Increasingly there are indications
that the uses of wireless technologies have been
developed to target an individual’s biological
body, with specific focus upon the neuronal
functioning of the brain. In this paper I examine
how some of these uses have had detrimental
effects, and what this implies for both present
and upcoming developments for particular
wireless/sensor technologies. I consider whether
this is not shifting dangerously towards a
psycho–civilised society, where greater emphasis
is placed upon social control and pre–emptive
strategies.
Introduction
The rate of
technological innovation in some fields is
developing exponentially with new advances in
wireless sensor networks, ubiquitous and pervasive
computing, motes, nodes, grids, and media
platforms. Information flows are increasing not
only in their quantity and density, but also in
their immersive quality. The historical
developments of information communication systems
can be said to have traced a similar path to how
nation states have organised their global power
base and dominance. First, power over the land and
dominance in waging war on one’s neighbours
through ground battle, the domesticated horse and
the infantry soldier. Second, domination of the
seas and the strongest Navy gave advantage to
sea–faring Empires, such as Portugal, Spain, and
Britain. The end of naval dominance then gave rise
to the advent of the railroad and the dynamic
change in transport technology, both in routes and
in speed. The transcontinental scope of the
railroads finally gave out to air power, winning
the World Wars through dominance in the skies. And
now, finally, the ‘final frontier’ is space, for
‘the vast potential resource base of outer space
is presumably so enormous, effectively
inexhaustible, that any state that can control it
will ultimately dominate the earth’ [1].
Likewise,
modern communication technologies have moved from
the land (the telegraph); to the sea (wireless
radio; radar); back to land (cables; fibre
optics); and to the intermediate land/air stage
(masts/antenna); to the outer frontier of space
(satellites); and finally now even beyond these
frontiers towards a solar system Internet (Turner,
2007). Whoever controls these channels for
communication can, in some degree, to be said to
‘dominate the earth’. And the possible uses of
wireless communications for the dissemination,
targeting, and receiving of clandestine
‘communications’ is an active industry.
The aim of
this paper is to examine some of the examples and
instances where the use of wireless technologies
have been developed to target an individual’s
biological body, with specific focus upon the
neuronal functioning of the brain. I also show how
some of these uses have had detrimental effects,
and what this implies for both present and
upcoming developments in particular
wireless/sensor technologies. This paper shows
that an upcoming area of importance is
neurotechnology, a discipline that places brain
functioning and knowledge of the human brain as
primary. Technologies are now being researched and
trialled that seek to penetrate and, to a degree,
intervene in neural functioning. Whilst some have
termed this positively as a coming ‘neural
society’ (Lynch, 2004), I consider whether this is
not shifting dangerously towards a
psycho–civilised society, where greater emphasis
is placed upon social control and pre–emptive
strategies. I trace a timeline that follows
developments from a historical context to the
present; and finally to future scenarios and
implications. It may be that the social pursuit of
increasingly connective and immersive technologies
has the potential to open up a Pandora’s box of
problematics.
Opening Pandora’s
box
The background
to this narrative begins with the story of a true
Pandora’s box — a U.S. project titled Project
Pandora that was organized and administered by the
psychology division of the psychiatry research
section of Walter Reed Army Institute of Research
(WRAIR). This project was set–up to specifically
research programs on the health effects of
microwave exposure following the ‘Moscow Embassy’
incident. From 1953 to 1976, the Soviets directed
microwave radiation at the U.S. embassy in Moscow
from the roof of an adjacent building. Whilst this
clandestine microwave targeting was allegedly
known for some time by U.S. officials, the event
was not made public until 1976 when the U.S. State
Department finally accused the Soviet Union of
bombarding the U.S. embassy in Moscow with
microwave radiation for illicit purposes. It was
initially reported as a harmless procedure for
charging Soviet spy–bugs: ‘Soviet antennas, which
are beaming the waves in both to charge up the
batteries of their listening devices and to jam
embassy–based U.S. electronic monitoring of
Russian communications’ (Time, 1976a;
1976b). However, the State Department soon
indicated that, in addition to interference
mechanisms, the microwave radiation could have
serious adverse effects on the health of the
occupants of the embassy (O’Connor, 1993). This
was supported by Soviet data in which Soviet
non–ionising electromagnetic energy (NIEM)
‘research literature reported adverse health
effects in laboratory animals and in Soviet radar
workers at levels well below the 10
mW/cm2 U.S. ANSI safety
recommendations’ [2].
