Conference Information
Related Links
Keynote Speakers, Plenary Sessions and Invited Talks
Day One
Nanotechnology: Will it revolutionise health care?
Professor Gordon Wallace, University of Wollongong, Australia
Director of the Intelligent Polymer Research Institute, University of Wollongong
Executive Research Director of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science
Professor Gordon Wallace’s research interests include organic conductors, nanomaterials and electrochemical probe methods of analysis and the use of these in the development of intelligent polymer systems. A current focus involves the use of these tools and materials in developing biocommunications from the molecular to skeletal domains in order to improve human performance via medical Bionics.
Gordon is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE), Institute of Physics, and Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI). He received the Inaugural Polymer Science and Technology Award from the Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI) in 1992; the RACI Stokes Medal for Research in Electrochemistry in 2004; and the HG Smith Memorial award from the RACI in 2008. He was awarded an ETS Walton Fellowship by the Science Foundation Ireland in 2003; named NSW Scientist of the Year (Chemistry) in 2008; appointed as a Professor in the World Class University by the South Korean Government in 2009; received the SPIE Smart Materials Research Lifetime Achievement Award in the USA in March 2009 and was honoured with the 2009 Smart Structures and Materials Lifetime Achievement Award.
He has published more than 450 refereed publications and a monograph (3rd Edition published in 2009) on Conductive Electroactive Polymers: Intelligent Polymer Systems and supervised more than 55 PhD students to completion.
Abstract
Health Care as we know it involves diagnosis and treatment with an increasing emphasis on preventative “therapies”. In each of these areas, new materials are having an impact by, for example, being able to “sense” vital signs such as temperature or heart rate and even deliver a drug when stimulated. New materials also provide the basis for medical implants that can restore function by providing structural support for tissue engineering or facilitate nerve repair and so enhance neural prosthetics such as the cochlear ear implant. Advances in materials also underpin the revolution in communications technologies we find ourselves immersed in. These communication systems are now being merged with the diagnostic and treatment materials discussed above to deliver health care therapies in a more effective and efficient manner.
Materials Science and Nanotechnology: The recent revolution in materials science can, in part at least, be attributed to the arrival of nanotechnology. Imagine, for a given material composition, being able to manipulate chemical, mechanical, optical and electronic properties simply by controlling structure in the nanodomain – no need to imagine - we can now do that. Being able to change these properties by varying the nanostructure leads to an ability to create nanostructured interfaces that interact effectively with biological components (the basis of all medical diagnostics and treatments). That more effective biological interactions are available using nanostructured materials is understandable given the dimensions in which biology operates from nanometers for protein and DNA to microns for living cells. Perhaps an unexpected and certainly less heralded aspect of nanotechnology as applied to materials science has been the ability to create nanoformulations of difficult to handle materials with characteristics that render them amenable to processing and device fabrication.
The examples presented in this presentation illustrate these advances using a recently discovered group of materials with great promise for use in health care: organic conducting polymers. These materials, organic in nature yet with the electronic properties of metals, provide a unique interface with living systems from the cellular to the skeletal level.
In Defence of the Precautionary Principle
Professor John Weckert, Charles Sturt University, Australia
School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Charles Sturt University
Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, IT and Nanotechnology: Ethics of Emergent Technology
John Weckert researches mainly in the areas of ethics and new technologies, concentrating on information and communication technology and nanotechnology. He is founding Editor-in-Chief of the journal Nanoethics: Ethics for Technologies that Converge at the Nanoscale. He currently holds an ARC Linkage grant with the Australian Computer Society on ethics and regulation in the ICT industry and a National Science Foundation (US) grant on nanotechnology and human enhancement. His fields of special interest are: Nanotechnology, Information and Communication Technologies, Methods for Ethically Assessing Emergent Technologies, Philosophy of Technology
Abstract
The precautionary principle is thought by many to be a useful strategy for decision and policy making but by many others to be useless at best and dangerous at worst, potentially stifling beneficial scientific and technological developments. In this talk it will be argued that it can be a coherent and useful principle. First the principlewill be examined and clarified and then defended against a number of criticisms. Examples from nanotechnology and geoengineering will used as illustrations of good and bad uses of the principle.
