Tag

Ethics

Navigating Ethics and Privacy in an Augmented Reality Metaverse Era

Welcome to the mind-bending realm where the physical and digital worlds seamlessly merge: the augmented reality metaverse era. Picture this – you can effortlessly soar through virtual landscapes, engage with holographic objects, and connect with individuals from across the globe, all in an ethereal alternate dimension. As thrilling as it may be to witness such technological wonders unfold before our eyes, we cannot ignore the pressing ethical and privacy concerns that accompany this brave new world. In today’s thought-provoking blog post, we dive deep into understanding and navigating these intricate waters of ethics and privacy within the augmented reality metaverse era. Join us on this exhilarating journey as we uncover crucial questions, grapple with moral dilemmas, and explore possible safeguards to ensure a harmonious coexistence between advanced technology and individual rights. Let’s embark together on this eye-opening adventure that will challenge your perceptions of what is possible in our rapidly evolving technological landscape!

Introduction to Augmented Reality Metaverse:

The term “metaverse” has been gaining a lot of attention lately, especially with the rise of augmented reality (AR) technology. But what exactly is an AR metaverse? It refers to a collective virtual shared space that is created by blending the physical and digital worlds together. In simpler terms, it is a virtual world that exists alongside our real world.

The idea of a metaverse has been around for decades, first introduced by Neal Stephenson in his sci-fi novel “Snow Crash” published in 1992. However, recent advancements in AR technology have made the concept more tangible and closer to reality than ever before.

The key feature of an AR metaverse is its ability to enhance the physical world by overlaying digital information on top of it. This allows users to interact with and experience their surroundings in new and immersive ways. For example, using AR glasses or smartphone apps, one can see digital objects appear as if they were physically present in their environment. This could range from simple things like displaying directions or restaurant menus when walking down a street to more complex experiences such as playing games or attending virtual events with other users in real-time.

The potential uses for this technology are limitless, and it has already shown incredible promise in various industries such as education, gaming, healthcare, and retail. The widespread adoption of AR devices like smartphones and smart glasses has also made it easier for people to access the metaverse anytime and anywhere.

However, with these advancements come concerns about the impact on privacy, security, and the blurring of lines between the physical and digital worlds. There are also challenges to creating a seamless and truly immersive metaverse experience, such as technical limitations, design constraints, and the need for constant connectivity.

Despite these challenges, the concept of an AR metaverse holds immense potential for shaping our future interactions with technology. It has the power to transform how we learn, work, play, socialize and connect with our surroundings. As we continue to push the boundaries of AR technology, it is clear that the metaverse will be an important part of our augmented reality future.

Understanding the Ethics and Privacy Concerns in AR Metaverse

The rise of augmented reality (AR) technology has brought forth exciting new advancements in the digital world, with the metaverse being one of its most promising developments. The metaverse refers to a collective shared space created by the convergence of virtual and physical realities, where users can interact and engage with each other in real-time through their avatars. While this immersive digital universe holds great potential for enhancing our daily lives and experiences, it also raises significant ethical and privacy concerns that must be carefully navigated.

One of the main areas of concern is data privacy. As users enter into this immersive world using AR devices like smart glasses or headsets, they are essentially exposing themselves to vast amounts of personal data collection. This data includes information such as location, biometric measurements, browsing history, purchasing habits, and even emotional responses captured through facial recognition technology. With all this intimate information being collected and stored by tech companies who own these metaverses, there is a growing fear about potential misuse or exploitation of personal data.

Furthermore, the concept of privacy itself may be redefined in an AR metaverse era. In traditional online interactions on social media platforms or websites, users have some control over what content they share and how much they reveal about themselves. However, in a fully immersive environment where our physical presence is replicated by 3D avatars controlled by technology companies, we may not have full control over our personal information anymore.

Another aspect worth considering is the influence that corporations may exert within these metaverses . With the rise of virtual economies in the metaverse, there is a risk that companies can use their power and resources to manipulate user behavior and create unfair advantages for themselves. Virtual assets and currencies in the metaverse can hold real-world value, and as such, corporations could exploit this for financial gain.