Despite this being below the U.S. recommended
levels the Soviet standards excluded military
personnel whilst the U.S. did not, according to
the National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements (NCRP), 1986 (O’Connor,
1993).
Soviet studies
in the area of electromagnetic microwave radiation
reported psychological symptoms in human subjects
that included lethargy, lack of concentration,
headaches, depression, and impotence [3].
O’Connor notes how the Soviet medical journals
termed these collective symptoms microwave
sickness whilst the U.S. literature referred to
the symptoms as neurasthenia (1993). Time
magazine reported in March 1976 that the State
Department launched:
a medical investigation of the
thousands of U.S. diplomats and their families
who served in Moscow since the early 1960s. In
the wake of the microwave disclosures, former
embassy employees and their families have
recalled suffering strange ailments during their
tenure in Moscow, ranging from eye tics and
headaches to heavy menstrual flows. Some point
out that former Ambassadors to Moscow Charles
Bohlen and Llewellyn Thompson both died of
cancer, within the last two years one other
Moscow diplomat died of cancer, and five women
who lived there have undergone cancer–related
mastectomies — although no medical authorities
attribute these deaths and illnesses to
radiation. (Time,
1976b)
U.S. officials and
military, long before the public exposure, were
aware and concerned about the consequences of
microwave bombardment of civilian and military
targets. In 1972 the U.S. Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) released an internal report (later
declassified through the Freedom Of Information
Act [FOIA] Program [4])
that had been previously prepared by the U.S. Army
Office of the Surgeon General Medical Intelligence
Office titled ‘Controlled Offensive Behaviour —
USSR’ (initially released in July 1972). The
report states that
This report summarizes
the information available on Soviet research on
human vulnerability as it relates to
incapacitating individuals or small groups. The
information contained in this study is a review
and evaluation of Soviet research in this field
of revolutionary methods of influencing human
behavior and is intended as an aid in the
development of countermeasures for the
protection of U.S. or allied personnel. Due to
the nature of the Soviet research in the area of
reorientation or incapacitation of human
behavior, this report emphasises the individual
as opposed to groups. (LaMothe,
1972)
It is
interesting to note that the Report authors
believed the Soviet research to be in the area of
‘reorientation’; suggesting that the U.S. were
worried over concerns that the Soviets may be
planning a mass zapping of U.S. citizens with the
hope of ‘brainwashing’ them into a newly
orientated ideological outlook. The 174–page
Report is extensive, with much material extended
upon various forms of beamed energies and wireless
strategies. On the opening section on
Electromagnetic Energy the report concludes
that
Super–high
frequency electromagnetic oscillations (SHF) may
have potential use as a technique for altering
human behavior. Soviet Union and other foreign
literature sources contain over 500 studies
devoted to the biological effect of SHF. Lethal
and non–lethal aspects have been shown to exist.
In certain non–lethal exposures, definite
behavioural changes have occurred. [5]
During this
time the U.S. establishment was not naïve to the
potential of conducting neurological
at–a–distance effects upon human
behaviour.
In the 1970s
José Manuel Rodríguez Delgado was a controversial
figure in neuroscience; a professor of physiology
at Yale University, he was an acclaimed
neuroscientist. In 1970 “the New York Times
Magazine hailed him in a cover story as the
impassioned prophet of a new ‘psychocivilized
society’ whose members would influence and alter
their own mental functions” [6]. Yet
two decades earlier, in 1952, Delgado co–authored
the first peer–reviewed paper describing long–term
implantation of electrodes in humans (Horgan,
2005). As an example of the achievement into
wireless–neurological devices Delgado’s most
famous experiment took place in 1963 at a
bull–breeding ranch in Cordoba, Spain. Delgado
implanted radio equipped electrodes, which he
termed ‘stimoceivers’, into the brains of several
‘fighting’ bulls and stood in a bullring with one
bull at a time and attempted to control the
actions of the bull by pressing buttons on a
handheld transmitter. In one instance Delgado was
able to stop a charging bull in its tracks only a
few feet away from him by the press of a button.