Ethical Aspects of ICT Implants in the Human Body (Opinion no. 20): European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies
Professor Rafael Capurro, Steinbeis-Transfer-Institute Information Ethics, Germany
Distinguished Researcher in Information Ethics, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA
Director of the Steinbeis-Transfer-Institute Information Ethics (STI-IE)
Editor in Chief of the International Review of Information Ethics (IRIE)
Director of the International Center for Information Ethics (ICIE)
Member of the European Group on Ethics and New Technologies to the European Commission (EGE) (2001-2004; 2005-2009).
Co-founder of the Africa Network for Information Ethics (ANIE)
Red Latinoamericana de ética de la información (RELEI)
Rafael Capurro was born in 1945 in in Montevideo, Uruguay. He holds a licentiate in Philosophy from Universidad del Salvador, Buenos Aires, Argentina (1970). In 1978 he received his Dr.phil. in Philosophy from Düsseldorf University and he completed his postdoctoral teaching qualification (Habilitation) in Practical Philosophy (Ethics) from Stuttgart University in 1989. Between 1987 and 2004 he was a lecturer at the Institute of Philosophy Stuttgart University and then between 1986 and 2009 he was a Professor (em.) of information management and information ethics at Stuttgart Media University, Germany.
His recent publications include: Localizing the Internet. Ethical Aspects in Intercultural Perspective by Rafael Capurro, Johannes Frühbauer, Thomas Hausmanninger (Eds.), Munich 2007; The Public / Private Debate. A Contribution to Intercultural Information Ethics by Makoto Nakada and Rafael Capurro. In: Rocci Luppicini and Rebecca Adell (Eds.): Handbook of Research in Technoethics, Hershey PA: IGI Global, 2009, 339-353; and Ethics and Robotics (R. Capurro & Michael Nagenborg, Eds.), IOS Press, 2009.
Abstract
At first sight ICT implants are ethically unproblematic if we think for instance about cardiac pacemakers. However, although ICT implants may be used to repair deficient bodily capabilities they can also me misused, particularly if these devices are accessible via digital networks. The idea of letting ICT devices get under our skin in order not just to repair but even to enhance human capabilities gives rise to science fiction visions with threat and/or benefit characteristics. The intimate relation between bodily and psychic functions is basic to our personal identity. Consequently the objective of this Opinion is primarily to raise awareness and questions concerning the ethical dilemmas created by a range of implants in this rapidly expanding field.
Tumours, Tracking, and Tyranny: The Downside to Implantable Microchips
Dr Katherine Albrecht
PhD in Education, Harvard University
Director of CASPIAN
Author of "Spychips: How major corporations and government plan to track your every move with RFID"
http://www.katherinealbrecht.com/
Katherine Albrecht is a popular media commentator whose views have been featured in over 2,000 radio, television, and print news stories. She is a dynamic radio personality who has hosted the daily syndicated radio show "Uncovering the Truth with Katherine Albrecht" since early 2007. Author/co-author of six books and videos, including the award-winning bestseller "Spychips: How major corporations and government plan to track your every move with RFID." A sought-after public speaker and privacy expert, Katherine has been invited to address the Federal Trade Commission, The Federal Reserve Bank, The European Commission, the Royal Society of London, The International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners, The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, and the state legislatures of California, Washington, Arizona, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, and Michigan, to name just a few. In 2006 Katherine was appointed by NH Governor John Lynch to serve as an expert member of that state's two-year RFID Study Commission. Katherine is also the director of CASPIAN Consumer Privacy (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering), an 18,000-member grass-roots organization she founded in 1999 to oppose shopper surveillance. Katherine holds a PhD in Education from Harvard University.
