Indian neuroscientist peers into a woman's brain, finds guilt
This is pure Philip K. Dick: in June a judge in India found a woman guilty of murdering her former fiancé and sentenced her to life in prison. The smoking gun? Test results obtained using the Brain Electrical Oscillations Signature test (BEOS) developed by Indian neuroscientist Champadi Raman Mukundan. The BEOS software uses an EEG to determine whether the subject is recalling specific details of a crime as they are being read aloud. BEOS "works" because as the crime's details are recited to a subject, their brain lights up in specific regions -- the areas that (in theory) show measurable changes when experiences are relived. According to Mukundan, the system can distinguish between peoples' memories of events they witnessed and deeds they committed. Gee, now that we have the technology to read criminal's minds and predict crimes we'll be expecting a crime-free society any minute now.
Update: The headline error in the post has been fixed -- thanks commenters!
[Via Slashdot]
Update: The headline error in the post has been fixed -- thanks commenters!
[Via Slashdot]


















These should be installed in the lunch room of every bussiness to find out who the thiving basterd is who eats other co workers lunches...
Hey, I didn't see your name on that sandwich.
hmmm looks like SOMEBODY has been reading Lifehacker . . . ;-)
Yea! Good idea. I walked into work today and all four bottles of SoBe I had in the fridge were empty!
Sandvich?! nom nom nom nom
Wow that's lame..Though i really don't believe it worked, I think they just needed some evidence to put her away, and this is the best they could come up with, which is kinda sad.
I thank God for this great country we live in. It's far from perfect, but it's pretty amazing and this just shores that up...
No love for the Point Break reference? Tough crowd...
they sentenced someone to life in prison on theory? if that really works then great, but what if she's innocent?
Then somone, somewhere is about to loose alot of money...
loose is fine, as long as they don't lose it.
Whoa! You can loose money? Can you tighten it too?
Uh, i think that's the point of this article.
I AM AN FBI AGENT!
Sorry.
not anymore
I'm an illegal immigrant!!
...from Canada
I'm a cop you idiot!
...or much less convincing arguments against capital punishment...
Minority Report anyone?
A Scanner Darkly...
I was just thinking that too.
I'll join the "Future Crime" Fighters, and beat crime before they even happen... lol
what about Wanted? Ofcourse it will never be used on people of power or otherwise deemed inconclusive.
If it works with identification of details as they are being read aloud, I would imagine that sights, sounds and smells would cause intense activity in those 'specific regions'
Think naughty thoughts, think naughty thoughts.
always
I wonder what guilt looks like. I think it might look something like Bush or Cheney.
BEOS or BS? No, I think this is a very interesting concept, but what is the realistic accuracy of such technology? We can have very strong emotional responses to events we never actually participated in -- novels, films are probably the most obvious examples. So how do we know that these brain signals we're reading are not just from the person's activated imagination?
I think the emotional response from imagining someone being killed vs. actually having the memory of killing someone would be quite different regardless of how active an imagination would be.
- This message was sent from my tricorder
I have mixed feelings. On one hand BEOS has such a slick interface. On the other hand its liable to get me incarcerated if I'm not careful.
Shut up! Someone hacked my brain and put those thoughts there!
you weren't supposed to remember that!
They should try this on OJ.
i like orange juice, but OJ is guilty!!!!
What's the point? Everyone already knows he was guilty.
well i highly doubt it can be used in the us without other evidence pointing to one individual as the culprit. i know if i were found guilty of something with this tech i would try to get a retrial. but this is very interesting. i would love to hear the legal wranglings that are going to happen because of the highly criminal us government trying to use this in the "drug war."
Yeah sure, crime free anytime now. I am not gonna hold my breath though. I am just a rebel that way.
What if you recount some similar event from a movie? This is so flawed.
Argument against: Describe to me a breakfast. (Bear with me) My brains reaction and readings withing BEOS, are they signifying that particular breakfast read aloud or a breakfast that I've had quite like it?
If someone is supposedly "re-experiencing" the event in regions of their brain, how is it proof they are guilty and not envisioning a similar occurence?
I can see it now.... Maury 2.0. YOU ARE THE FATHER!!! oh and while I was in there I noticed that he wants to sleep with your sister!
Yall dont know Me!!
Someone should port ReiserFS to BeOS....
Sadly, it doesn't work. Wired did a piece on this a while back that seemed to do a decent job of explaining why Mukundan's analysis is mostly fantasy. There are other papers in the primary literature saying the same thing, but this should give you the gist of things.
http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-06/mf_neurohacks
When they mentioned Guilt all I could think of was Trauma Center...
The charlatan who is pedaling this crap is not a neurosurgeon. Please correct your title.
Was anyone else saddened by the fact that the acronym that some of us used to know as "BeOS" is now being recycled for a different meaning? Long live BeOS.
Hey, as long as they don't start asking me about my massive porn addiction, I'm good to go.
That shit is embarrassing.
Oh thank goodness. I thought they wrote it for BeOS and I was about to headdesk.
Now if I were only an illiterate criminal...
If she was repeatedly told of crime story, she'll have visual memory of the crime even if she didn't commit it. Also, she may even start to think that she was part of the crime (kind of brainwash). This technology is not a very reliable way to prove crime.
Sounds like rubbish science, but good enough for convicting some presumably powerless woman who anyway committed the
unspeakable crime of eloping with another man. Not good enough to convict a powerful man any time soon, I'll bet you.
omg its going to turn into a real life 'batman forever' with jim carey stealing our brains!