The New York Times published a front page
story on the event, “calling it ‘the most
spectacular demonstration ever performed of the
deliberate modification of animal behavior through
external control of the brain’” [7]. In
1969 Delgado described wireless brain–behaviour
modification and its implications in his book
Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a
Psychocivilized Society (1969). Delgado’s
research during this time was supported not only
by academic grants but also by the U.S. Office of
Naval Research. This research is now over forty
years old, and much has happened in the
intervening four decades.
Technologies
that can wirelessly transmit information from
and to the body is an area of research that has
attracted various interested parties post–World
War II. Such energy–information distribution and
targeting within the electromagnetic spectrum
can variously be used for medical, industrial,
military, and telecommunications purposes. I now
turn to examine some of the military–industrial
research and uses of wireless
technologies.
Beams,
firewalls and brain scanning: Inside the
military–industrial complex
Researcher
Igor Smirnov of the Russian Academy of Sciences is
by all accounts an odd person, referred to by a
Newsweek article as ‘A Subliminal Dr.
Strangelove’ (Elliott and Barry, 1994). Smirnov
was apparently contacted by the FBI during the
Davidian sect siege in Waco, Texas in 1993.
Experts from the FBI Counter–Terrorism Center met
with Smirnov in Arlington, Virginia to discuss
ways of affecting the behaviour of Davidian sect
leader David Koresh. Smirnov’s plan was to send
subliminal messages through the phone lines during
negotiations; and for targeting David Koresh the
plan was to use the voice of Charlton Heston to
subliminally play God (Elliott and Barry, 1994).
Smirnov’s strategies, whilst sounding eccentric,
are closely tied with military research into
behaviour modification via wireless transmissions.
Smirnov’s laboratory in Moscow is named the
Institute of Psycho–Correction and using
electroencephalograph scanning (EEG) he measures
brain waves which he then computes to create a map
of various human impulses–brain waves correlation.
This data can then be used for experimenting upon
affecting brain–body modification at–a–distance.
Asked in a 2004 interview whether it was possible
to defeat terrorism Smirnov replied
that
Only informational war is
capable of defeating terrorism completely. And
we possess this weapon. Peoples’ actions can in
fact be controlled by unnoticed acoustic
influence. Look — it’s easy. All I have to do is
record my voice, apply special coding, which
converts my voice to mere noise and afterwards,
all we have to do is record some music on top of
that. The words are indistinguishable to your
conscious; however, your unconscious can hear
them clearly. If we were to play this music over
and over again on the radio for instance, people
will soon start developing paranoia. This is the
simplest weapon. (Pravda,
2004)
Smirnov’s
capabilities were demonstrated to U.S. observers
as far back as 1991 when infra–sound — a very
low frequency transmission — was shown to be
able to transmit acoustic messages via bone
conduction [8].
Military
strategist Timothy Thomas examined these
implications in his paper ‘The Mind Has No
Firewall’ in which he states that ‘We are on the
threshold of an era in which these data processors
of the human body may be manipulated or
debilitated. Examples of unplanned attacks on the
body’s data–processing capability are
well–documented’ [9]. He
references a Russian military article on the same
subject which declared that “‘humanity stands on
the brink of a psychotronic war’ with the mind and
body as the focus” [10].
The context here is that the human body is a
complex communication system that is constantly
receiving signal inputs, both external and
internal. Thus,
The “data” the body
receives from external sources — such as
electromagnetic, vortex, or acoustic energy
waves — or creates through its own electrical or
chemical stimuli can be manipulated or changed
just as the data (information) in any hardware
system can be altered. [11]
Military
thinking in this area is beginning to shift
towards a systemic viewpoint which considers the
human as an open system rather than as a closed,
bounded system.
In this new
systemic approach the human communicates with, and
can be communicated by, the environment through
information flows and communications media. By
this understanding military thinking has begun to
openly declare that ‘one’s physical environment,
whether through electromagnetic, gravitational,
acoustic, or other effects, can cause a change in
the psycho–physiological condition of an organism’
[12].
