WhyNot?

brain firewall?

Category: Legal
Responses: 7 (1 in support, 0 neutral, 6 in opposition)
Number of views: 1786
Tracking: Track this idea
Community Rating:Weak WeakYour Rating:

Why not a little chip, by using technology from Kevin Warwick, to read and write to nerves in the body ( look for Project Cyborg 2.0 ) that acts as a firewall placed on the neck nerve, that filters information passing that spot.

The firewall then filters information, so it blocks/alters neural information that would result in a illegal action, and it could automatically switch to a specific country's police server when travelling.

And if we could combine that with the chip technology that helps dement people to remember things, by intentionally destrying real memory cells in brain, and replacing it with these chips, equipped with short-range wireless communications to the firewall that filters the neural lines.

Then the firewall can scan'N'delete information in the brain for example a plan for a bank robbery. Then you will "forget" that you was planning to do a bank robbery. Or having it modifyed, so you is planning to make yourself a cup of tea instead.

This will make the perfect world... never a crime done!

Then all cops will get the very beutiful status "unemployed".

sebastiannielsen, Jul 31 2006

What do you think of this idea or comment?
(You can change your vote at any time)

agree I agree no opinion No opinion disagree I disagree

Users who liked this idea also liked:

Other ideas in category (Legal):

Comments from other members:

Add your comment

Since specific information formation in the brain is is very much a mystery the technology you suggest is not yet available. For this, I am quite grateful as it would make automatons of us all, although it might improve our capabilities in spelling and proper use of terminology.

sand, Jul 31 2006

yes, but Kevin Warwick have invented so he can control her nerves via the computer. What will be next?

I think reading and storing information in the brain will be next.

And when everyone has this type of "police chip", locks, alarms, access control systems, safes, security systems, encryptions, firewalls, passwords, keys, tamper-evident things, licenses, DRM, anti-virus, anti-spyware, magstripe cards, ID-cards, PINs, biometric systems, money and banks will not be needed anymore, because it would be sufficent with an sign/text saying what a people is allowed to do. No sign = not allowed to do anything with that thing. (except for what is allowed by law)

And our bank balaces would be stored in the brain instead... Everyone will be thrustworthy, because the chip makes sure you cannot lie. And cannot do crime.

sebastiannielsen, Aug 01 2006

OK. You go first. . .

I'll wait until last if you don't mind. Oh, of course you won't mind. You will be the perpetually smiling mindless soldier of the state.

Hyenuf, Aug 01 2006

This would require some heavy-duty processing.

The way I see it, the brain of each person is essentially a massive device, with magnitudes more memory than presently available on any single unit, all of it uniquely encrypted; and with multilateral processing beyond what we can fit in a standard computer rack.

All of our actions, from scratching an itch to slashing a throat, are composed of innumerable lesser actions. A single synaptic link could either drive a muscle cell to contract, or form the basis for a judgement. How many nerve impulses does it take to conjure an idea?

More importantly, what is the smallest workable unit of thought? How many of these does it take to commit a crime? How different are they from making a sandwich? When exactly does the crime begin? The moment you coerce the bank employee? The moment you walked out the door? The moment you conceived of the crime? What is the proper penalty?

How do you tell the difference between the conception of a "bank" as a place to store money, a "bank" as the brick-and-mortar building on Main Street, a "bank" as a general theme of storage, "bank" as in "lean to one side", and "bank" as an oral sound with a soft labial attack and a sharp guttoral stop?

nayhem, Sep 22 2006

But the device should have acces to brain data. Then it would be able to differentate between "money bank" as in storing money, or "paper bank" as in storing papers.

Because your brain CAN'T lie.... If you lie, the brain always have the truth, this is why lie detectors can see if you lie....

So if that device has access to your thoughts, it can erase information that is parts of plans to crime.So if you think "Im going to rob the fort knox" (which in this case would be a low-security gold storing bank that has an single thin unlocked wooden door to the vault, its low-security because of the brain firewall in everyone), the chip will immediaty delete the information, or alter it. So next second you are instead thinking "im going to read my mails" or "im going to make myself a cup of tea".

that would be the perfect world. Nobody can do crime....And nobody needs security. And every company that has with security to do, will go bankruptcy.And door locks, keys, codes and so on would be a thing of the past... Every door, computer and so on in the world is unprotected. Because the chip will prevent unauthorized persons from entering the area or accessing the computer.

No restrictions on owning weapons.... Because the chip will prevent you from injuring people. Or animals in the case you not allowed to injure them by law. (so if you are out for a legal hunt, you would be allowed to kill animals that is legal to hunt.

sebastiannielsen, Sep 22 2006

Conscious thought does not involve the nerves of the spine. All of the thinking is done in the head. Intercepting the signals at the neck would only enable the system to affect the signals your body nerves send to your brain and the signals sent back to the body. This could affect what you feel and how you move, but not your thoughts. When I say "what you feel," I mean, in this case, what you feel with your sense of touch, not your emotions. Physical sensations may affect your emotions, but your emotions are mostly in your head.

How can a computer tell what is a "crime?" I would challenge any computer wizard to design a program that could look at people engaged in various activities and determine whether or not a crime is being committed. This is totally impossible right now and will probably stay impossible for quite some time.