Moreover, AR metaverses may also raise concerns about identity theft and deception. As avatars become more sophisticated and realistic, it becomes easier for individuals to hide their true identity or impersonate someone else within this digital world. This could lead to malicious activities such as cyberbullying, fraud, or even dishonest business transactions.

Lastly, there are ethical considerations surrounding the impact of an AR metaverse on our physical world. The immersive nature of these virtual environments may result in people spending more time engaging with technology rather than engaging with real-world experiences. This could have negative consequences on mental health, social interactions, and general well-being.

To address these ethics and privacy concerns in the AR metaverse, actions must be taken by both tech companies and policymakers. First and foremost, transparency around data collection and usage is crucial. Users should be informed about what personal data is being collected from them while they are engaging in these virtual experiences. Additionally, strict regulations and guidelines must be in place to protect user privacy and prevent the misuse of personal information by tech companies.

Companies should also take responsibility for creating fair and ethical virtual economies within these metaverses, ensuring that users have equal opportunities and access to their platform. Additionally, there should be options for users to control their content and personal information in the metaverse, similar to how we have privacy settings on social media platforms.

Ultimately, it is essential to consider the potential consequences of an AR metaverse on our physical world and society as a whole. As this technology continues to advance, it is vital that we lay down ethical foundations and establish clear boundaries before fully embracing this new digital frontier.

How AR Metaverse Works and its Impact on Society

The concept of the metaverse, a virtual world where users can interact with each other and digital objects in real-time, has been around for decades. However, with the rise of augmented reality (AR) technology, the boundaries between our physical and digital worlds are becoming increasingly blurred. The AR metaverse takes this idea to the next level by seamlessly integrating virtual elements into our everyday lives.

At its core, the AR metaverse works by combining real-world data captured through devices like smartphones or headsets with computer-generated images and information. This creates an immersive experience where users can see and interact with virtual objects as if they were physically present in their environment.

The first step in creating an AR metaverse experience is mapping out the physical space. This is done through a process called spatial mapping, which uses cameras and sensors to capture detailed information about a user’s surroundings. Then, using location-based services and GPS technology, digital objects are placed within this mapped-out space.

Once these virtual elements are integrated into our environment, they can be manipulated in various ways depending on the application or platform being used. For example, some AR games allow players to physically move around their surroundings while interacting with virtual characters or objects. Other applications may use gesture recognition technology to allow users to control and manipulate objects with hand movements.

Impact of AR Metaverse on Society

The potential impact of an AR metaverse on society is far-reaching and raises important ethical considerations regarding privacy, surveillance, and social dynamics.

Privacy concerns arise from the fact that our physical and digital worlds are becoming increasingly intertwined. As we interact with virtual objects in our everyday lives, there will be a constant exchange of data between us and these digital elements. This raises questions about who owns this data and how it is used.

Surveillance is also a concern as AR technology allows for more extensive tracking of users’ movements and behaviors. This information could potentially be used for targeted advertising or other purposes without users’ consent.

Additionally, the social dynamics within an AR metaverse may differ significantly from those in our physical world. As users spend more time interacting with virtual elements, it may lead to a decrease in face-to-face interactions and further isolation from the real world.

On the other hand, the AR metaverse has great potential to enhance education, training, and remote work. With the ability to create realistic virtual simulations, it can provide immersive learning experiences and expand access to education and job training opportunities.

Overall, the widespread adoption of AR metaverse technology will have both positive and negative impacts on society. As with any new technology, it is essential to consider its ethical implications and actively work towards addressing any potential issues that may arise.

Examples of Ethical Dilemmas in AR Metaverse

The AR metaverse brings a whole new set of ethical challenges and dilemmas that we must navigate as we immerse ourselves in this virtual world. With the blurring lines between reality and digital simulations, it becomes crucial to examine how our actions within the AR metaverse can have real-world consequences.

To gain a better understanding of the ethical dilemmas that may arise in the AR metaverse, let’s take a look at some examples:

1. Privacy Concerns:
The most significant concern surrounding augmented reality technology is privacy. In an environment where individuals can access and share various forms of personal information, there is a heightened risk of privacy breaches. For example, tracking data from AR devices can be used to create profiles of users without their knowledge or consent, thereby invading their privacy.