Simpson’s investigations into the sociological
discipline of communication research, which
crystallised in the U.S. in the early 1950s, shows
that it was financed and mentored by governmental
psychological warfare programs:
Government psychological
warfare programs helped shape mass communication
research into a distinct scholarly field,
strongly influencing the choice of leaders and
determining which of the competing scientific
paradigms of communication would be funded,
elaborated, and encouraged to prosper. [13]
Dominance over
the airwaves, and the capability to exert coercive
control over information communications is a vital
area in military planning. Documented and
declassified evidence shows that what may have
begun as a program in standardized propaganda and
psychological warfare has now developed into
research on wireless information targeting and
‘psychocivilized’ control practices. To this
effect the term ‘psycho–terrorism’ was coined by
Anisimov of the Moscow Anti–Psychotronic Center
and Anisimov admits to testing such devices as are
said to ‘take away a part of the information which
is stored in a man’s brain. It is sent to a
computer, which reworks it to the level needed for
those who need to control the man, and the
modified information is then reinserted into the
brain’ [14]. In
such cases there is concern that the ‘mind has no
firewall’ and may be vulnerable to accidental,
unwanted and/or rogue interventions. Thomas’s
paper concludes by stating that ‘In reality, the
game is about protecting or affecting signals,
waves, and impulses that can influence the
data–processing elements of systems, computers, or
people. We are potentially the biggest victims of
information warfare, because we have neglected to
protect ourselves’ [15].
The Air Force
Research Laboratory (AFRL) brief on this subject
titled ‘Controlled Effects’ also noted the power
to use the electromagnetic spectrum for wirelessly
interfering into human subjects’ thinking and
behaviour. By this stage the strategy had been
dubbed ‘non–lethal weapons’, as explored more
fully in the work of non–lethal defence at Los
Alamos by retired Army Colonel John B. Alexander
(Alexander, 1999). The AFRL report states
that
the panel investigated
the potential for using electromagnetic and
other nonconventional force capabilities to
achieve strategic, tactical, lethal, and
nonlethal force projection ... . For the
Controlled Personnel Effects capability, the
S&T panel explored the potential for
targeting individuals with nonlethal force, from
a militarily useful range, to make selected
adversaries think or act according to our needs.
(AFRL,
2004)
These theories
and concerns to affect command and control
at–a–distance were echoing the conclusions from a
much larger and significant military report that
was published and made available in 1996 titled
‘New World Vistas’. ‘New World Vistas’ was a major
undertaking by the U.S. Air Force Scientific
Advisory Board to examine future developments in
weapons, and totalled 14 volumes of studies. The
fifteenth ‘ancillary’ volume concluded by putting
forth some potential developments for a possible
future man–machine integration. In a section
dealing with ‘Biological Process Control’ the
Report states that
One can envision the
development of electromagnetic energy sources,
the output of which can be pulsed, shaped, and
focused, that can couple with the human body in
a fashion that will allow one to prevent
voluntary muscular movements, control emotions
(and thus actions), produce sleep, transmit
suggestions, interfere with both short–term and
long–term memory, produce an experience set, and
delete an experience set. (USAF Scientific
Advisory Board,
1995)
In
military–speak the term ‘experience set’ implies a
person’s stored memories and life experiences;
thus suggesting that such a technology could
delete and then replace a person’s memories, or
‘experience set’. Research and development along
these lines have so far materialised a technology
dubbed by the military as active denial
system (ADS).
The Active
Denial System is a non–lethal, directed–energy
weapon system recently unveiled by the U.S.
military and which directs, or pulses,
electromagnetic radiation at a frequency of 95
Gigahertz (GHz) towards the target subjects. The
radiated beam of millimetre–wave energy can travel
over a range of 500m and heats the water molecules
in the epidermis skin up to 54C (130F) (BBC,
2007). The result can be an intensely painful
burning sensation. Such a system was designed for
such uses as crowd control. A fully operational
and mounted system was demonstrated to journalists
by U.S. military personnel at Moody Air Force
Base, Georgia, on 24 January 2007. A Reuters
correspondent who volunteered to be shot with the
beam during the demonstration described it as
‘similar to a blast from a very hot oven — too
painful to bear without diving for cover’ (BBC,
2007). The diagram below illustrates the
active denial system (ADS).