If you did come up with a system that could do what you're suggesting, it would be total mind control. I don't think anyone would sign up to be under the complete control of the state. The idea of having a device that could manipulate my thoughts and feelings in ways completely beyond my control is disgusting.

Scan and delete information in my brain? No thanks!

Dwane Anderson, Jan 20 2007

No, not ONLY intercepting the signals at the neck. It should read the brain by checking what you are remembering too.But it is at the neck the signal will be blocked. And the system should have ability to delete/change information in brain too, by the chips that replaces intentonally damaged memory cells.

About computers can differentiate by crime or not crime, can be done by using a HUGE logging computer, and the computer would by analyzing the logs, analyze WHAT the people is thinking about, WHAT will happen next, WHEN will it happen, and so on. Then the computer can decide, if:

Signal should be blocked when the crime is about to be commited

Information about crime should be changed

Information about crime should be deleted

The crime should go through ("its not a crime")

--------------------------------------

About no one partipicating:First under the beta stage, it could be a huge money reward for people that sign up for this. When the beta stage is over, the chip would simply be mandatory, you cannot simply say "no" to the chip.

Then polices could have guns with sleeping medicine in, so they shoot at unchipped people (they can check with some handheld PDA which people that is unchipped), they gets into a police van with a surgery board, and they gets the chip while in sleep, and then they are free'd.(maybe complement the sleeping medicine with narcosis when in van, if required)

And a surgery robot could do the chip implanting, so make sure no mistakes are done, and the robot could then do the surgery faster, so more people can be chipped per hour.

sebastiannielsen, Jun 26 2007

Project Sheeple 2.0.Over my dead body.One would have to be truely insane to even consider being chipped.I would never even allow an "ID" chip into my body. Never.FREEEEEDOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!!!

Lemmings over the cliff...

SamThielen, Aug 22 2007

Assuming that, hypothetically, this process did work, at what age would you insert the chip into people's brains? Would you have brain surgery on a newborn, or would you allow an unknowing toddler to rob Fort Knox blind?

Also assuming that the chip worked, would it allow for unknowing wrongdoing? Say, for instance, someone did not know it was illegal to plagiarize. Would the brain chip contain a legal database which would inform them of this fact? If so, would the legal database be updated using real-time connections to legal handbooks? Would the legal handbooks be different for each country, according to national laws? How would international travel affect the brain chip? If the brain chip were to receive information from every nation in the world's legislative documents, how would this affect normal productivity? Would the brain be distracted by learning the chip's new updates, or would the chip fail to inform the brain of its learnings?

Those certainly are a lot of hypothetical questions. Are you sure about your idea?

Tealeaf, Dec 05 2007

It could check on-th-fly with the police server in the country the person is currently in if a specific action is allowed or denied.

Unknownly wrongdoing would be blocked by querying the server and check a signature like a antivirus program. The chip dosen't need to learn people.

The chips should be planted at a stage as close as possible to the born of the baby, but the baby must be in a stage so its medically safe to plant the chip.

sebastiannielsen, Dec 05 2007

1. Who would control the "Law"? Would an un-chipped human control it, or would a chipped human control it, whereby that human is really owned by the Program?2. No program has ever been hack-proof. The first person to hack this system could "rule the world" by enslaving people, ordering killings, etc.3. I would rather live in a dangerous world where self-choice is possible, than in a world where everyone is a soul-less slave of the Program.4. By becoming a slave to the Program, this is almost like death: If everyone killed themselves right now, we'd be able to cure violence forever!5. I would rather die, and take a lot of chip-bearing people with me, before someone cut my brain open and dog-collared me.6. Horrible idea, BUT if you'd like to be a slave, I have some chores that can be done. Be at my manufacturing plant by 4am tomorrow or I will send the termination code to your cerebral cortex. There is no "I".

msalexan, Dec 30 2007

About 1:It depends of the type of control the actual country has. If its democratic country, all people will be chipped and changes can only be made after a sucessful vote. If it dictature, one single unchipped man has full control of his country's people.

About 2:Since it will be laws against hacking, any hacking attempts against the system will be blocked. Even if you have a good working "hack", the chip will block you from doing the hack.

About 3:People dosent have souls anyways. What happens when you die. Answer: you get buried in a grave. Many people think you get up in the heaven.

About 4: No

About 5: A police would shoot you with a sleeping injection, and implant the chip without you knowing it.

About 6: YOU should not control the chip. The leaders of a country should control that country's police server.

sebastiannielsen, Dec 31 2007

just so you know, i only read the 1st 2 paragraphs.

if you had something like that, you would have no need for police officers.how many po are there in the world? millions. thats how many people would be out of a job.

the wourlds unemployment rate would skyrockey and screw every one

cash_200, May 25 2008

Yes the unemployment would skyrocket, forcing companies to lower the prices and salaries so unemployment people can survive. That would lead to the unemployed people getting less cash, companies forcing to lower price more, unemplyed get lesser cash and so on.

All this would cause in the end that a huge ultra-deflation occurs where the money's value skyrocket. When the money's value has skyrocketed so much its not possible to skyrocket it anymore, the end result will be:

The death of money. Everything will be free, and nobody earns any salary.

sebastiannielsen, May 25 2008