RFID, GPS Technology and Electronic Surveillance

Intel Wants Brain Implants in Its Customers’ Heads by 2020

November 21, 2009

PopSci - If the idea of turning consumers into true cyborgs sounds creepy, don’t tell Intel researchers. Intel’s Pittsburgh lab aims to develop brain implants that can control all sorts of gadgets directly via brain waves by 2020.

The scientists anticipate that consumers will adapt quickly to the idea, and indeed crave the freedom of not requiring a keyboard, mouse, or remote control for surfing the Web or changing channels. They also predict that people will tire of multi-touch devices such as our precious iPhones, Android smart phones and even Microsoft’s wacky Surface Table.

Turning brain waves into real-world tech action still requires some heavy decoding of brain activity. The Intel team has already made use of fMRI brain scans to match brain patterns with similar thoughts across many test subjects.

Plenty of other researchers have also tinkered in this area. Toyota recently demoed a wheelchair controlled with brainwaves, and University of Utah researchers have created a wireless brain transmitter that allows monkeys to control robotic arms.

There are still more implications to creating a seamless brain interface, besides having more cyborgs running around. If scientists can translate brain waves into specific actions, there’s no reason they could not create a virtual world with a full spectrum of activity tied to those brain waves. That’s right — we’re seeing Matrix creep.

Brain Scanner Could Herald a New Big Brother Era Envisaged in Minority Report

November 1, 2009

The Sunday Times - Scientists have discovered how to “read” minds by scanning brain activity and reproducing images of what people are seeing — or even remembering.

Researchers have been able to convert into crude video footage the brain activity stimulated by what a person is watching or recalling.

The breakthrough raises the prospect of significant benefits, such as allowing people who are unable to move or speak to communicate via visualisation of their thoughts; recording people’s dreams; or allowing police to identify criminals by recalling the memories of a witness.

However, it could also herald a new Big Brother era, similar to that envisaged in the Hollywood film Minority Report, in which an individual’s private thoughts can be readily accessed by the authorities.

Earlier this year, Jack Gallant and Thomas Naselaris, two neurologists from the University of California, Berkeley, managed to 'decode' static images seen by the person from activity in the brain's visual cortex. Last week Gallant and Shinji Nishimoto - another neurologist - went one step further by revealing that it is possible to decode signals generated in the brain by moving scenes.

In an experiment which has yet to be peer reviewed, Gallant and Nishimoto, using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology, scanned the brains of two patients as they watched videos.

A computer programme was used to search for links between the configuration of shapes, colours and movements in the videos, and patterns of activity in the patients’ visual cortex.

It was later fed more than 200 days’ worth of YouTube internet clips and asked to predict which areas of the brain the clips would stimulate if people were watching them.

Finally, the software was used to monitor the two patients’ brains as they watched a new film and to reproduce what they were seeing based on their neural activity alone.

Remarkably, the computer programme was able to display continuous footage of the films they were watching — albeit with blurred images.

In one scene which featured the actor Steve Martin wearing a white shirt, the software recreated his rough shape and white torso but missed other details, such as his facial features.

Another scene, showing a plane flying towards the camera against a city skyline, was less successfully reproduced. The computer recreated the image of the skyline but omitted the plane altogether.

“Some scenes decode better than others,” said Gallant. “We can decode talking heads really well. But a camera panning quickly across a scene confuses the algorithm.

“You can use a device like this to do some pretty cool things. At the moment when you see something and want to describe it to someone you have to use words or draw it and it doesn’t work very well.

“You could use this technology to transmit the image to someone. It might be useful for artists or to allow you to recover an eyewitness’s memory of a crime.”

Such technology may not be confined to the here and now. Scientists at University College London have conducted separate tests that detect, with an accuracy of about 50%, memories recalled by patients.

The discoveries come amid a flurry of developments in the field of brain science. Researchers have also used scanning technology to measure academic ability, detect early signs of Alzheimer’s and other degenerative conditions, and even predict the decision a person is about to make before they are conscious of making it.

Such developments may have controversial ramifications. In Britain, fMRI scanning technology has been sold to multinational companies, such as Unilever and McDonald’s, enabling them to see how we subconsciously react to brands.

In America, security agencies are researching the use of brain scanners for interrogating prisoners, and Lockheed Martin, the US defence contractor, is reported to have studied the possibility of scanning brains at a distance.

This would allow an individual’s thoughts and anxieties to be examined without their knowledge in sensitive locations such as airports.