2. Virtual Property Rights:
In the AR metaverse, users can create and own virtual assets like clothes, accessories, or even entire buildings and lands within the virtual space. The ownership of these virtual assets raises questions about intellectual property rights and copyright issues. There have been cases where companies have copied designs from user-generated content in AR games without giving credit or compensation to them.

3. Identity Theft:
With advanced facial recognition technology being integrated into many AR applications, there is a potential risk for identity theft in the metaverse. Hackers could use people’s avatars to steal their identities or commit scams by impersonating them. This puts innocent users at risk and raises concerns about accountability for such criminal acts.

4. Social Impact:
The immersive nature of the AR metaverse can lead to a blurring of boundaries between the virtual and real world. This can result in individuals prioritizing their virtual existence over real-life experiences, leading to social isolation and addiction. This may also exacerbate existing issues such as cyberbullying and online harassment, with serious consequences for mental health.

5. Bias and Discrimination:
As we bring our biases into the virtual world, they can manifest in various forms, such as discriminatory avatars or biased algorithms. For example, facial recognition software has been found to have higher error rates for people of color, leading to unjust treatment. In the AR metaverse, these biases could be amplified and cause harm to marginalized communities.

6. Ethical Use of Data:
Augmented reality technology relies heavily on data collection from users’ activities and experiences within the virtual space. The ethical use of this data has become a major concern in today’s digital age, with companies often using it for targeted advertising or selling to third parties without permission. In the AR metaverse, where data collection is even more prevalent, there is a need for strict regulation and transparency regarding its use.

7. Replicating Real-World Issues:
As developers create virtual environments that mirror the real world, they may unintentionally replicate existing societal issues and inequalities. For example, a virtual shopping mall may only cater to certain body types, perpetuating unrealistic beauty standards. It is essential for developers to be mindful of these issues and create inclusive and diverse virtual spaces.

In conclusion, as we continue to dive deeper into the AR metaverse, it is crucial to address these ethical dilemmas and work towards creating an inclusive, safe, and ethically responsible digital space for all users.

Quelle:

Navigating Ethics and Privacy in an Augmented Reality Metaverse Era

28. September 2023 0 comment

Knowledge Metaverse Research

The Ethics of the Metaverse

Openness, interoperability and theoretical wandering on what the Metaverse will end up being are driving the conversation. Is this at the expense of the values, ethics and philosophy we need to build the future of web technology around? Brave ethical judgements need to be made and added to the road map of the Metaverse, but how do we go about deciding what those will be, or who the responsibility is with?

This is unchartered territory, the cart firmly leading the horse. The only certainty in 2021 is our children will grow up experiencing the digital worlds which we are envisioning and building; they will enter their teens with an internet we can barely imagine. How do those tasked with creating the Metaverse make it safe? How do they ensure the ethics we pride ourselves on in real life will transcend borders and be applicable in the Metaverse?

Confidentiality, hate-speech, justice, depression, anxiety, isolation, pornography, violence, harassment, bullying. These are words which should be part of the conversation now, as we build, not in a decade when the digital bull has destroyed the stable and we are too far along the decentralized path to make amends. Step one is to widen the conversation.

Bullying in the Metaverse

Facebook brings people together but is addictive by design. Twitter is leading the conversation yet is a cesspool of hate speech and racism. BitClout is a decentralized social media platform where freedom of speech is available to everyone but you can buy and sell popularity and fame and amplify the social value and ‘worth’ of anyone on the platform. Just what teenagers need. 44% of Americans have suffered online harassment, 15% physical threats, 12% sexual harassment and 12% have been stalked. These numbers are going up. The Metaverse has to bring them down.

Biometric Data, the Blockchain and GDPR

In the Metaverse advertisers will be able to track your body movement, brainwaves, and physiological responses to adverts you don’t even know are adverts. It can all be stored on the blockchain, for ever. Every eye movement checked, reviewed, and confirmed. Could this Metaverse data be sold to the highest bidder? Like today, only infinitely worse?

