Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology Science

Big Tech Wants to Harvest Your Thoughts (wired.com) 54

Wired reports that consumer neurotechnology is rapidly moving from the lab into workplaces and homes, with companies including Apple, Meta, and Snap developing products that can monitor or interpret brain activity. Researchers warn that as these systems improve, neural data could become the next major privacy battleground. Some neuroscientists are already calling for a series of core rights, coined "neurorights," that protect "mental privacy," "identity," and personal "agency." Here's an excerpt from the article: Over the past two decades, researchers using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which tracks the iron in the hemoglobin supplying oxygen to neurons, have been building up increasingly detailed maps and inventories of the mammalian cortex. Thanks to huge advances in machine-learning artificial intelligence -- computer algorithms that are able to sort through enormous amounts of information and use statistical methods to make classifications and predictions -- fMRI scans can now be used to identify everything from depressive thoughts to the nuanced feelings of envy and schadenfreude. Other algorithms have been able to accurately piece together reconstructions of movie clips watched by subjects, just by analyzing their brain scans; or have detected, in probing the brain activity of swing voters in the US presidential election, responding to photographs and videos of presidential candidates, which candidates provoked anxiety or even disgust, and which elicited positive responses or feelings of empathy.

In just the last few years, neuroscience researchers have progressed from decoding images and emotions as they play across the cortex to sounds, words, phrases, and even language. In 2023, in a remarkable demonstration of this emerging technology, a woman called Ann Johnson, who had been paralyzed for 18 years by a brain-stem stroke, was able to speak again through the insertion of a grid of 253 electrodes onto the surface of her brain, which translated her neuronal signals into sentences, in real time, at a rate of 78 words per minute (just about half the speed of standard conversation). The research team at the University of California, led by neurosurgeon Edward Chang, had combined this brain-computer interface with an animated avatar of Johnson's head, which spoke in her own voice, as reconstructed from a recording of a 15-minute toast she had given at her wedding. Just as the avatar's mouth spoke Johnson's words as she thought them, so its expressions were similarly influenced by the nuances of her brain activity, which turned her thoughts about facial gestures into displays of emotion -- from smiles to pursed lips and frowns.

[...] The more invasive the recording equipment, the richer and more detailed the data. Surgical interventions are at the vanguard of neuroscience and remain very rare -- fewer than 100 people on the planet have brain-computer interfaces like Johnson's embedded beneath their skulls. Yet almost inevitably, a concerted trickle-down effect is occurring. In the summer of 2023, a team at the University of Texas demonstrated that they could use fMRI to translate brain scans into words and sentences, after subjects listened to 16 hours of the storytelling podcasts The Moth Radio Hour and The New York Times' Modern Love to train an AI model. When the subjects then listened to new podcasts, the algorithm was able to convert the gist of what they heard, as it manifested in their brains, into words, phrases, and sentences that roughly captured the stories. As the team's lead computational neuroscientist, Alexander Huth, put it in an interview with Science, "Our thought when we actually had this working was, 'Oh my God, this is kind of terrifying.'" Now noninvasive, wearable brain scanners are beginning to proliferate beyond the lab, making their way into our workplaces and, through the vast global consumer market, into our homes too.

Big Tech Wants to Harvest Your Thoughts

Comments Filter:
  • I can't wait (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by liqu1d ( 4349325 )
    Ads finally designed to be as irritating as scientifically possible.
    • by jhoegl ( 638955 )
      Futurama did a joke on beaming commercials into your dreams while you sleep.
      • Futurama did a joke on beaming commercials into your dreams while you sleep.

        And letting us hear Bender's dreams [youtube.com] - I think we're in them. :-)
        (Can't decide if they would/wouldn't want to harvest those thoughts...)

      • Max Headroom did this already in its pilot. ("Blipverts").

        And the episode "Dream Thieves".

        And almost every other episode...

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(TV_series)#Episodes

        Anyone has been wondering why that show is never on re-runs?

  • If big tech think they can turn this into a commercial, everyday product they are in for a big surprise. Because let's be honest - who would ever wear this kind of equipment outside a lab?

    In a few years this whole idea will be seen as another useless scientific toy that wasted copious amounts of money for nothing, and that is written off on the tax statement.

    • Something that was initially impractical because it couldn't be used at scale but that advances in technology elsewhere suddenly made it useful for ton of applications.

      Technology is not a one-way Street it's a complicated mess of back roads and by roads.

      We have a lot of major disasters we are ignoring. Climate change, boomers dying and taking all the money with them causing a collapse in disposable income spending, AI taking all the water and electricity, fascism, etc etc etc.

      But just for fun le
    • by Smonster ( 2884001 ) on Wednesday August 12, 2026 @07:32PM (#66286362)
      I think that misses the point. What if the cops or some judge orders you to wear one in order to extract information or control behavior? We should have laws to explicitly protect people from such things. Right now if you don't want to help the government the worst thing they can legally do is temporarily jail you for contempt. This would take things to a whole other level.
      • What if the cops or some judge orders you to wear one in order to extract information or control behavior?

        In the U.S. this would probably violate the 5th Amendment clause against self-incrimination.
        That said, let's just hope this isn't available in the next 2.5 years ... /s

        • Even with right against self incrimination in the constitution, that line has already been blurred. For example: You are not required to give someone your password. However you can be forced to unlock a device with biometric data link a finder print, iris, palm, or facial scan. You can also be jailed for not giving them your password. Which is why we need laws to explicitly prevent such things.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      They're trying to workshop the next hype train for investors because they can smell the AI bubble bursting, you insensitive clod!

