Brain Archive

do you wont to save the world ?
posted on 03/03/2002 12:11 AM by rotshild@agri.huji.ac.il

Dear Mr. Raymond Kurzweil

The subject: do you wont to save the world.

I had red abut you lately and has you do, I fill concern about the duality in human nature (the good and the bad). Has you had mention the thecnology advances only enlarge the risk to the unman society.
To be sort, I believe you have the tolls and the capability to save the world. That is to suppress the bed part of the human nature and to strength the good.
in practice, IM speaking on developing a system (electronic devices) that will measure the moral credibility of people in a way that it will be possible to know if a person is bad (murder, tiff, rapist…) or good. The deferent religious and the law had been established by the humen society in order to strength it morality yet their success is limited.
How these systems will work?
It will be based on the will of pepele to join to the “ honesty club” and for this they will connect themselves to a lie detectors saported wiet an appropriate computer program and will have to reply on some question about the bad tinges thy maid in life. The result of the test will be numbering the moral credibility of the person and saving it in handy personal devices that will be able to communicate with others similar devices carried by others people who are members of the honesty club.
It may be seen complicated, yet it will be like looking in a hand watch any time we meet a new person. Ofcorse the system will have to be carefully protected and to be periodically update.
The benefit that honest people will gain from it is cleir and I believe that most human society will eventually use the system.
I hop that you will adapt the idee presented her. I don’t wont any personal benefit for myself. I only wont to see it going on.
If you decide to go on with it, pay attention it won’t be used by the bad people as a system to control the good ones.

Best regards
Nathan Rothschild
Israel

Re: do you wont to save the world ?
posted on 03/04/2002 4:38 AM by americanfree44@hotmail.com

Nathan

The concept of honesty as you relate it to duality is a universal value that can deliver peace and happiness to the inhabitants of earth. The use of force, whether physical, or by fraud or coersion, is never be justified. The only justifiable use of force is in defence of the individual and his property.

I am unable to find a reference as all this technology is comming at me so fast, but I recall a company in Japan who has developed a voice stress analyzer type device capable of detecting a lie with an accuracy of 80%. It should be on the market within a few years. Now lets say we combine this kind of technology to the vision that Ray Kurzweil shares with us. We will have ubiquitous very high bandwidth connections to the Internet at all times. The minuscule electronics powering these developments will be invisibly embedded in our glasses and clothing. You will know if an individual is being honest or trying to defraud you, and can choose whether or not you want to do business with that individual. Those invididuals who have evil intentions will be ostracized from society.

The war of two worlds is on. It is Earth’s last war between good and evil. It is the last war because each side now has the power to eliminate the other: Evil has the power to kill the good with chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. Good has the power to vanish the evil with new technology.

I think the Honesty Club is a great concept!

Re: do you wont to save the world ?
posted on 03/21/2002 9:15 PM by rotshild@agri.huji.ac.il

Dear Mr. Raymond Kurzweil

Tank you for replying on my lather, yet I’m afraid I was misunderstood.
The concept of the honesty club is not based on hunting the bad people (murders, tiffs, terrorist).
It is based on voluntarily joining of people to the honesty club. It is clear that good and bad exist in whole of us, yet the concept of the honesty club will support the good part in us, and eventually will eliminate the badness and the opportunism from the society.
In order to join the honesty club, people well have to passe periodically a test in the “confession machine” and to talk honestly on the bad and the good tings thy did and to get from the confession machine their scoring of morality in their moral credit card.
Since joining the club will be mad voluntarily, it won’t stand in contrast to any law of justice and freedom.
Today the technology of building a reliable confession machine (lie detectors) is being available and reliable since it is based on sensing the brain, (reference for the technology are included.) And therefor people won’t be able to cheat the “confession machine”. Until now science and technology had improved our health and economy, now its time to use the technology to improves the morality of the human society before it will be to late.

Best regards
Nathan Rothschild


Reference

Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging

AB The accurate detection of deception or lying is a challenge to
experts in many scientific disciplines. To investigate if
specific cerebral activation characterized feigned memory
impairment, six healthy male volunteers underwent functional
magnetic resonance imaging with a block-design paradigm while
they performed forced-choice memory tasks involving both
simulated malingering and under normal control conditions.
Malingering that demonstrated the existence and involvement of
a prefrontal-parietal-sub-cortical circuit with feigned memory
impairment produced distinct patterns of neural activation.
Because astute liars feign memory impairment successfully in
testing once they understand the design of the measure being
employed, our study represents an extremely significant
preliminary step towards the development of valid and sensitive
methods for the detection of deception.