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a law passed by the European Union which imposes obligations onto organizations on how and why they collect data. Does the law cover the Metaverse and could it/should it even if it is applicable? Could a new cross-chain, cross-platform regulation work? And if so, how?

Polkadex has a decentralized KYC which uses cryptographic proof instead of user data to verify that the participant is not involved in money. Could a similar system be used to monitor abuse, violence, harassment, discrimination?

The 4 Stoic Laws of Robotics

Could the 4 Stoic virtues — wisdom, courage, justice and temperance — be used to build an ethical template for the Metaverse? Or perhaps Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics, tweaked for the technological prowess of the Metaverse? A Ten Commandments; a declaration; or just an agreed upon ‘cross-chain’ ethical consensus which instils a sense of morality into the code of the Metaverse?

Who makes up the Metaverse Ethical council?

Whatever the answer — and gaming companies, mega-corps and mixed reality play-to-earn companies building the Metaverse should be incorporating the philosophical thinking of humanity into their plans and road maps for the future — once the ethics which guide the conduct of people participating in virtual worlds have been agreed upon, the next step is to decide whose hand the keys of responsibility should be in? Should it be solely left to the companies to decide? Or should the players, technologists and undisclosed third parties be added to the conversation? How about A.I. itself?

An ethical Metaverse conclusion

It’s all too easy with the Metaverse to become grandiose and fall into a trap of your own making filled with Bladerunner and Terminator and the Matrix and Ready Player One and A.I. characters with real personalities and emotions which will also populate the Metaverse. This loses sight of the immediacy of the issue. How we will treat those incarnations is for another day. The Turing Test already needs an upgrade.

Searching the internet, articles on the ethics of the Metaverse are few and far between. It is all about the digitalized wonder, crypto gold and arguments about the Metaverse is. However, there are a few. The Oasisconsortium re-launched as an industry consortium which will promote ethical standards and practices for the Metaverse.

“Our vision is an ethical Internet built with safety, privacy, and inclusion at its core, where future generations trust they can interact, co-create, and exist free from online hate and toxicity.”

There are more questions than answers, and I only aim to raise a few. It will be for others to answer. I’ll leave you with a quote from the ISACE paper on digital ethics and the blockchain, and hope, for the sake of our children, that the Metaverse is built on the fundamentals of human nature which even Marcus Aurelius would be proud.

“If blockchains are built for integrity, privacy, security, distributed value and inclusion, economies and social institutions can be redesigned to be worthy of trust.”

And so can the Metaverse.

Quelle:

https://medium.com/enjinstarter/the-ethics-of-the-metaverse-b532143cd4ef

29. September 2021 0 comment

Knowledge Research

Virtual Rape: The Dangers Of Immersive Technologies

Exclusive: eSafety has expressed concern over the potential for virtual rapes and sexual assaults as the advancement of immersive technologies makes virtual reality harder to distinguish from real-life experiences.

The rapid advancement of immersive technology has sparked grave concerns about the potential for virtual rapes, image-based abuse and physical and sexual assaults.

Australia’s eSafety Commission has warned new harms may emerge from hyper-realistic technology such as VR headsets and haptic suits – a wearable device which produces vibrations and engages a user’s sense of touch.

“While eSafety has not – as yet – received any reports of mishaps with haptics, or other misuses of these technologies, we anticipate that as they become more widely used these immersive technologies will give rise to a range of online safety issues,” says eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant.

In 2016, gamer Jordan Belamire wrote about experiencing a virtual sexual assault while playing the fantasy game QuiVR.

Ms Belamire had been playing with her husband and brother-in-law in multi-player mode when she was groped by another gamer.

“The virtual groping feels just as real,” she wrote at the time.

“Of course, you’re not physically being touched, just like you’re not actually one hundred feet off the ground, but it’s still scary as hell.”

Australian laws don’t really cover virtual rapes and sexual assaults, experts say.

Getty

Following the assault, developers of QuiVR, updated the game’s code to include an expanded “personal bubble” that they believe will prevent future gropings.

