frereubu
3 days ago
This area of ethics should be considered seriously, but in this specific instance these consumer-level headsets tell you very little about anything. I'm constantly frustrated by the amount of coverage these get when, if you've ever studied any kind of neuroscience, you realise quite how vague the data is, and how much over-interpretation goes on in the advertising for these products.
It's a shame this book by my MSc dissertation supervisor isn't coming out until next June, because I'm pretty sure there's a bunch of stuff in there about this kind of neurobollocks: https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/479845/neurobollocks-by-devl...
Otterly99
a day ago
Thanks, I was actually going to ask about the relevant of a "Foundation brain model" relying on EEG data. Isn't it a rather poor choice? Like what can you actually get out of an EEG other than alpha/beta/gamma activity?
frereubu
a day ago
Yes, it's a terribly poor choice, so poor it's essentially meaningless in that context. The reason people outside of neuroscience like it is because it's relatively cheap and easy to set up (and also easy to set up badly). It has high temporal resolution - i.e. you don't need to go through complex statistical manipulation to get a signal like you do for fMRI - so people can see the feedback quickly, and it's easy to sell a story about what that feedback means. There are numerous legitimate applications of EEG, but it's being wildly oversold by these companies.
gabriel666smith
2 days ago
With your perspective, I'd be really interested in knowing what you would currently guess the chance that their purported dataset (of 50k hours of EEG data) not ultimately being useful for training a ML model with some kind of genuine utility is.
Do you think that this data is so vague that it is 100% unlikely to provide utility? 99.9%?
frereubu
2 days ago
I'm not an expert by any means - you'd need Joe (my supervisor) for that! - but here's a relatively common example that he pointed at: https://www.acnlabs.co.uk/blog/neuro-bollocks-alert-dopamine...
"Muscle movements on the head (like moving your eyes, smiling, gurning, etc) produce electrical noise that is far stronger than the brain signals EEG tries to measure. You cannot put a helmet over an EEG kit and then bang your head around in a jet or race car and get anything but pure noise."
That's a crude example, but it's the kind of over-interpretation that's really common with these things.
And that's using a proper EEG skullcap, not these ridiculously simple things that you slip over your head without any conduction gel etc. In my non-expert opinion a large dataset of this kind of vague data would just lead to mostly mush because the signals that come from these things are so rubbish. But it won't stop people who want to make money from it that there are clear signals there, like the use of Myers-Briggs, astrology etc.
The only current technology that actively concerns me is direct neural implantation. You can get really clean, clear signals from that depending on where you hook into. Anything else feels like it's a long way away from anything which would actively harm privacy, although clearly people have a vested interest in making that work and we shouldn't be complacent.
999900000999
2 days ago
Can someone manipulate their own brain wave patterns.
As is I can imagine this being used to interrogate people. Of course it doesn’t matter if the EEG produces any real data.
Billy only needs to think LEOs can read his mind.
frereubu
2 days ago
> Can someone manipulate their own brain wave patterns.
Yes, absolutely.
> As is I can imagine this being used to interrogate people. Of course it doesn’t matter if the EEG produces any real data.
Indeed - "lie detectors" are a good analogy.
999900000999
2 days ago
So this is sci-fi, but do you think someone can affect the brain waves of others just by being near them.
Not full mind control, but maybe the amplification of existing traits. For some reason you can't place your always get a bit more paranoid around John.
frereubu
2 days ago
> do you think someone can affect the brain waves of others just by being near them
No, not in the sense I think you mean it. But if someone you thought was very attractive did nothing but stood next to you that would affect your brain waves, yes. It's one of the things about brains - they respond to the environment, so pretty much anything can affect brain waves, that's what so difficult about understanding the data.
999900000999
2 days ago
Ok.
But strictly in a hypothetical, a state actor could develop a sadness ray ?
I could imagine a B52 or something flying over a major city and beaming out sadness (or whatever emotion you want).
On the other side, once this science is understood better you could have recreational brain wave modification. A happy beam if you will.
Any books you can suggest on the topic?
frereubu
2 days ago
I can't quite tell if you're pulling my leg, but if not, you're thinking of electromagnetic waves, which are entirely different. Brain waves are fluctuations in the activity of the brain's electrical circuits and couldn't be influenced in that way.
999900000999
2 days ago
I’m not making this up, there are some theories that this technology might already exist to an extent.
> The team of three experts concluded that incident was a widescale use of electronics to carry out a so-called neuro-weapon attack
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2018/9/6/ex...
SR2Z
a day ago
I recall a game at the health exhibit of the Denver Museum of Nature and science where two people sit across from each other put on headsets. The headsets then measure theta wave intensity, and the objective is to concentrate and have more theta-wave activity than your opponent. There's a motorized ball on the table which can be pushed across; it was really satisfying to see people lose concentration when they were doing badly and have the ball just roll straight into their goal.
ArcHound
2 days ago
While you're more knowledgeable than me on this, let me tell you that these giants are now able to use the tiniest hints to create and enhance existing profiles. So no, we should stop this ASAP.
frereubu
2 days ago
It's probably more efficient in legal terms to make it a blanket ban, so I agree with you on that front, but honestly, with this kind of data the risk is more about people selling snake oil than any real privacy concerns. Or I suppose something like this ending up on a credit report where the data is worse than useless because it's utterly meaningless! Noise in, noise out...
plastic-enjoyer
2 days ago
> I'm constantly frustrated by the amount of coverage these get when, if you've ever studied any kind of neuroscience, you realise quite how vague the data is, and how much over-interpretation goes on in the advertising for these products.
I blame engineers here. I have a neuroscience background myself and know what you're talking about. Engineers, in my experience, can't really grasp the nature of neural signals and do seem to over-interpret them quite alot or just misuse them.
frereubu
2 days ago
I did consider doing a PhD on imaging methodology because I was so angry about its misuse, but I in the end I realised I didn't want to be angry the whole time! Perhaps if I'd been able to do an elective in meditation...
leafingensemble
2 days ago
Excellent, since the data says so little, the company will not be needing it.
Revealed preference.