Abstract
This paper reviews literature published in oncology and toxicology journals between 1990 and 2006 addressing the effects of implanted radio-frequency (RFID) microchips on laboratory rodents and dogs. Eleven articles were reviewed in all, with eight investigating mice and rats, and three investigating dogs. In all but three of the articles, researchers observed that malignant sarcomas and other cancers formed around or adjacent to the implanted microchips. The tumors developed in both experimental and control animals, and in two household pets. In nearly all cases, researchers concluded that the microchips had induced the cancers. Possible explanations for the tumors are explored, and a set of recommendations for policy makers, human patients and their doctors, veterinarians, pet owners, and oncology researchers is presented in light of these findings.
Day Two
Human Enhancement: Could you become infected with a computer virus?
Dr Mark Gasson, University of Reading, United Kingdom
Senior Research Fellow, School of Systems Engineering
Cybernetic Intelligence Research Group, University of Reading
Dr. Mark Gasson is a senior research fellow at the School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading, UK. He obtained his first degree in Cybernetics and Control Engineering in 1998 from the Department of Cybernetics at Reading, and was subsequently given a research post. He obtained his Ph.D. in 2005 for developing an invasive interface between the nervous system of a human volunteer and a computer system. His current research predominantly focuses on user-centric applications of emerging technologies, with specific focus on pushing the envelope of Human-Machine interaction. In 2009 he demonstrated the use of mobile phone technology for creating detailed behavioural profiles, and he also became the first human to be infected by a computer virus using an RFID device implanted in his hand.
Dr. Gasson considers public engagement of science as an essential component of the scientific endeavour, and as such has had an active involvement spanning over ten years. Based on the thesis that public interest is generated through direct dialogue, Dr. Gasson aims to motivate and maintain interest by making science accessible and relevant through a variety of activities. Dr. Gasson frequently delivers invited public lectures and workshops internationally, aimed at audiences of varying ages.
Abstract
Experiments demonstrating human enhancement through the implantation of technology in healthy humans have been performed for over a decade by some academic research groups. More recently, technology enthusiasts have begun to realize the potential of implantable technology such as RFID. It has taken the wider academic community some time to agree that meaningful discourse on the topic is of value. As developments in medical technologies point to the possibilities for enhancement, this shift in thinking is not too soon in coming. In this paper it is demonstrated that implantable RFID devices have evolved to the point whereby we should consider them as simple computers. To this end, the infection with a computer virus of an RFID device implanted in a human is presented. Coupled with our developing concept of the body and its boundaries, it is argued that this has given rise to the world’s first human infected with a computer virus.
Social-Technical Issues Facing the Humancentric RFID Implantee Sub-culture through the Eyes of Amal Graafstra
Mr Amal Graafstra, RFID Toys, USA
Author
Director of IT, Outback Systems
RFID Toys author Amal Graafstra, is the owner of several technology and mobile communications companies and a double RFID implantee. Amal loves thinking up interesting ways to combine and apply various technologies in his daily life.
Since learning about RFID technology used in cats and dogs for identification, Amal wanted to leverage that technology himself. Getting implants meant there was no need to carry an RFID access card around and he could implement his own RFID access control systems instead of buying expensive off-the-shelf products. Soon after getting his first implant and posting some pictures of the process for a few friends, word quickly spread over the Internet and soon he found himself talking to everyone from industry players to clergy to book publishers about RFID technology and its possibilities.
Amal has been interviewed about his adventures in RFID by television, print, and online news media from around the world, including the Discovery Channel’s Daily Planet program. He uses his RFID implants to log into his computer, access his front door and opening his car door.