      What are you doing? Ignoring these schemes completely and continuing on with life as normal? You're supposed to be contributing to the 5%!

    • "Who would be carrying listening and tracking devices willingly, let alone purchasing them so the government can track us 24/7, of course it is nonsense." - probably you in 1990, holding a pager.
    • Btw, you don't seem to understand how "the surveillance economy" actually warmed the pot of frogs, which is already scorching hot. Privacy was a given, almost religiously protected. It was common sense. It was our right. How did we lose the war against cookies, supercookies, cellphone trilateration, cellphone gps, cars with gps, from private smtp and pop servers to everything at google, yahoo and outlook? From federated networks like Jabber to giving every bit of behavioral data plus phone numbers, addresse
    • If big tech think they can turn this into a commercial, everyday product they are in for a big surprise. Because let's be honest - who would ever wear this kind of equipment outside a lab?

      In a few years this whole idea will be seen as another useless scientific toy that wasted copious amounts of money for nothing, and that is written off on the tax statement.

      If you told people forty years ago that people would pay a thousand dollars a pop every few years to carry around a surveillance device that was always listening, constantly sending their location to anyone snooping, and able to record anything via video or audio at a moment's notice and instantly broadcast it anywhere on the planet, they'd have had a similar reaction to what you're having to this story. Never underestimate a marketing sweep that captures the collective consciousness. Even better if they ca

    • Actually, the next frontier in ad targetting is eye tracking. Guess what all the VR goggles do now?
  • I always wondered what Nuerolink was for...
  • This is an ad. No scientist thinks like this: 'through the vast global consumer market, into our homes too' and has a scare feeling invoking sentence beginning: 'Oh my God, this is kind of terrifying.' He is acting like a typical seller.
    • by Rujiel ( 1632063 )
      It's ads all the way down, and I resent the normalization. That's great that brain implants can help the paralyzed (which is always the go-to example for Neuralink), but keep the literal brain scanning tech out of public spaces, my work or my home
  • by awwshit ( 6214476 ) on Wednesday August 12, 2026 @08:38PM (#66286472)

    Put one on a dog.

  • ... a finger.

    • I have some htoughts about "big tech" and their massive data centers, omnipresent surveillance and political manipulation (aka "campaing contributions") that are better left unshared.

  • Danger ranger is vastly overstating  bio-electric eves-dropping. That brain-implant procedure   took years and cost $30-million;   they won't get cheaper. And why bother with MRI when ... you can just record somebody speaking ? How abouts discovering "hidden" thoughts ?  Do we really need an electromagnetic Freud when a "smart" woman and  bottle of gin reveal all ?
  • Big Tech wants you to open your wallet, buy stuff you dont need, or sell leads. They fail at this miserably, and stupid advertisers pay too much for dud leads. Blocking Youtube ads does not work, and any ad hot on the heels of a blocked ad is money down the train. Work out the client type (A,B,C or D). Where A is easy peazy, and Type D consumers miserable skinflints with moths in their wallet, and drive a 15 year old junker as their car. As a Type D, I am not getting real offers. IF AI can get type Ds the
    • Now compare this to marginal electorate ads at election time. They know where I live, and call my phone and email with a targeted ad or script. Obama's A and B ads was ground breaking in the day, yet consumer rubbish is still shotgun, because advertisers, some of them, pay for pray and spray saturation ads. Again, capacity to pay is not properly calculated.
  • "subjects listened to 16 hours of the storytelling podcasts The Moth Radio Hour and The New York Times' Modern Love"

    That sounds like torture. Did the "subjects" really give informed consent?

  • Somewhere along the way these big tech companies decided that if data exists, they already own it, and it is wrong on an ethical level that anyone, anywhere, ever thought otherwise. Therefore, we are all just nodes in their data-store that they have not yet found a way to tap into and utilize. Submit, apply their shiny data-harvester, and STFU so they can monetize your thoughts and start trying to sort out how to shove ads into your dreams.

  • Honestly, it's the motives that bother me. The core ideas - monitoring, interpreting, hell even directly reading thoughts, I think are inherently useful ideas. It's just I don't trust these companies any farther than I can shit to not want to do these technologies for bad reasons.
  • What do you mean what social media is?

    On the other hand ... either people are really dumb or they are not dumping their thoughts there but trying to impersonate something they aren't.

  • Only sentiment and attitudes can be nudged in groups of people (a nondeterministic subset of individuals) using persuasion and manipulation tactics.
  • There is so much sloppy writing and neurobullshit in this article. It may indeed be possible to train a machine to guess well at a single individual's thoughts, which is impressive, but the data won't generalize across individuals for a simple reason: degeneracy [pnas.org]. In the brain (and in all other biological systems), the same output or function is realized in multiple ways, whether in a single individual or across individuals. When I wiggle my finger twice, different combinations of neurons are involved. When

  • At this point I think the term "big tech" is no longer appropriate. I suggest we use "Evil doers", or if I believed in a God I would suggest "spawn of Satan" as an alternative. The era of them providing anything useful to society is long gone.
    • by whitroth ( 9367 )

      Soudns about right.

      They want to know what I'm thinking of them? HERE: @#$%^&*#$%^&*#$%^&*(#$%^&*@!#$%^&*()_#$%^&*(#$%^&*(

  • Nobody should want to get inside my head. It's very weird in there. I don't spend any more time there than I absolutely have to.
  • They (any party) would be able to tell if you really were on their side or just faking it ... with appropriate consequences to follow. They could ensure there are only True Believers in the Inner Circle. If you're not with us, you're not necessarily against us, but you'll certainly be blocked from anything important.

Frankly, Scarlett, I don't have a fix. -- Rhett Buggler

Working...