It followed mass uproar over a virtual rape in the 1990s on the text-based multi-user game LambdaMOO, after someone hijacked the system and played out various forms of sexual assault using people’s avatars.

Professor Kieran Tranter from QUT School of Law says the haptic suit example is “really at the extreme outside end of what our law imagines.”

“You are attaching something that has the potential to engage with your body in a sexual way, so there will be issues about consent around that,” Professor Tranter told The Feed.

“If there is unwanted sexual conduct, could we even identify the perpetrator and if we can’t, could we argue that the platform or even the hardware manufacturer is precariously liable for the assault?”

Professor Tranter says it would be difficult without substantial reforms to achieve a prosecution for sexual assault.

However, he says outside the area of sexual assault, there could be some options for victims to pursue under the Commonwealth Crimes Act regarding conduct on cyberspace.

What are immersive technologies?

eSafety predicts the use of immersive technologies will increase throughout the next decade and may soon be almost indistinguishable from actual experiences.

According to eSafety, immersive technology is a wide-ranging term that covers virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, a blend of AR and VR, and haptic technologies.

Together, these form a new universe of “extended reality” — and according to eSafety, smell and taste sensations will soon be added to the mix.

Haptic technology company HoloSuit provides full-body gaming experiences through wearables.

On its website, it claims, the user will be able to experience a “completely new level of immersion and free body movement.”

HoloSuit says this will allow gamers to do things like “throw the gun on the ground and surrender with their hands raised to see if enemy players will show mercy”.

As well as gaming, immersive technologies are also being integrated into the sex industry. Sex Like Real is one of the largest VR porn companies, recording over half a million monthly users in 2018.

In 2020, it launched a new interactive experience that uses multi-camera videos and allows users to interact through synchronised teledildonics – haptic devices designed to stimulate sexual excitement.

eSafety says it acknowledges there are positive outcomes that relate to the use of teledildonics, which it says can improve intimacy for people with disabilities or who are in long-distance relationships.

So what other potential harms are there?

There is concern that immersive technologies could ramp up image-based abuse and lead to increased sharing and streaming of non-consensual images and videos.

eSafety cautions augmented realities could be used to fake a sexually explicit three-dimensional image or video of a real person and interact with it, without their consent.

It says there is also a risk of non-consensual sexual activity if haptic sexual devices are hacked or controlled by someone without approval.

In 2017, Canadian sex toy maker We-Vibe was made to pay a settlement of $5.3 million to customers for collecting user-sensitive user data. This information included when they were used and vibration settings, linking it all to users’ email addresses.

eSafety believes location and biometric information, such as fingerprints, which are collected by AR and VR technologies, could also pose risks such as identity theft, stalking and extortion.

‘The potential for grooming’

eSafety has also raised significant concerns about the use of immersive technologies as a tool for online child sexual abuse.

One of the main risks, it says, is that predators may hide behind an avatar or a fictional character to groom children and persuade them into sexualised conversations and actions.

The eSafety Commission says if you receive threats or abuse in an immersive environment, you should report the incident to the platform and collect evidence, such as screenshots – unless the person involved is under 18 years of age.

Ms Inman-Grant says it’s important to supervise children when they’re online and make them feel comfortable to ask for help.

“In practical advice – when parents and carers are deciding if their child should play an immersive technology game, they should think about whether it’s something they would want their child to experience in real life,” she says.

Professor Tranter says it’s important to keep talking about these technologies as they continue to advance.

“This is a really important discussion,” he says.

“Up until now, a lot of our discussion around digital media has always been ‘well, if you don’t want to experience those things don’t use it.’”

“And increasingly, we’re in a position where that’s not a reality and I suspect we’re going to be facing these issues more and more”

Quelle:

Foto: Getty

https://www.vrroom.buzz/vr-news/trends/virtual-rape-dangers-immersive-technologies

17. Dezember 2020 0 comment

Knowledge Research

Is It Too Late To Talk About VR Ethics?