These
technologies show uses of wireless–to–body
communication and directed energy weapons for
possible military attack or defence purposes.
Another area for research and development is in
both military and industrial uses for operator
enhancement.
Real–time
brain scanning of pilots and similar operators
under stress is an increasingly active area for
research involving military and industrial
partnerships. Since the early 1990s research has
been made into detecting and interpreting brain
and body signals, especially brainwaves, for
computerized monitoring of pilots. This
information can be used to measure pilot fatigue
and to compensate for this with increased
automation of the airplane in order to avoid pilot
error. Initially this was conducted by measuring
the pilot’s brain waves through unobtrusive sponge
sensors in the flight helmet:
By measuring the
amplitude of the brain waves generated, fatigue
of the pilot can be recognized. By increasing
the brightness of the instrumental panel lights,
the amplitude of the brain waves can be returned
to their normal height, thus compensating for
fatigue. To get the “evoked response” from the
pilot’s brain, the instrument panel lights could
be made to flash so fast that the pilot would
not be aware of the flashes. [16]
Researchers
have said that the brain can ‘register’ up to 145
flickers per second, which can then be followed up
by beaming a near infrared light into the
subject’s eye, causing a spot of light to be
reflected off the cornea in order to track eye
movement and measure the degree of pilot
concentration. This type of research, which is
still ongoing, has been referred to by at least
one current R&D laboratory as ‘Real–Time EEG
for Operator State’ [17].
Brain monitoring of people in situations where
fatigue could be fatal now involves real–time
analysis and observation of motorists. A
technology now being considered is one called
‘Sensation’.
This technology is
non–intrusive and includes a small camera that
monitors a driver’s eye movements, looking out
for repeated blinking, which can be evidence of
tiredness. To compliment this the driver’s seat
is also lined with a material which monitors
changes in body temperature. The steering wheel
too checks for handling pressure. Finally, other
sensors, if needed, can be fitted to the finger
and ear to send out measurements of pressure to
indicate fatigue and levels of concentration.
The driver is now wirelessly monitored, both by
camera and wireless sensors, to create a more
extensive immersive driving experience
(Millward,
2006).
This research
and these innovations indicate that a shift is
occurring in how the human is enmeshed into an
increasingly information saturated environment.
These developments recognise that the human body
is itself becoming the most capable
data–processing subject. The rest of this paper
explores how these trends to envelop the
body–brain into an environment of information
flows are being developed into social and
commercial applications.
Emotional gaming and dangerous
intentions: Inside the social–civil
sphere
The use of EEG
brain scanning has now moved into the gaming
industry with up–to–date developments in sensory
gaming. Recently Emotiv publicly released
information on their upcoming ‘Project Epoc’, a
developmental technology that interprets
electrical signals emitted by the brain and
converts them into actions on a computer. In this
way the user/gamer is able to direct actions via
their thoughts in the online environment. Below
are pictures of two prototypes which the company
expects to market some time in 2008 [18].
The company
Web site claims that they provide the ultimate
human–computer interface and that they are
pioneers in brain computer interface technology.
In their press release of 7 March 2007 they state
that
Emotiv has created the
first brain computer interface technology that
can detect and process both human conscious
thoughts and non–conscious emotions. The
technology, which comprises a headset and a
suite of applications, allows computers to
differentiate between particular thoughts such
as lifting an object or rotating it; detect and
mimic a user’s expressions, such as a smile or
wink; and respond to emotions such as excitement
or calmness. [19]
In the same
press release the company foresees in the future
that ‘Emotiv’s technology has the potential to be
applied to numerous industries, including
interactive television, accessibility design,
market research, medicine, and security’ [20]. A
similar corporate gaming company, NeuroSky, claims
to have gone even further than Emotiv and reduced
‘the brainwave pickup to the minimum specification
imaginable — a single electrode. Existing versions
of this electrode are small enough to fit into a
mobile phone and ... they will soon be shrunk to
the size of a thumbnail, enabling people to wear
them without noticing’ (Economist, 2007).