Russell Foster, a neuroscientist at Oxford University, said rapid advances in the field were throwing up ethical dilemmas.

“It’s absolutely critical for scientists to inform the public about what we are doing so they can engage in the debate about how this knowledge should be used,” he said.

“It’s the age-old problem: knowledge is power and it can be used for both good and evil.”

Chicago’s Extensive Big Brother Surveillance System Raises Concerns About Possible Privacy Abuses

November 17, 2009

CBS - A giant web of video-surveillance cameras has spread across Chicago, aiding police in the pursuit of criminals but raising fears that the City of Big Shoulders is becoming the City of Big Brother.

While many police forces are boosting video monitoring, video-surveillance experts believe Chicago has gone further than any other U.S. city in merging computer and video technology to police the streets. The networked system is also unusual because of its scope and the integration of nonpolice cameras.

The city links the 1,500 cameras that police have placed in trouble spots with thousands more—police won’t say how many—that have been installed by other government agencies and the private sector in city buses, businesses, public schools, subway stations, housing projects and elsewhere. Even home owners can contribute camera feeds.

Rajiv Shah, an adjunct professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago who has studied the issue, estimates that 15,000 cameras have been connected in what the city calls Operation Virtual Shield, its fiber-optic video-network loop.

The system is too vast for real-time monitoring by police staffers. But each time a citizen makes an emergency call, which happens about 15,000 times a day, the system identifies the caller’s location and instantly puts a video feed from the nearest camera up on a screen to the left of the emergency operator’s main terminal. The feeds, including ones that weren’t viewed in real time, can be accessed for possible evidence in criminal cases.

A police spokesman said the system has “aided in thousands of arrests.” Video cameras caught 16-year-old Michael Pace, an alleged Chicago gang member, opening fire with a 40-caliber handgun on a city bus in a 2007 incident that claimed the life of 16-year-old honor student Blair Holt and wounded four others. In July, Mr. Pace pleaded guilty to murder on the eve of his trial, and the video was released during a hearing where a judge sentenced him to 100 years in jail.

The city is “allowing first responders access to real-time visual data,” said Ray Orozco, executive director of the city department responsible for the system. “Chicago understands the importance of networking instead of just hanging cameras,” said Roger Rehayem of International Business Machines Corp., which designed the system. Former U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff has called Chicago’s use of cameras “a model for the country.”

That worries some Chicagoans. Charles Yohnka, director of communications and public policy for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said:

“With the unbelievably rapid expansion of these systems, we’d like to know when enough is enough.”

The ACLU has been calling, so far without success, for the city to disclose how many cameras are in the system and what the capabilities of the system are, as well as who is allowed to look at the video feeds and under what circumstances.

Mr. Yohnka said that he isn’t aware of any abuses in the use of the video but that “political surveillance” of opponents could be tempting for office holders. In other cities there have been reports of male police staffers ogling and tracking women for extensive periods though they aren’t doing anything suspicious.

Mr. Orozco dismisses worries about privacy abuse. The department logs in all users and can monitor what they are doing, he said, assuring accountability. He also said access to the command center is tightly controlled. He declined to discuss specifics of who is allowed inside the center.

Chicago said that it only networks video cameras in public areas where people have an expectation they may be seen. None of the cameras record speech, because that would violate wire-tapping laws, although some can detect the sound of gunfire and breaking glass.

“People want these cameras in their neighborhoods,” said Mayor Richard Daley in a prepared statement. “We can’t afford to have a police officer on every corner, but cameras are the next best thing.”

While video-surveillance cameras are ubiquitous in most of the developed world, they’re primarily used to collect evidence that can be examined after a crime has been committed.

The Chicago system is also designed to deal with emergencies as they happen. Besides turning on when people call 911, some are set to sound alerts at command centers if people enter closed areas after hours, and some also issue spoken warnings at the site.

At the Navy Pier amusement area, cameras monitor an inlet that only official boats are allowed to enter. When the system detects recreational boats in the area, a warning to move away is issued over a loudspeaker.

It’s difficult to tell how much Chicago’s system cuts crime. The city’s crime rates have declined steadily over the last 10 years, like those in many other cities.

Chicago police started installing highly visible cameras topped by flashing blue lights back in 2003. Many were placed at locations where residents had complained about drug-dealing, and the city later said that crime decreased up to 30% in areas with cameras. But some critics complained that the cameras just pushed drug dealers to nearby street corners.

