Therefore, I say:
Know your enemy and know yourself;
in a hundred battles, you will never be defeated.

When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself,
your chances of winning or losing are equal.

If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself,
you are sure to be defeated in every battle.

-- Sun Tzu, The Art of War, c. 500bc

State of New York Makes Moratorium on Facial Recognition Technology in Schools Permanent

The report did not take digital fingerprinting off the table, however, noting that it presented lower risk to student rights and would be fit for specific uses such as tracking lunch payments and letting students unlock school-owned devices.

The new legislation requires allows school districts to implement fingerprinting and types of biometric identification other than facial recognition technology, but they must first obtain input from parents and conduct a similar assessment of the potential impact on student rights.

@Cyber_Security_Channel

Michael A Aquino, former head of psychological warfare for the Army, founder of the Temple of Set, and John B Alexander, former Army Colonel, and researcher for NIDS at Skinwalker Ranch

MindWa by Michael A. Aquino.pdf

a. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
As the phenomenon of magnetism is integral with electricity, and human mental
activity is electric, it is unsurprising to find that magnetic fields, while not
affecting the body’s metabolism to a significant degree, due to the extremely
small amount of ferromagnetic material therein, can influence thought itself.
- 101 -
As discovered through MRI imaging, the area of the brain in which evaluations
and opinions about others’
beliefs and morality are made is the tempero-parietal junction (TPJ). In 2010
MIT neuroscientists discovered that application of a magnetic field to the right
TPJ, by means of a noninvasive technique called transcranial magnetic
stimulation (TMS) temporarily disrupts an individual’s ability to makejudgments based upon previously-learned morality. In effect, pre-indoctrination
is suppressed, resulting in the subject’s tending to judge situations more on a
discrete cause-and-effect basis. In theory, TMS could be used to condition
personnel to make decisions unencumbered by prior moral, social, or ethical
indoctrination; and to remove that same protective indoctrination from a hostile
individual being interrogated. TMS thus approaches in scientific reality the
mythical “brainwashing” of classic conspiracy legend. 63
The present limitations of TMS from a MW
perspective are that its effects are only temporary, and that the magnetic field
needs to be precisely created in close proximity to the TPJ. The establishment of
a direct cause-and-effect relationship between magnetism and morality,
however, opens the MW door to the long-sought “holy grail” of SLIPC: the
removal of preexisting moral beliefs.
Unlike BWR, magnetic fields can be generated and focused directionally, in
precisely-calculated strengths. A precisely-configured TMS field directed at
hostile humans motivated by intense moral conditioning (as in a deeply-held
religious belief or irrational political ideology) can instantly dismantle or at least
substantially 63 Cf. Anne Trafton, “Moral Judgments Can Be Altered By
Magnets”, MIT News, March 30, 2010 (http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/
moral-control-0330.html).
- 102 -
weaken this barrier to communication and situational reasoning.
The 1990s’-emergent technique of Functional
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) opens new potential for both the reading
of human thoughts and the implantation of them. In fMRI magnetic sensors
detect blood-flow activity within the brain with such precision and accuracy that
the result can be used by a computer to assemble an accurate image of the
subject’s visualization from a database of standardized components. In reverse,
fMRI may eventually be able to transmit them. 64

Moral judgments can be altered ... by magnets
By disrupting brain activity in a particular region, neuroscientists can sway people’s views of moral situations. 😭😢😱😱😱😱

HEY DID YOU UNDERSTUND ? YOUR JUDGMENTS CAN BE ALTERED BY MAGNETS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Moral judgments can be altered ... by magnets
By disrupting brain activity in a particular region, neuroscientists can sway people’s views of moral situations.
Anne Trafton, MIT News Office
Publication Date:
March 30, 2010
Credits:
Graphic: Christine Daniloff
MRI brain scans showing the location of the right temporoparietal junction (blue circle). The purple triangle shows a nearby region that the researchers disrupted with magnetic stimulation as a control experiment.
Caption:
MRI brain scans showing the location of the right temporoparietal junction (blue circle). The purple triangle shows a nearby region that the researchers disrupted with magnetic stimulation as a control experiment.
Credits:
Images courtesy Rebecca Saxe laboratory, MIT

To make moral judgments about other people, we often need to infer their intentions — an ability known as “theory of mind.” For example, if one hunter shoots another while on a hunting trip, we need to know what the shooter was thinking: Was he secretly jealous, or did he mistake his fellow hunter for an animal?