The company Web site claims its ‘bio sensor and
signal processing system for the consumer market’
will unlock ‘worlds of new applications such as
consumer electronics, health, wellness, education
and training’ [21].
Clearly there
is a potential commercial market envisioned here
for wireless–brain technology that goes beyond the
sphere of gaming. Somewhat on the extreme to this,
wireless acoustic transmissions have now been
developed to ‘stop’ people from over–gaming; in
other words, as a treatment for gaming addiction.
In highly technologised Asian countries such as
South Korea teenagers are spending an unhealthy
amount of time at their computers in gaming
environments. There have even been instances where
gamers have died after extensively long sessions
in front of a computer without a break, such as in
MMORPGs (Massive Multiplayer Online Role–Playing
Game). South Korean company Xtive, established in
2005, spent a year of research to develop a system
of acoustic sound waves that act as subliminal
transmissions during the gaming
experience:
We incorporated messages
into an acoustic sound wave telling gamers to
stop playing. The messages are told 10,000 to
20,000 times per second ... . Game users can’t
recognize the sounds. But their subconscious is
aware of them and the chances are high they will
quit playing ... . Game companies can install a
system, which delivers the inaudible sounds
after it recognizes a young user has kept
playing after a preset period of time. (Tae–gyu,
2007)
This
emphasises that research into techno–information
flows are increasingly being developed that
wirelessly interact with a person as a biological
construct, utilising the already present
bio–neural functioning. And this is a trend that
is attracting more corporate players wishing to
enter the field.
Gaming giant
Sony Corporation has submitted and been granted a
patent on a device for transmitting sensory data
directly into the human brain. Sony’s patent
describes the device as firing “pulses of
ultrasound at the head to modify firing patterns
in targeted parts of the brain, creating ‘sensory
experiences’ ranging from moving images to tastes
and sounds” (Hogan and Fox, 2005). This is based
upon a technique known as transcranial magnetic
stimulation that activates the nerves by using
rapidly changing magnetic fields to induce
currents in brain tissue. The patent also claims
that this technology could give blind or deaf
people the chance to see or hear. Niels Birbaumer,
a neuroscientist at the University of Tübingen in
Germany who has himself developed similar devices,
examined the Sony patent and commented that ‘I
looked at it and found it plausible’ (Hogan and
Fox, 2005). Since Sony’s initial patent
application in 2000 (granted in March 2003), a
series of further patents have been applied for.
However, this line of research is not totally
new.
For several
years there has been research conducted into
decoding thoughts from the brain for sending
signals to an external device such as manipulating
cursors on a screen, which has been developed for
disabled people, as in the case of Matthew Nagle
(Pollack, 2006). In recent years several other
companies have emerged claiming to offer
brain–computer wireless interaction for either
gaming purposes or for various health impairment
benefits. One example is S.M.A.R.T. BrainGames, a
company based in California that offers EEG caps
designed to treat people with attention deficit
and hyperactivity disorder. The company claims to
offer superior neurofeedback technology at what it
calls ‘affordable prices’ [22].
The body–brain is increasingly shifting towards
becoming a biologically–enhanced data processor
for wireless reception and transmission. Computer
software giant Microsoft is aware of this and
already ahead of the game.
In 2004
Microsoft was awarded U.S. Patent 6,754,472,
titled ‘Method and apparatus for transmitting
power and data using the human body’ [23]. In
this patent Microsoft is granted exclusive rights
to a technology that uses the electrical capacity
of the human body to act as a computer network
(Adam, 2004). Microsoft envisages ‘using the human
skin’s conductive properties to link a host of
electronic devices around the body, from pagers
and personal data assistants (PDA) to mobile
phones and microphones, although the company is
uncharacteristically coy about exactly what it may
have in mind’ (Adam, 2004). This supports what
Bill Gates himself has said about the computer
finally disappearing into the environment and the
world around us (Gibson, 2005). This may be the
ultimate wireless network, using the complete skin
of the body, from fingers to toes, receiving and
transmitting flows of information. The patent also
proposes that an area of skin could even act as a
keypad making a person capable of typing by
tapping on their arm (Adam, 2004).
