|
|
Why do we enforce laws? Is harm to others the only motivation behind limiting our actions? If I would not want to be harmed by others, then why should I harm others? This is the traditional veiw, but what shape will this wonderful standard take after the connection of our brains to electronic media? |
|
|
From the earliest times traditions and social influences have kept us in line, be they -sham rituals- or -guilt feelings-. Rumor or brute force may have been the only ways to enforce the law. Temporarily distancing themselves from the discontents, primitives would put someone under ridicule and make them go through a probationary period. Upon completion of this ostrasization the violater would be let back into the group. These kinds of rituals influenced the crime rate and the incidence of harmful behaviors. Our contemporary legal systems are constructed upon these basics, basics which repeatedly emerge whenever humans live together. |
|
|
Is not the object of criminal justice to stop crimes before they happen, or at least to deter them? Stopping muscular motion, when harmful to others, would, solve many problems that can result when people violate each other's space. Criminal justice would be releived of much if these harmful motions never occurred in the first place. |
|
|
Think about the rate of deterrence now and in the past. If an officer pulls you over for speeding has the motion of your limbs been influenced? You have speeded up until the officer pulled you over but the flashing lights did have an effect on how you were pushing the peddles on the floor. If they can catch you faster now than in the past should the rate of interdiction be a standard for establishing the worth of these laws? If methods of detecting harmful behaviors improve should we consider this as giving up our rights? These supposed rights, who's only reason for existence may have been past technological problems involved in law enforcement's effort to reduce the incidence of these harmful behaviors. Should we be allowed to just rip down the highway at any speed we like, even in a residential district?
|
|
The Absorption of the Legal Infrastructure by Intelligent Devices.
|
|
|
Freedom of thought not motion of limbs. A private security system that will have it's own set of privacy rules. We may have more privacy then but the onboard system will know all. It may not be able to communicate this with anyone or thing though..... |
|
|
The legal infrastructure will dissappear into our heads and off from the land. As it has been with computers, reducing the number of positions in labor, these information devices will do the same in every category of social existence. The legal system included.
|
|
|
And so, the trend will continue in which all technologies will appear to dissappear from our sensual world. Law enforcement will seem to be gone but will be there even more than it is now, always with us with every thought and action. Is this a lack of trust of human nature or an acknowledgement that in some ways we can't be trusted?
|
|
|
Is there a chance that our rights will be diminished in this situation? The benevoulent observer - the solution to the legal paradox. An action censor. Each person will have their own private justice system; inside of their head. This information will be safe and secure and in no way be accesable to anyone.
|
|
|
Even if the inner police mechanism has to be taken out to be repaired or replaced, there will be no private information within it. This device only stops actions that it recognizes as harmful and needs not remember anything about the individual.
|
|
|
With the need for the legal infrastructure gone all the money spent on courts and personel could easily cover the costs of the blanket. The blanket which will reside just beneath the skull bone and consist of the equivelant of nurmerous supercomputers at this time. Cost will not be a problem but the transition from material legal enforcement to mental enforcement may be hard.
|
|
|
This Inner Police will have most of it's connections with those portions of the brain that send nerve impulses directly to the muscles. This portion of the brain is called the Somatic Cortex and most voluntary control of muscles must pass through this region.
|
|
|
A conflict will arise over how to allocate memory space in those portions of the blanket that contact the Somatic cortex. At least a minimal portion of this space will be for the Inner Police but people will want the rest for the remote control of; other willing people, robots, mechanical devices, etc... The blanket may end up having to be thicker in these regions of the brain.
|
|
|
The progression from the Glasses to the Inner Police will be smooth. We will be used to having every action recorded in a less private manner. With the miniturization of technology it will be simple to have video cams somewhere on our bodies, running at all times. Why? The perfect aliby, what better way to establish what happened than to play the tape. So this benevoulent observer will not be a totally new experience, perhaps a more secure one.
|
|
|
Along with the mediation of the terrain, between our thoughts and our actions, we will further adapt to an exposed condition. We will begin to know everything about each other and learn to like this situation.
|
|
|
From there it will be a short step to the internalization of the entire governmental apperatus. We will truely begin to carry the world around inside our heads. Our centers of government will most likely remain as tousist attractions where people will flock to see how it used to be in those harsh times.
|
|
|
Isn't it all information anyway? A society made up of individuals who receive signals (information) from their senses and then send signals (information) to their muscles that will in turn make their muscles move in the desired way. Could our cultural institutions be portrayed as temporary; the regulation of harmful actions by people in large institutions and beauracracies? Why do we need a giant governmental apperatus to regulate the traffic of signals flowing in such small spaces; between different parts of our brains and bodies. Could we put Washington on the head of a needle?
|
Get your own Free Home Page