Liu, et al. 2002. Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum. Brain Mapping. 15:157-164,. (C) Wiley-Liss, Inc.


Behavioural and functional anatomical correlates of deception in humans.

AB - Brain activity in humans telling lies has yet to be elucidated. We developed an objective approach to its investigation, utilizing a computer-based interrogation and fMRI. Interrogatory questions probed recent episodic memory in 30 volunteers studied outside and 10 volunteers studied inside the MR scanner. In a counter-balanced design subjects answered specified questions both truthfully and with lies. Lying was associated with longer response times (p < 0.001) and greater activity in bilateral ventrolateral prefrontal cortices (p < 0.05, corrected). These findings were replicated using an alternative protocol. Ventrolateral prefrontal cortex may be engaged in generating lies or withholding the truth.

Neuroreport 2001 Sep 17;12(13):2849-53.


Using brain MERMER testing to detect knowledge despite efforts to conceal.

This experiment examined the accuracy and reliability of the memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response (MERMER) technique for detecting information related to events subjects have experienced, despite subjects' efforts to conceal that knowledge. Information obtained through interviews was used to develop stimulus sets consisting of words and phrases presented to subjects visually by computer. Sets were composed of three types of stimuli: life experience-related (Probes), stimuli the subject was asked to memorize and respond to (Targets), and irrelevant information (Irrelevants). Each set of stimuli was tested on two individuals: (1) one individual who had participated in the event in question-and thus had the relevant information stored in his/her brain, and (2) one who had not. Six subjects were tested. Electrical brain responses to the stimuli were recorded non-invasively from the scalp and analyzed. MERMERs, (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic responses), of which the P300 is a sub- component, were used to determine whether the subject had the relevant information stored in his brain (information present) or not (information absent), thus indicating whether or not each subject had participated in the real-life event in question. Bootstrapping was used to analyze and compare the responses to the three types of stimuli. As predicted, MERMERs were elicited by Probe stimuli only in the subjects who had participated in the investigated event, by Target stimuli in all subjects, and in no case by Irrelevant stimuli. For each of the six subjects, brain MERMER testing correctly determined whether the subject had participated in and consequently knew about the event in question (information present) or had not participated (information absent). The statistical confidence for this determination was 99.9% in five cases and 90.0% in one case. The article concludes with a discussion of areas of future research and the potential for using this new technology as an investigative tool in criminal cases.

J Forensic Sci. 2001 Jan;46(1):135-43.

TI Differentiation of deception using pupillary responses as an
index of cognitive processing

AB The deception literature has predominantly focused on detection
of guilty individuals using electrodermal measures. Little
research has examined other psychophysiological measures or the
mechanisms underlying deception. Therefore, the present study
examined pupillary responses in a differentiation-of-deception
paradigm. Twenty-four undergraduate participants answered the
same questions twice, once truthfully and once deceptively,
while pupillary responses were recorded. Questions were based
on recently learned (episodic) information from scenarios or on
general (semantic) knowledge from long-term memory Task-evoked
pupil dilation was significantly greater when participants
confabulated responses than when they told the truth for both
episodic and semantic memory questions. Previous research has
demonstrated that pupil size increases with increased cognitive
processing load. The present study suggested that generating
deceptive recall was associated with increased pupil size and
required greater cognitive processing than truthful recall.

Psychophysiology. 2001 Mar;38(2):205-11.

Re: do you wont to save the world ?
posted on 03/21/2002 9:22 PM by rotshild@agri.huji.ac.il

Dear Mr. Raymond Kurzweil

Tank you for replying on my lather, yet I’m afraid I was misunderstood.
The concept of the honesty club is not based on hunting the bad people (murders, tiffs, terrorist).
It is based on voluntarily joining of people to the honesty club. It is clear that good and bad exist in whole of us, yet the concept of the honesty club will support the good part in us, and eventually will eliminate the badness and the opportunism from the society.
In order to join the honesty club, people well have to passe periodically a test in the “confession machine” and to talk honestly on the bad and the good tings thy did and to get from the confession machine their scoring of morality in their moral credit card.
Since joining the club will be mad voluntarily, it won’t stand in contrast to any law of justice and freedom.
Today the technology of building a reliable confession machine (lie detectors) is being available and reliable since it is based on sensing the brain, (reference for the technology are included.) And therefor people won’t be able to cheat the “confession machine”. Until now science and technology had improved our health and economy, now its time to use the technology to improves the morality of the human society before it will be to late.