This is a
powerful example of how technologies and
technological thinking is shifting away from
external hardware devices towards using the
natural bio-properties of the human body for
integration into a global informational
environment. As way of some examples, here are
just two from many of the patents filed that claim
to develop wireless transmission technologies:
patents 4,395,600 and 5,507,291. Patent No.
4,395,600 is titled ‘Auditory subliminal message
system and method’ and is geared towards
subliminal messaging to influence consumer
shoppers:
Ambient audio signals
from the customer shopping area within a store
are sensed and fed to a signal processing
circuit that produces a control signal which
varies with variations in the amplitude of the
sensed audio signals. A control circuit adjusts
the amplitude of an auditory subliminal
anti–shoplifting message to increase with
increasing amplitudes of sensed audio signals
and decrease with decreasing amplitudes of
sensed audio signals. This amplitude controlled
subliminal message may be mixed with background
music and transmitted to the shopping area.
[24]
In a similar
manner for affecting an individual’s mental state
is patent no. 5,507,291 — ‘Method and an
associated apparatus for remotely determining
information as to person’s emotional state’ —
which comes very close to what has been discussed
on military uses of information
warfare:
In a method for remotely
determining information relating to a person’s
emotional state, a waveform energy having a
predetermined frequency and a predetermined
intensity is generated and wirelessly
transmitted towards a remotely located subject.
Waveform energy emitted from the subject is
detected and automatically analyzed to derive
information relating to the individual’s
emotional state. [25]
In this
scenario information flows are two-way with the
body-brain emitting as well as receiving. Yet with
the human body–brain becoming a site for data
transfer and reception, there are concerns that it
is increasingly becoming a target for various
corporate interests. And not only corporate
interests are involved in these developments,
however, for there are also recent innovative
technologies in this area that offer serious
implications for social privacy and liberty at a
state level.
At first the
idea sounds like nothing more than science
fiction. Indeed, it even appeared as a central
feature in the film ‘Minority Report’. This is the
notion of pre–cognition: to be able to know a
person’s actions before those actions are
committed. Yet now a team of neuroscientists have
developed a technique that can scan a brain and
learn from the patterns of neuronal activity what
a person is thinking or intending to do. This
research is the culmination of recent studies
where brain imaging has been used to identify
particular brain patterns pertaining to such
behaviour as violence, lying, and racial prejudice
(Sample, 2007). To achieve this the team ‘used
high–resolution brain scans to identify patterns
of activity before translating them into
meaningful thoughts, revealing what a person
planned to do in the near future’ (Sample, 2007).
This is the first acknowledged instance of having
the technical capacity to judge whether people
have the intention to commit a criminal
act regardless of actual hard physical evidence of
the crime. According to Prof Haynes: ‘We see the
danger that this might become compulsory one day,
but we have to be aware that if we prohibit it, we
are also denying people who aren’t going to commit
any crime the possibility of proving their
innocence’ (Sample, 2007). Since this technology
is so new there are no current ethical or moral
debates on this issue and the implications for its
civil use are worrying. If developed these
‘techniques may eventually have wide–ranging
implications for everything from criminal
interrogations to airline security checks. And
that alarms some ethicists who fear the technology
could one day be abused by authorities, marketers
or employers’ (Cheng, 2007).
A hypothetical
situation in the future might place these scanning
devices within regular x–ray scanning machines at
airports. On passing through to the passenger
lounge all travellers will be scanned not only for
potentially dangerous physical objects but also
for dangerous intentions. Yet who has not
had a ‘dangerous intention’? Or rather, to quote a
more familiar phrase: ‘He who is without sin among
you, let him be the first to throw a stone’
[26]. In
this manner all travellers will have to safeguard
their thoughts at all times; who is to know
whether such scanning devices are embedded into
the walls of the airport lounge and corridors? Or
in the toilets; on board the airplane? This
uncertain and somewhat dystopian scenario is one
that could shift technologised states into
psycho–civilised societies where thoughts and
intentions become part of terrorist discourse.
This could be seen as an extreme case of
convergence between the social compromises
required to facilitate efficient physical–digital
infrastructures and the need for securitised
mobilities (Wood and Graham, 2006). It also
resembles the extremity of constructing an
all–inclusive technological web of complex
information flows that bypasses traditional forms
of interface.