Last year, while on stage giving my TEDx Talk on the immortalising power of VR, I found myself saying this:

“Imagine if, ten years after her death, I could relive the memory of my grandma teaching me how to waltz in her living room? And imagine if, even decades after she passed away she could teach her grandson, who she never met, how to waltz in her living room. That’s the thing with VR, we’re not just immortalising memories, we’re immortalising people too!”

Fast-forward six months and I find myself twisted up with a weird sense of guilt and horror after seeing my imaginings brought to life. My prophetic wonderings were realised in the form of Jan Ji-Sung, reliving the memory of a day at her neighbourhood park with her deceased six-year-old daughter, through a VR headset.

The VR piece titled ‘I Met You,’ was created for a TV show in South Korea and became a lightning rod for criticism and discussion. Was this a psychologically traumatising experiment with damaging and negligent consequences? Or a glimpse into the potential of VR to immortalise our memories, our loved ones, even the possibility of reanimating them?

It seems we have arrived, earlier than I ever expected, at a crossroads where innovation and ethics intersect.

And while Silicon Valley is full of stories of optimistic good intentions quickly descending into a morally corrupt dystopia, VR has a chance to do things differently.

As a pioneer and champion of VR, I took a step back to take a holistic look at not just the South Korea experiment, but at what it implies for the VR industry as a whole, and how we can overcome human challenges in creating content for this powerful medium that protects and promotes our audiences’ wellbeing.

Firstly, we need to consider consent.

We’ve seen how big tech has clandestinely acquired our data, images, search history and geolocation and misused, sold it and commoditised it all without the public’s awareness or consent. Offering your likeness in VR has to be different. It has to be a conscious act of consent made with clarity and full understanding.

So, what might that look like?

Rather than signing their lives away, we might see people signing over their likeness by giving loved ones permission to reanimate them in the event of their death. Finer details like whether their effigy can be used for general purpose as an avatar or exclusively to engineer VR experiences from lived memories, like the South Korea experiment, might be included as caveats. It’s not farfetched to think that this might even be an extension of the opt-in schemes organ donors sign up to.

But who has the right to whose memories? Would you want your partner, mother or friends to be able to relive memories of your embarrassing wedding dad-dancing or school plays? Could it be possible to veto memories you’d rather forget to prevent them becoming your VR legacy?

The issue of consent is further complicated with the South Korea experiment as the deceased person in question is a child. Consent legally falls to parents and guardians for children in most cases, it’s likely VR would be no different. By agreeing to take part in the TV show, Ji-Sung had, explicitly or not, consented to having her daughter’s image used in this way.

Once we’ve accounted for consent, there’s still a lot to consider. Whether or not it is legal to create a VR experience isn’t a satisfactory qualifying criteria when it comes to safeguarding our audience.

The next thing we need to look at is whether it is safe and ethical to recreate someone in VR based on acceptance.

Experts have suggested that the South Korea experiment could be considered ethical if the mother had fully accepted that her daughter had passed away. I’m no grief counsellor, but Princeton neuroscientist Michael Graziano told Dell Technologies in December 2019: “Since you know the person is gone, you accept the virtual equivalent for what it is — a comforting vestige.”

With acceptance comes healing, so a VR experience of a deceased loved one is more likely to spark positive feelings of nostalgia rather than despair and grief while immersed in the reanimated memory. So, full acceptance is fundamental in order for viewers to safely engage in this type of VR experience. Graziano gave it his ethical seal of approval, stating that if acceptance is a prerequisite then “there is nothing wrong or unethical about it.”

So, what happens once the headset comes off?

We have an opportunity, as creators, to foster new, transgressive experiences that offer the impossible and bring to life worlds beyond our own. But we also have a responsibility to ensure that we consider our audience’s best interests beyond the virtual world.

That’s where aftercare needs to be appropriately signposted or facilitated if necessary.

All appropriate measures should be taken to put aftercare in place for potentially vulnerable audiences. Neurological studies show that our brains respond to VR experiences the same way they do to things we encounter in reality. This represents a huge threat to our industry if it’s overlooked. Participating in a sensitive VR creation can have traumatising effects on our psyche.

