[offtop5]

This scares me a bit.

Let's say you have certain nero indicators which indicate person X may do Y .

Do you we then minority report lock up people.

At the same time , it's going to be amazing for people in a coma or unable to communicate. We could have a fantastic amazing world, where we effectively live forever via some type of matrix like interface.

[swalsh]

Worse yet, while the government may be banned from looking at this data intrusively. We're likely to freely give it away to a few large tech companies. Without limits on their use, their power will only continue to grow.

To me the primary issue of our day at this moment, is we have no users bill of rights. We are forced to use the services of large tech companies to participate in modern life yet there are few restrictions on their powers.

It's bad enough when it's our written thoughts. But the idea that it can be my unwritten thoughts too... that scares the heck out of me.

[offtop5]

You have to just be careful who gets your data.

The less you use social media the happier you'll generally be. No matter what you say the context around it can change and your life destroyed with it.

Breaking out of the social media matrix has been one of my best decisions, I was able to really live in 2019. Made tons of friends as well as a few partners. All of this happened in this place called reality.

[Rastonbury]

Imagine targeting advertising based on a certain state of mind yikes

[daniel-cussen]

This is why I stopped using Spotify. With all the places it shares data with, it could easily "randomly" play an inspiring song right when I'm on the fence about buying something.

[maxerickson]

Just let the machine make you happy.

[cambalache]

Yes, they will do. People are claiming for other people to be fired, disbarred or imprisoned for stupid tweets. Can you imagine the cancel brigade and the big social media companies in charge of this technology and its consequences?

[VRay]

We're already there on foreign soil with Palantir's monitoring software. You don't need to read people's brains to invasively spy on them and arrest them without traditional probable cause

[meowface]

I think the question is the maximum possible range. If it requires something that's a few centimeters (or less) away from the skull, then a government would either have to force you / make you agree to a scan, or would have to tap data generated by existing consumer devices (like they currently often do with phones/computers).

Is it theoretically plausible that this activity could be read from many feet away, or further?

[px43]

Eh, we'll have software for detecting and correcting criminal intent before the government gets its act together enough to start arresting people preemptively.

[marksbrown]

Aren't those things equivalent?