Abstract
Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags and transponders have traditionally been used to identify domesticated animals so that they can be reunited with their owners in the event that they stray. In the late 1990s, industry started to investigate the benefits of using RFID to identifying non-living things throughout the supply chain toward new efficiencies in business operations. Not long after, people began to consider the possibilities of getting RFID tag or transponder implants for themselves. Mr Amal Graafstra of the United States is one of the first, and probably most well-known ‘do it yourselfer’ (DIY) implantees, who enjoys building customized projects which enable him to interact with his private social living space. Since 2005, hundreds of people have embarked on a mission to interact with their mobile phones, their cars, and their house via a chip implant, providing personalized settings for their own ultimate convenience. This paper presents some of the socio-technical issues facing the RFID implantee sub-culture, namely health and safety, privacy, security, regulation, and societal perceptions. The paper concludes with a list of recommendations related to implantables for hobbyists.
The Challenge of Cyborg Rights
Dr Roger Clarke, Xamax Consultancy
Visiting Professor, School of Computer Science, ANU
Director, Xamax Consultancy
Roger is a consultant focusing on strategic and policy aspects of eBusiness, information infrastructure, and dataveillance and privacy, working through his own company, Xamax Consultancy. He has a long list of both formal and informal publications, and has been a Visiting Professor at universities in Australia and overseas. He has been an active privacy advocate since 1972, an active privacy researcher since 1975, an active privacy consultant since 1977, and a Board member of APF since its inception in 1987. In 2009, he was awarded only the second-ever Australian Privacy Medal.
Abstract
The first generation of cyborgs is alive, well, walking among us, and even running. Pacemakers, clumsy mechanical hands, and renal dialysis machines may not match the movie-image of cyborgs, but they have been the leading wave. Greater challenges are posed by the legs of sprinter Oscar Pistorius, and by implants of both the cochlear and RFID varieties.People who are using prostheses to recover lost capabilities will seek to protect their existing rights. People who have lost capabilities but have not yet got the relevant prostheses will seek the right to have them. Enhanced humans will seek additional rights, to go with the additional capabilities that they have. Professional engineers have an obligation to anticipate these developments, and to brief political, social and economic institutions on their nature, impact and implications. They have to date signally failed to do so, and urgent action is needed.
Cyborg 1.0, Cyborg 2.0 and the Future (Q&A)
Professor Kevin Warwick, University of Reading, United Kingdom
Professor of Cybernetics, University of Reading
Kevin Warwick is Professor of Cybernetics at the University of Reading, England, where he carries out research in artificial intelligence, control, robotics and biomedical engineering. He is a Chartered Engineer (CEng.) and is a Fellow of The Institution of Engineering & Technology (FIET). He is the youngest person ever to become a Fellow of the City & Guilds of London Institute (FCGI).
Kevin was born in Coventry, UK and left school to join British Telecom, at the age of 16. At 22 he took his first degree at Aston University, followed by a PhD and a research post at Imperial College, London. He subsequently held positions at Oxford, Newcastle and Warwick universities before being offered the Chair at Reading, at the age of 33.
He has been awarded higher doctorates (DScs) both by Imperial College and the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague. He was presented with The Future of Health technology Award from MIT (USA), was made an Honorary Member of the Academy of Sciences, St.Petersburg and received The Mountbatten Medal in 2008. In 2000 Kevin presented the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures, entitled “The Rise of The Robots”. He has also been awarded Honorary (DSc) Degrees by the Universities of Aston and Coventry.
Kevin’s research involves robotics and he was responsible (with Dr Jim Wyatt) for Cybot, a robot exported around the world as part of a magazine “Real Robots” – this resulted in royalties totalling over £1M for Reading University. Robots designed and constructed by Kevin’s group (Dr Ian Kelly, Dr Ben Hutt) have been on permanent interactive display in the Science Museums in London, Birmingham and Linz.
Kevin’s recent research involves a collaborative project with the Oxford neurosurgeon, Prof. Tipu Aziz, using intelligent computer methods to predict the onset of Parkinsonian tremors such that they can be stopped by means of a deep brain implant. In 2007 this work was hailed in the Mail on Sunday as “the most significant recent advance in biomedical engineering”.