To avoid corporate negligence we need to make sure that a network of support is in place for anyone affected by our creations. This could include helplines, therapy sessions or time with grief counsellors.

As a final backstop for the VR industry, before diving head-first into storyboarding the next ‘I Met You,’ we should consider Jeff Goldblum.

That’s right, Jeff Goldblum. Decrying the skewed moral compasses of genetic scientists in all his unbuttoned-shirt glory in Jurassic Park, Jeff delivers this timeless maxim:

“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

It’s going to be a continual temperature check on the state of the VR industry to keep asking ourselves, why are we doing this? And are we doing more harm than good? That pause for thought and self-regulation is the difference between harming our audience in the name of innovation, or building a better, more inclusive, interactive world.

Quelle:

https://www.vrroom.buzz/vr-news/trends/it-too-late-talk-about-vr-ethics

3. Juli 2020 0 comment

Knowledge Research

The Ethics of a Brain-Computer Interface in VR

There was no better way to wrap up the GDC 2019 conference than Valve Software’s Mike Ambinder talking about a brain-computer interface in VR. No need to worry about any immediate developments in BCI (as it’s known). It was a highly speculative talk.

We’re still trying to develop decent hand-controllers for our virtual environments. But Ambinder is thinking into the future, where we’ll be a few decades from now.

Brain-computer interface solutions raise profound ethical challenges – and not just in virtual reality. BCI could far surpass the power of VR to create immersive experiences. All our work to shoehorn miniature screens in plastic headset would seem so primitive if we could trick our brains into seeing what isn’t actually there.

But what concerns us is that the ethical issues are seldom raised at tech conferences. We’d feel much better if ethicists were working alongside tech developers – or at least if they were talking to each other. Instead, the groups silo themselves. One side waxes enthusiastically about the potential of technology; the other veers toward middling or dystopian visions of the future.

Neither conversation is particularly productive. Technology is more than a tool – it shapes our experience of ourselves and the world. That holds as much for the early railways at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to the way virtual reality will reshape human experience. If we’re going to jack ourselves into the Matrix, we should at least explore the possibilities before we get there.

Or before there’s no way to unplug.

Mike Ambinder: A Brain-Computer Interface in VR

In his talk, Mike Ambinder is upfront that Value had no major BCI projects underway.

This is supposed to be speculative. This is one possible direction things could go. [Ars Technica]

But as he pointed out, we’re on the cusp of the journey into a brain-computer interface in VR. We can already track an array of responses in games, and eye-tracking is moving toward broader implementation. We expect the latter will be a standard feature in most high-end HMDs within two years.

At GDC 2019 last week, Tobii released an SDK and associated libraries for eye-tracking in VR. Having superhuman powers just through your gaze is utterly fascinating.

For now, we’ll have to content ourselves with more physiological data. And the only thing holding us back is money and the size of some of the tech.

As Ambinder says,

We can measure responses to in-game stimuli. And we’re not always getting [data] reliably, but we’re starting to figure out how. Think about what you’d want to know about your players. There’s a long list of things we can get right now with current technology, current generation analysis, and current generation experimentation.

Some of the data – heart rates, for example – could raise their own ethical issues. But taking it to the next step – a brain-computer interface in VR – won’t happen in the near future. There’s just too many hardware challenges in translating neuronic signals into something software could use in either gaming or virtual reality.

Even Larger VR Headsets?

Mike Ambinder joked that brain-computing interfaces in virtual reality might be a way to get people to love their bulky VR headsets. They might be willing to wear an even larger one. We know we’re not going to have virtual reality through minimal style goggles – even the size of Magic Leap – anytime soon.

You can do limited EEG readings with smaller sensors – the Muse headband is a stylish approach to technology-enhanced meditation. But truly accurate readings require hardware that make you look like an alien. The only way to get all those sensors attached to your head would be some form of headgear.

VR helmets. I knew this would happen.

BCI Challenges

Neurable has been working on this for some time and demoed what they billed as the first mind-controlled game at SIGGRAPH 2017. But they only used a modified Vive headset – you’ll need a lot more sensors than that to make this work. As RoadtoVR notes,

Companies like Neurable have already begun productizing EEG devices especially built to work with VR devices, letting people “control software and devices using only their brain activity,” the company claims.

