Warning Over Job Bias and Privacy Risks Posed by Rapidly Advancing Brain Technology
The UK’s data protection regulator has warned that the increasing use of technology that collects and uses data directly from the human brain constitutes a serious threat to privacy and employment bias and discrimination. The Office of the Information Commissioner (ICO) has called for new regulations to cover the use of neurotechnologies, including implants and brain monitors, in areas outside of medicine, such as marketing and wellness, and in the workplace where they have the potential to lead to ethical violations. While developments in brain technology have brought benefits to medicine, the ICO said that the spread of such advances also posed significant concerns. Brain technology is capable of collecting data on complex behaviours and personal aspects like emotions, while workers whose brain activity is undesirable could be overlooked for promotion.
Concern Over Neurotechnology’s Negative Implications
Audrey Azoulay, the director-general of United Nations science and culture agency UNESCO, said it was possible that neurotechnology could lead to increased health outcomes, but warned that it could equally be used to access and manipulate people’s brains, leading to privacy concerns and challenges to human dignity and thought freedom. Due to the significant risks inherent in the use of neurotechnology, regulators have called for extensive ethical governance of its use. UNESCO is due to host the first international conference on the technology next month.
Employers Expected to Use Neurotech Devices at Scale Within Next Decade
The ICO’s report highlighted a risk that professional sports would be early adopters of neurotechnology within the next two to three years, harnessing non-invasive technology to monitor and analyse athlete responses to stimuli as well as tracks signs of injury. In the future, the use of “neuroenhancement” devices may be adopted to boost athlete reaction times and muscle responses. The report also warned of the use of brain data collected from the general public. The ICO also suggested that the use of neurotech devices by employers to monitor employees and to assess new hires was likely to become common within a decade. The watchdog has said that employers will require guidance on the storage and management of personnel data.
Additional Piece:
The Use of Brain Technology in the Coming Decade: Balancing Risk and Innovation
The use of brain technology in non-medical and medical fields has long been a slow-moving affair. Concerns about ethical implications and misuse of data relating to the human brain are nothing new. According to the UK’s regulatory watchdog, the ICO, new regulations are needed to govern the use of brain technology devices in the healthcare sector. While implants are being used to diagnose and treat nervous system diseases, there is still a need to monitor ethical violations to ensure that the technology isn’t being implemented too quickly without due regard for ethical implications. However, regulation should not come at the cost of innovation.
By analysing brain data relating to emotions and complex behaviours, manufacturers can develop devices that will help individuals make better decisions or enable those with disabilities to walk again. Brain computing interfaces can also be used to play video games or to control computer interfaces. While the risks of overlooking employees or external hires based on brain activity are real, employers can also use such devices to better understand employees and improve workplace satisfaction and productivity.
The use of brain technology also raises the spectre of discrimination, with inaccurate data and assumptions relating to people used by big data algorithms. For example, bias in algorithms can lead to discrimination when hiring new talent. A lack of diversity, something that any modern organisation should be concerned about, would be one of the negative outcomes. However, with the right regulatory measures in place, the adoption of brain technology has the potential to better the workplace environment; enhancing productivity and employee well-being.
In summary, the area of brain technology is at a critical juncture. While the risks posed by rapidly advancing technology that collects and uses data directly from the human brain are significant, the potential benefits are equally great. Regulators have an integral role to play in overseeing the ethical governance of the use of such technology, thus ensuring that it is used as a positive tool of innovation for all of society.
Sources:
https://www.ft.com/content/e30d7c75-90a3-4980-ac71-61520504753b
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/research-and-reports/ico-tech-futures-neurotechnology/
—————————————————-
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| 90’s Rock Band Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Nature’s Secret to More Energy | View |
| Ancient Recipe for Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| You Need a VPN in 2023 – Liberty Shield | View |
The rapid advance of technology that collects and applies information directly from the human brain carries a serious risk of job bias and discrimination and threatens privacy, the UK’s data regulator has warned.
In a report released Thursday, the Office of the Information Commissioner called for new regulations on the applications of neurotechnologies in non-medical fields, such as wellness and marketing, and in the workplace, to prevent ethical violations.
Brain monitors and implants are already being used in medicine to diagnose and treat diseases of the nervous system. Last month, scientists in Switzerland enabled a paraplegic patient to walk again with a neural implant that bypassed a spinal injury.
But Stephen Almond, executive director of regulatory risk at the ICO, said that while the idea of ”brain data . . . conjures up images of sci-fi movies”, many didn’t realize how fast its use was spreading .
“Neurotechnology collects intimate personal information. . . including emotions and complex behavior,” he said. “The consequences could be dire if these technologies are developed or implemented inappropriately.”
“We are very concerned about the very real risk of discrimination when models are developed that contain bias, leading to inaccurate data and assumptions about people,” he added, noting that workers with brain activity patterns deemed undesirable may be unfairly overlooked for promotion.
The ICO said employers were likely to adopt neurotech devices on a significant scale by 2028 to monitor existing employees and hire new ones, but that they had concerns about how personnel data would be held and analysed.
The watchdog joins an international movement to establish ethical, regulatory and governance guidelines for neurotechnology. Next month, UNESCO will convene what it says will be the first major international conference on the subject at its headquarters in Paris.
Audrey Azoulay, director-general of the United Nations science and culture agency, said neurotechnology “could help solve many health problems, but it could also access and manipulate people’s brains and produce information about our identities and emotions.” ”.
“It could threaten our rights to human dignity, freedom of thought and privacy,” he added.
In the UK the ICO aims to provide guidance within two years following an extensive consultation exercise.
Watchdog research suggested that professional sports would be early adopters of neurotechnology within the next two to three years, using noninvasive brain-monitoring devices to analyze athletes’ responses to stimuli and concentration levels, as well as monitor long-term effects. of head injuries.
Longer term, the regulator’s report noted that “neuroenhancement” devices would aim to improve reaction times and muscle responses, “potentially allowing athletes to run faster, jump higher and throw farther.” .
Gaming and entertainment are set to become one of neurotechnology’s largest consumer markets, as more sophisticated devices are introduced to not only control computers, but also to boost user performance through “neuromodulation.”
The ICO also included concerns about the use of consumers’ brain data “and what risks could be posed, if people choose to share it without fully understanding its potential uses and inferences.”
https://www.ft.com/content/4545931c-bc25-4ed3-873f-730258be31ec
—————————————————-