MIT neuroscientists have now shown they can influence those judgments by interfering with activity in a specific brain region — a finding that helps reveal how the brain constructs morality.

Previous studies have shown that a brain region known as the right temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) is highly active when we think about other people’s intentions, thoughts and beliefs. In the new study, the researchers disrupted activity in the right TPJ by inducing a current in the brain using a magnetic field applied to the scalp. They found that the subjects’ ability to make moral judgments that require an understanding of other people’s intentions — for example, a failed murder attempt — was impaired.

The researchers, led by Rebecca Saxe, MIT assistant professor of brain and cognitive sciences, report their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 29. Funding for the research came from The National Center for Research Resources, the MIND Institute, the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, the Simons Foundation and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation.

The study offers “striking evidence” that the right TPJ, located at the brain’s surface above and behind the right ear, is critical for making moral judgments, says Liane Young, lead author of the paper. It’s also startling, since under normal circumstances people are very confident and consistent in these kinds of moral judgments, says Young, a postdoctoral associate in MIT’s Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences.

“You think of morality as being a really high-level behavior,” she says. “To be able to apply (a magnetic field) to a specific brain region and change people’s moral judgments is really astonishing.”

Thinking of others

Saxe first identified the right TPJ’s role in theory of mind a decade ago — a discovery that was the subject of her MIT PhD thesis in 2003. Since then, she has used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the right TPJ is active when people are asked to make judgments that require thinking about other people’s intentions.

In the new study, the researchers wanted to go beyond fMRI experiments to observe what would happen if they could actually disrupt activity in the right TPJ. Their success marks a major step forward for the field of moral neuroscience, says Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor of philosophy at Duke University.

“Recent fMRI studies of moral judgment find fascinating correlations, but Young et al usher in a new era by moving beyond correlation to causation,” says Sinnott-Armstrong, who was not involved in this research.

The researchers used a noninvasive technique known as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to selectively interfere with brain activity in the right TPJ. A magnetic field applied to a small area of the skull creates weak electric currents that impede nearby brain cells’ ability to fire normally, but the effect is only temporary.

In one experiment, volunteers were exposed to TMS for 25 minutes before taking a test in which they read a series of scenarios and made moral judgments of characters’ actions on a scale of one (absolutely forbidden) to seven (absolutely permissible).

In a second experiment, TMS was applied in 500-milisecond bursts at the moment when the subject was asked to make a moral judgment. For example, subjects were asked to judge how permissible it is for a man to let his girlfriend walk across a bridge he knows to be unsafe, even if she ends up making it across safely. In such cases, a judgment based solely on the outcome would hold the perpetrator morally blameless, even though it appears he intended to do harm.

In both experiments, the researchers found that when the right TPJ was disrupted, subjects were more likely to judge failed attempts to harm as morally permissible. Therefore, the researchers believe that TMS interfered with subjects’ ability to interpret others’ intentions, forcing them to rely more on outcome information to make their judgments.

“It doesn’t completely reverse people’s moral judgments, it just biases them,” says Saxe.

When subjects received TMS to a brain region near the right TPJ, their judgments were nearly identical to those of people who received no TMS at all.

While understanding other people’s intentions is critical to judging them, it is just one piece of the puzzle. We also take into account the person’s desires, previous record and any external constraints, guided by our own concepts of loyalty, fairness and integrity, says Saxe.

“Our moral judgments are not the result of a single process, even though they feel like one uniform thing,” she says. “It’s actually a hodgepodge of competing and conflicting judgments, all of which get jumbled into what we call moral judgment.”

Saxe’s lab is now studying the role of theory of mind in judging situations where the attempted harm was not a physical threat. The researchers are also doing a study on the role of the right TPJ in judgments of people who are morally lucky or unlucky. For example, a drunk driver who hits and kills a pedestrian is unlucky, compared to an equally drunk driver who makes it home safely, but the unlucky homicidal driver tends to be judged more morally blameworthy.