Get stimulated: A decision between freedom and control over your brain
A friend once told me: “Your brain can always control a computer, but no computer can control your brain.” He is wrong.
In 2021, I read a paper that later inspired my master's thesis in brain-computer interaction. It showed how two people could play Tetris together using only their brains to communicate. One person, who saw the full Tetris screen, decided if the falling Tetris block should be turned to fit a winning game strategy. This decision was then read directly from that person's brain with an electroencephalogram (EEG) that measured electrical activity in the brain. The second person, who only saw half of the screen, was sitting in another room. The decision from the first person was communicated directly to the second person's brain by stimulating it with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). This person then finally performed the action of turning the block1.
Reading data from a brain, like the decision of the first person, is one example of a brain-computer interface (BCI). But, what is even more fascinating, is what happened to the second person. The decision if the Tetris block should be turned, was directly written to the brain. This data input to a brain is called a computer-brain-interface (CBI). It is done by stimulating specific brain regions like the motor cortex, visual cortex, etc. In the Tetris game’s case, the visual cortex was stimulated using TMS. As a result, the second person “saw” phosphenes – bright flashes – that communicated the decision if the Tetris block should be turned. Since these flashes were directly written to the brain, the person would even “see” them with their eyes closed.
Future CBIs can unlock new science-fiction-like abilities in the real world. You could get new senses or extend your existing ones. Imagine connecting your visual cortex to an additional camera on your back. You could see what was behind you without turning. Even applications like downloading knowledge about speaking a language without any learning process could be possible. Imagine you use the public libraries’ CBI, to write the basics of Japanese language and culture into your brain before you travel to Tokyo. If you want to go whale-watching on your trip, make sure to connect your auditory cortex to an ultrasound microphone which would enable you to know that the whales are communicating.
But directly stimulating the brain also means that someone else can control what is happening in your head. Not only can they control your brain, but also everything your brain controls, which means all of you. By stimulating the motor cortex, you could make a rat move its tail2 or a human moving the finger3 (both scenarios were already implemented). A person on the other end of a CBI setup would be remote-controlled. If there were no health risks connected to CBI, would you try it? Who would you want to stimulate and vice versa? Would you download the Japanese language package?
I wouldn't. Thinking through a CBI or giving somebody control over my brain sends cold shivers up and down my spine. I am afraid of losing control over my senses and thoughts. I also fear a future in which other people are remote-controlled. Imagine the Japanese language package uploaded the wrong words. They are now in my brain. Would I need to use another CBI to forget and overwrite them?
CBI technology should only be acceptable in situations where the benefits massively outweigh the medical and social risks that come with its usage. Therefore, the future of CBI technology for the next decades, and maybe forever, will be limited to medical applications. Mainly because any CBI application needs to be hyper-personalized and developed with high security that ensures the user cannot be hijacked by bad actors. This precaution on CBI development is critical even if it means we don’t get to unlock the full potential of CBI technology. It seems like the risks are too high. Today a computer might be capable of controlling your brain, but this doesn’t mean it should.
Jiang, L., Stocco, A., Losey, D. M., Abernethy, J. A., Prat, C. S., & Rao, R. P. N. (2019). BrainNet: A Multi-Person Brain-to-Brain Interface for Direct Collaboration Between Brains. Scientific reports, 9(1), 6115. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41895-
Yoo, S. S., Kim, H., Filandrianos, E., Taghados, S. J., & Park, S. (2013). Non-invasive brain-to-brain interface (BBI): establishing functional links between two brains. PloS one, 8(4), e60410. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060410
Rao, R. P., Stocco, A., Bryan, M., Sarma, D., Youngquist, T. M., Wu, J., & Prat, C. S. (2014). A direct brain-to-brain interface in humans. PloS one, 9(11), e111332. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111332