That said, EEG data isn’t a perfect solution. Ambinder compared it to sitting outside of a football stadium and trying to figure out what’s happening on the field just by listening to the intensity of the crowd’s reaction. The current generation of BCI devices are noisy, and EEG is one of the noisiest due to its job of picking up neuronal signals through the skull, scalp, and hair.

The football stadium is a good analogy of where we are now. But as technology progresses, brain-computer interfaces will learn how to separate out the signal from the noise.

And there will be both positive and negative implications.

Transforming Lives

For accessibility purposes, BCI would be remarkable both in and outside of VR. We’ve already seen incredible advances here. It was only in 2015 that researchers at the University of Houston developed an algorithm that allowed someone with a prosthetic hand to grasp an object like a water bottle just with their thoughts.

Think for a moment about what that means as a technological breakthrough. A prosthetic device controlled by human thoughts. In the same year, the press was all over Palmer Luckey’s breakthrough VR headset (pre-orders started January 6, 2016). It would help to keep our priorities in perspective.

Not surprisingly, Ambinder takes this much further, speculating on the ultimate enhancement of our senses.

Can we make you see in infrared like the Predator? Give you access to spatial location data, or even echolocation? Could we add a sense? Improve your sense of touch? Help you notice new frequencies?” Ambinder continued. “Taste and smell things you’ve never tasted or smelled? Focus your attention? Stimulate certain areas of your brain to recruit neurons for other tasks? Help you hold more memory at once? improve memory retrieval? [Ars Technica]

Developments like that would transform the lives of people with disabilities. And it would impact far more than gaming; it would revolutionize our immersive experiences in VR. We’d have superhuman experiences in virtual environments and easily interact with AI-driven beings like Magic Leap’s Mica.

Welcome to the Matrix.

Privacy and Hacking of the Self

As we noted, tech conferences downplay the ethical challenges. No one wants to undercut what they’re developing – or selling. Ambinder mentioned a few of them in passing but the stakes seem much higher when you step outside the tech bubble.

Consider just the privacy issues described in GE Reports for brain-computer interfaces:

The potential ability to determine individuals’ preferences and personal information using their own brain signals has spawned a number of difficult but pressing questions: Should we be able to keep our neural signals private? That is, should neural security be a human right? How do we adequately protect and store all the neural data being recorded for research, and soon for leisure? How do consumers know if any protective or anonymization measures are being made with their neural data? As of now, neural data collected for commercial uses are not subject to the same legal protections covering biomedical research or health care. Should neural data be treated differently?

Right now, we haven’t come close to resolving the privacy challenges of our personal data in social media. In the future, the privacy of our neural data could become a fundamental issue. When you look at what happened to the Norwegian company Nord Hydro last week (servers hacked, data encrypted), try to imagine parallel developments on a personal level.

Today, only technology devices get hacked. But it’s not that far-fetched to think of a BCI-dependent future where individuals are hacked. You can always unplug, you say? That only works until a hacker asks for a price in return.

Time for a Conversation on the Ethical Issues

You won’t see brain-computer interfaces in VR and other technologies in the next few years. Given the challenges Valve seems to have in even releasing a VR headset, they may be the last to jack into our brains.

But BCI developments are swirling around us. DARPA is funding partnerships between companies and universities that could result in significant breakthroughs in brain disorders. Elon Musk has created his own company, Neuralink, to work toward the same goal and move us closer to a form of “consensual telepathy” communication.

Mike Ambinder’s talk might have been completely “speculative”, but it’s time to take the developments seriously. If we’re not careful, BCI will hit us like a tsunami that overwhelms the most fundamental elements of human experience.

For us, it’s not about unbridled optimism or despair. It’s about instigating a conversation with multiple perspectives. At the very least, we owe that to those who will inherit the future we are creating.

Quelle:

https://www.digitalbodies.net/future/the-ethics-of-a-brain-computer-interface-in-vr/#more-15515

10. Januar 2020 0 comment