Mind-reading tech ‘must include neurodivergent people to avoid bias’ | Neuroscience

Mind-reading technologies pose a “real danger” of discrimination and bias, the Information Commissioner’s Office has warned, as it develops specific guidance for companies working in the sci-fi field of neurodata.

The use of technology to monitor information coming directly from the brain and nervous system “will become widespread over the next decade”, the ICO said, as it moves from a highly regulated medical advancement to a more general purpose technology. It is already being explored for potential applications in personal wellbeing, sport and marketing, and even for workplace monitoring.

The current state-of-the-art in the field is demonstrated by individuals like Gert-Jan Oskam, a 40-year-old Dutch man who was paralysed in a cycling accident 12 years ago. In May, electronic implants in his brain gave him the ability to walk.

“To many, the idea of neurotechnology conjures up images of science fiction films, but this technology is real and it is developing rapidly,” said Stephen Almond, the ICO’s executive director of regulatory risk.

As the technology becomes more mainstream, the ICO warned that some might be left behind by its development. Technology could be developed without the input of neurodivergent people, leading to inaccurate assumptions and discrimination based on faulty conclusions; or it could result in bias against those with unusual or distinctive neurological readings that come to be seen as undesirable in the workplace.

“Neurotechnology collects intimate personal information that people are often not aware of, including emotions and complex behaviour. The consequences could be dire if these technologies are developed or deployed inappropriately,” Almond said.

“We want to see everyone in society benefit from this technology. It’s important for organisations to act now to avoid the real danger of discrimination.”

In its preliminary report, part of the ICO’s insight and foresight series into emerging technologies, the regulator predicted that, in the short term, neurotechnology is likely to be most used in medical and allied sectors. But, in four to five years, it could become more widespread. “Neurodata-led gaming is likely to emerge rapidly in the medium term,” the ICO said, with games already existing that allow a player to remotely control drones via read-only non-invasive brain monitoring.

Before the end of the decade, the ICO expects an even greater integration of neuroscience into our daily lives, with children given wearable brain monitors to personalise their education, and marketers using brainscans to investigate emotional responses to advertising and products.

Such practices would already be covered by today’s data protection rules, with neurodata likely to count as special category data, which has carries specific protections. But they also raise the risk of new harms, such as neurodiscrimination.

“New forms of discrimination may emerge that have not been previously recognised under associated legislation, such as the Equality Act 2010,” the report concluded. “There is a risk that these approaches will be rooted in systemic bias and likely to provide inaccurate and discriminatory information about people and communities.”

In late May, Elon Musk’s brain implant company, Neuralink, was approved for human testing. The billionaire has been open about his goal to make brain implants a mainstream technology, predicting that one day implants will be a “general population device” that could even act as “a backup drive for your non-physical being, your digital soul”.