Best regards
Nathan Rothschild


Reference

Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging

AB The accurate detection of deception or lying is a challenge to
experts in many scientific disciplines. To investigate if
specific cerebral activation characterized feigned memory
impairment, six healthy male volunteers underwent functional
magnetic resonance imaging with a block-design paradigm while
they performed forced-choice memory tasks involving both
simulated malingering and under normal control conditions.
Malingering that demonstrated the existence and involvement of
a prefrontal-parietal-sub-cortical circuit with feigned memory
impairment produced distinct patterns of neural activation.
Because astute liars feign memory impairment successfully in
testing once they understand the design of the measure being
employed, our study represents an extremely significant
preliminary step towards the development of valid and sensitive
methods for the detection of deception.

Liu, et al. 2002. Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum. Brain Mapping. 15:157-164,. (C) Wiley-Liss, Inc.


Behavioural and functional anatomical correlates of deception in humans.

AB - Brain activity in humans telling lies has yet to be elucidated. We developed an objective approach to its investigation, utilizing a computer-based interrogation and fMRI. Interrogatory questions probed recent episodic memory in 30 volunteers studied outside and 10 volunteers studied inside the MR scanner. In a counter-balanced design subjects answered specified questions both truthfully and with lies. Lying was associated with longer response times (p < 0.001) and greater activity in bilateral ventrolateral prefrontal cortices (p < 0.05, corrected). These findings were replicated using an alternative protocol. Ventrolateral prefrontal cortex may be engaged in generating lies or withholding the truth.

Neuroreport 2001 Sep 17;12(13):2849-53.


Using brain MERMER testing to detect knowledge despite efforts to conceal.

This experiment examined the accuracy and reliability of the memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response (MERMER) technique for detecting information related to events subjects have experienced, despite subjects' efforts to conceal that knowledge. Information obtained through interviews was used to develop stimulus sets consisting of words and phrases presented to subjects visually by computer. Sets were composed of three types of stimuli: life experience-related (Probes), stimuli the subject was asked to memorize and respond to (Targets), and irrelevant information (Irrelevants). Each set of stimuli was tested on two individuals: (1) one individual who had participated in the event in question-and thus had the relevant information stored in his/her brain, and (2) one who had not. Six subjects were tested. Electrical brain responses to the stimuli were recorded non-invasively from the scalp and analyzed. MERMERs, (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic responses), of which the P300 is a sub- component, were used to determine whether the subject had the relevant information stored in his brain (information present) or not (information absent), thus indicating whether or not each subject had participated in the real-life event in question. Bootstrapping was used to analyze and compare the responses to the three types of stimuli. As predicted, MERMERs were elicited by Probe stimuli only in the subjects who had participated in the investigated event, by Target stimuli in all subjects, and in no case by Irrelevant stimuli. For each of the six subjects, brain MERMER testing correctly determined whether the subject had participated in and consequently knew about the event in question (information present) or had not participated (information absent). The statistical confidence for this determination was 99.9% in five cases and 90.0% in one case. The article concludes with a discussion of areas of future research and the potential for using this new technology as an investigative tool in criminal cases.

J Forensic Sci. 2001 Jan;46(1):135-43.

TI Differentiation of deception using pupillary responses as an
index of cognitive processing

AB The deception literature has predominantly focused on detection
of guilty individuals using electrodermal measures. Little
research has examined other psychophysiological measures or the
mechanisms underlying deception. Therefore, the present study
examined pupillary responses in a differentiation-of-deception
paradigm. Twenty-four undergraduate participants answered the
same questions twice, once truthfully and once deceptively,
while pupillary responses were recorded. Questions were based
on recently learned (episodic) information from scenarios or on
general (semantic) knowledge from long-term memory Task-evoked
pupil dilation was significantly greater when participants
confabulated responses than when they told the truth for both
episodic and semantic memory questions. Previous research has
demonstrated that pupil size increases with increased cognitive
processing load. The present study suggested that generating
deceptive recall was associated with increased pupil size and
required greater cognitive processing than truthful recall.

Psychophysiology. 2001 Mar;38(2):205-11.