Day Three
Of Weighty Reasons and Indiscriminate Blankets: The Retention of DNA for Forensic Purposes
Dr Carole McCartney, University of Leeds/Bond University
Lecturer in Law at Leeds University
EU Marie Curie International Research Fellowship at Bond University
Project Manager for the Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Dr Carole McCartney is a lecturer in criminal law and criminal justice at the University of Leeds, previously of Bond University, Queensland, Australia. Carole has written on Australian justice, Innocence Projects, and DNA and criminal justice, authoring Forensic Identification and Criminal Justice: Forensic Science, Justice and Risk (2006). She established an Innocence Project at the University of Leeds in 2005, of which she remains Director. She was project manager for the Nuffield Council on Bioethics report ‘The Forensic Uses of Bio-information: Ethical Issues’ (2007) and is currently leading a Nuffield Foundation project on ‘The Future of Forensic Bioinformation’; and teaching projects on forensic science education and researching forensic regulation. She recently secured an EU Marie Curie international research fellowship (2009-2012) on ‘Forensic Identification Frontiers’, which sees her based at the Centre for Forensic Excellence and Bond University for two years.
Abstract
This paper explores the ramifications of S & Marper v UK (2008), where the European Court of Human Rights, in ruling the UK’s DNA retention regime breached human rights, was ‘struck by the blanket and indiscriminate nature’ of the power to retain DNA and stated that the UK Government required ‘weighty reasons’ to justify the retention of DNA in cases of unconvicted individuals. Since the ruling, the UK Government has drafted a new retention regime but serious doubts remain whether the issue of DNA retention will have been satisfactorily resolved.
In Defense of Privacy: The Concept and the Regime
Professor Colin Bennett
University of Victoria
Professor, Department of Political Science
Colin Bennett received his Bachelor's and Master's degrees from the University of Wales, and his Ph.D from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Since 1986 he has taught in the Department of Political Science at the University of Victoria. From 1999-2000, he was a fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. In 2007 he was a Visiting Fellow at the Center for the Study of Law and Society at University of California, Berkeley.
His research has focused on the comparative analysis of surveillance technologies and privacy protection policies at the domestic and international levels. In addition to numerous scholarly and newspaper articles, he has published three books: Regulating Privacy: Data Protection and Public Policy in Europe and the United States (Cornell University Press, 1992); Visions of Privacy: Policy Choices for the Digital Age (University of Toronto Press, 1999, with Rebecca Grant); The Governance of Privacy: Policy Instruments in the Digital Age (The MIT Press, 2006 with Charles Raab). He has completed policy reports on privacy protection for the Canadian government, the Canadian Standards Association, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the European Commission, and the UK Information Commissioner. He is currently completing projects on the subject of “privacy advocacy” in Western societies, as well as on the politics of identity cards. He is currently the co-investigator of a SSHRC Major Collaborative Research Initiative grant entitled “The New Transparency: Surveillance and Social Sorting.”
He teaches a range of courses on US politics, political analysis and information and communications policy.
Abstract
It has recently become fashionable within the surveillance studies community to subject the concept and regime of “privacy protection” to some very rigorous criticism. “Privacy” and all that it entails is argued to be too narrow, too based on liberal assumptions of subjectivity, too implicated in rights-based theory and discourse, insufficiently sensitive to the social sorting and discriminatory aspects of surveillance, and overly embroiled in spatial metaphors about “invasion” and “intrusion.” As a concept, and as a way to frame the various social and political challenges encountered within “surveillance societies,” it is inadequate. These critiques are important, and to some extent, have set scholarly inquiry on a new, exciting and broader, trajectory than that offered by privacy scholars. On closer examination, however, these critiques are often based on some faulty assumptions about the contemporary framing of the privacy issue, and about the governance of the issue. Privacy, as a concept, regime, a set of policy instruments, and as a way to frame civil society activism, shows an extraordinary resilience. Surveillance scholars must learn to live with it.
