful, given its effects on societal health? How can we say that infinite scrolls via social media is worse? Because of the impossibility of distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable manipulation, there's zero opportunity for regulation.
It's a great read to demonstrate how our free will is not our own. But I think it may be more important to think beyond the technology and neuroscience to really consider what kind of society we want to build. Without defining our values and how we as humans want to interact with technology, without determining what an "existential threat" to our humanity and free will actually is, we can't move forward. And unfortunately our technology and power to shape those things mindlessly is moving faster than we can handle.
misterfix's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
3.5 Decent enough book for the uninitiated but if you have been following this issue in papers, periodicals, online and in other books then you will likely discover nothing new here. That said, this is a solid synthesis of many mostly old ideas and a few somewhat more current; from gangstalking, a Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues conferences from 2011 (that BardAI thinks was cancelled!), studies from 2016 about reanimating pigs brains, Havana Syndrome, Transhumanism, MK-Ultra, to Neuralink, BrainGate & Second Sight.
There's a lot of generally relevant topics but I was hoping for the inclusion of more timely material. The last chapter contains slightly more current content & makes up a bit, but the thing is, this subject moves rapidly. Look at AI and the valid hullabaloo recent advances in this field have created, none of which is included in this book because of publishing deadlines. Also there's the issue of corporations not sharing current research that author's must contend with. While I appreciate the challenges inherent in publishing a timely and revealing book given the pace of advances, this book still felt strangely dated to me. I'm going back to the online papers to stay more current.
Additionally, like so many books reviewing current and future... medical breakthroughs and the legal implications & privacy issues, the answer of 'we need legislation' is less than encouraging given the track record of these sorts of efforts when it comes to other technology. Unfortunately, despite a thoroughly researched and extremely strong presentation and argument for how to create such a legal framework, this was the only proposed solution. But - it's a worthwhile position to return to and fight for.
Finally, the argument that regulation and equitable access to the advances are the answers to how we incorporate the science into our lives leaves me... cold, given the track record and how 'equal' the world is and our success rate at distributing evenly. Nope - I don't have a better & workable answer to either of these items besides abolish/phase out capitalism - which is unfortunately not a... practical solution, hee, hee - but I wish the author did, though that's a lot to ask.
There's a lot of generally relevant topics but I was hoping for the inclusion of more timely material. The last chapter contains slightly more current content & makes up a bit, but the thing is, this subject moves rapidly. Look at AI and the valid hullabaloo recent advances in this field have created, none of which is included in this book because of publishing deadlines. Also there's the issue of corporations not sharing current research that author's must contend with. While I appreciate the challenges inherent in publishing a timely and revealing book given the pace of advances, this book still felt strangely dated to me. I'm going back to the online papers to stay more current.
Additionally, like so many books reviewing current and future... medical breakthroughs and the legal implications & privacy issues, the answer of 'we need legislation' is less than encouraging given the track record of these sorts of efforts when it comes to other technology. Unfortunately, despite a thoroughly researched and extremely strong presentation and argument for how to create such a legal framework, this was the only proposed solution. But - it's a worthwhile position to return to and fight for.
Finally, the argument that regulation and equitable access to the advances are the answers to how we incorporate the science into our lives leaves me... cold, given the track record and how 'equal' the world is and our success rate at distributing evenly. Nope - I don't have a better & workable answer to either of these items besides abolish/phase out capitalism - which is unfortunately not a... practical solution, hee, hee - but I wish the author did, though that's a lot to ask.