This sees a
shift away from earlier prototypes of the
hardware–heavy cyborg, such as the early ‘wearcam’
work of Steve Mann [27],
towards people actively engaging with their
informational environments both in terms of
security and surveillance. In some ways these
developments have contributed to a rise in acts of
self–surveillance, or
sousveillance.
(In)Securities, self–sensoring
and sousveillance: Inside the social
panopticon
Fears over
security and safety have reached new levels in the
opening decade of the twenty–first century. It is,
in all respects, a post–millennium state of
insecurity. The older and more familiar paradigms
of warfare and security were based upon binaries
(e.g., Democracy vs. Communism; friend
vs. foe). To some degree this binary distinction
is still maintained and played out in media and
cultural discourse as Freedom vs. Anti–Freedom, or
West vs. Islam. Yet upon deeper scrutiny this
manifests as an asymmetrical arrangement:
order/authority vs. guerrilla non–compliance. A
terror suspect can therefore no longer be easily
identified as ‘the enemy’ which requires that all
civilians be categorised in a state of ‘potential
terrorist’. This is especially so since the notion
of ‘home–grown terrorist’ is playing out the role
of insurgency and resistance from within. This
subtle shift in categorisation has seen a parallel
move in the increase of the militarization of the
civil sphere. By this I argue that civil space is
increasingly becoming a ‘censor/sensored zone’
where security issues — surveillance, tracking,
identification — are played out.
This zone,
which mobile bodies pass through and negotiate, is
characterised by a pervasive field of information,
code, and signifiers that increasingly constructs
the ‘social’. Such a coded environment has the
potential to be extremely intrusive and goes
beyond the normal ken of so–called civil
liberties. Under the sway of a post September 11
scenario and amid an orchestrated ‘war on terror’
many of these intrusive technologies are in rapid
development, so much so that the U.K. Government’s
Information Commissioner himself states that we
live in a surveillance society (Information
Commissioner, 2006) [28].
These systems of tracking and tracing surveillance
involve step changes that are taking place
gradually in many industrialised societies,
especially in the U.S. and the U.K. [29].
Developments
in sensor technologies and ubiquitous computing
often focus on the interfaces between person and
environment such that interconnectivity is likely
to become more pervasive, intrusive, and
‘everywhere’. In a seminal essay from 1996
computer engineers Mark Weiser and John Seely
Brown coined the term ‘ubiquitous computing’ and
envisioned the ‘social impact of imbedded
computers may be analogous to ... electricity,
which surges invisibly through the walls of every
home, office, and car’ (Weiser and Brown, 1996).
True to form, within a decade from this
pronouncement computing interfaces developed from
fixed locations of access to increased wireless
connectivity. And it is predicted to become ever
more ubiquitous in a manner that will dissolve
connectivity into embedded environments
(Greenfield, 2006). Greenfield considers this to
be, in one form or another, an inevitability, and
refers to this ubiquitous computing (ubicomp)
paradigm as ‘everyware’: “Everyware is information
processing embedded in the objects and surfaces of
everyday life ... the extension of
information–sensing, –processing, and –networking
capabilities to entire classes of things we‘ve
never before thought of as ‘technology’” [30].
This in turn is likely to trigger the ‘always–on’
surveillance of people in both public life and in
private affairs. This inevitably blurs the
boundaries between what is external and what is
internal, and leads to forms of surveillance that
turn inwards and emanates from the ‘self’ — an
idea somewhat akin to that of
sousveillance.
Sousveillance
was coined by Mann (1998) who describes it as form
of ‘reflectionism’ or as a ‘watchful vigilance
from underneath’, which is a form of inverse
surveillance. Yet it more than inverses the
notion; it embellishes it with a self–reflective
responsibility. For Mann, reflectionism “holds up
the mirror and asks the question: ‘Do you like
what you see?’” (Mann, et al., 2003).
Also, in this form, it requires that surveillance
is enacted as a form of self–control, as
self–maintenance. It is the discipline of being
inwardly secure; firstly vigilant towards the
self; secondly towards other people/selves. This
form of discipline seems to suggest