Even if cameras don’t prevent crimes, “prosecution is much quicker,” said Fredrik Nilsson, general manager of Axis North America, a unit of a Swedish company that makes the digital cameras used in Chicago. “When people face recorded videos, they don’t go through court trials.”

Big Brother’s Smart Meter Invades Home Privacy

November 18, 2009

The Star - North America's electrical grid is one of the greatest technological achievements of the 20th century. However, at the time of its design, the main goal was to make sure the lights stayed on, with no serious thought to energy efficiency, environmental conservation, alternative energy sources, consumer-tailored choices, or cyber security. But times have changed, and today the grid offers a virtual window into your home – providing granular levels of information such as when you cook or shower, and for how long.

The information and communications technology revolution has changed our society in profound ways, and these new technologies are being used to make the current electrical grid "smarter," commonly referred to as the "smart grid." But this is not the future.

The deployment of smart meters in Ontario homes is already widespread, and the Ontario government has committed to installing this technology in all homes and small businesses by the end of 2010. President Barack Obama's infusion of $3.4 billion (U.S.) to build the smart grid is greatly accelerating the delivery of the program across the U.S.

Smart meters record and report electricity consumption on an hourly basis – even at the appliance level. Consumers can access their meter data and make individual choices about their energy use, benefitting by taking advantage of future rates.

While this technology is clearly beneficial in terms of valuable efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and reduce consumers' energy bills, it will also give rise to a new challenge – privacy protection.

Privacy is the smart grid's sleeper issue. Whenever technology is utilized that targets individual consumers, there is invariably a dramatic increase in the amount of personally identifiable information that is collected and stored, leading to very real concerns regarding privacy. This is why we need to bake privacy into the smart grid at the design stage – known as "privacy by design" – a concept developed to ensure the protection of privacy by making privacy the default in the design of new technologies and business practices.

We must take great care not to sacrifice consumer privacy amid an atmosphere of unbridled enthusiasm for electricity reform. But we need not forfeit one for the other in a zero-sum manner; we can adopt a positive-sum approach, where both interests may prevail.

Information proliferation, lax controls and insufficient oversight of this information could lead to unprecedented invasions of consumer privacy. Intimate details of individual hydro customers' habits, from when they eat, when they shower, to when they go to bed, plus such security issues as whether they have an alarm system engaged, could all be discerned by the data, automatically fed by appliances and other devices, to the companies providing electric power to our homes.

These concerns, however, are not meant to scare us away from the value of monitoring electrical usage data on the grid – giving consumers more control over their electricity usage and giving electricity providers the ability to manage demand requirements – what we need to embrace is the idea that the dissemination of personal information must be done in a privacy protective and transparent manner.

That is why – along with co-author Christopher Wolf – we are releasing a white paper today, SmartPrivacy for the Smart Grid: Embedding Privacy in the Design of Electricity Conservation, which not only emphasizes the necessity of building privacy into the smart grid, but also provides guidance as to what concrete steps can be taken.

For example, data minimization is key: only the minimal amount of personally identifiable information should be provided, based on the nature of the relevant service, such as the first three digits of a postal code, which may be sufficient for services that allow for comparison of neighbourhood averages and other features such as regional electrical usage.

In addition, when an electrical utility company is sharing data with a third-party service provider, a pseudonym, such as a unique ID number, may be utilized instead of a customer's name or some other piece of information that can identify the individual. Further, third-party service providers should enter into contractual agreements not to correlate consumer data with data obtained from other sources, without the consent of the consumer. These are only a few of the steps that may be taken to ensure privacy protection on the smart grid.

The time for action is now, before the smart grid becomes a fully established part of our infrastructure. We cannot allow privacy to become the Achilles heel of this new method of energy management. The information collected on the smart grid will form a large and complex library of personal information, the mishandling of which could be highly invasive of personal privacy. There will be major concerns if consumer-focused principles of transparency and control are not treated as essential design principles. Both public and private sector organizations responsible for the processing of customers' personal information on the smart grid must ensure that privacy is embedded into the design of the smart grid, from start to finish – end-to-end.

If we give consumers assurances that their privacy is protected, we can then ensure consumer confidence and trust, which will allow for the widespread acceptance of the smart grid, in turn contributing to the overall goal of using energy in more efficient and environmentally friendly ways. We cannot and need not sacrifice privacy for energy efficiency. We can have both privacy and a fully functioning smart grid. A positive sum (win-win) outcome for all – electrical utility providers, consumers, the environment and privacy – is there for the asking.

The paper discussed in this article can be viewed at http://www.ipc.on.ca/.