(Jan) Christoph Bublitz

A Moratorium on Implantable Non-Medical Neurotech Until Effects on the Mind are Properly Understood - Neuroethics The development of non-medical consumer neurotechnology is gaining momentum. As companies chart the course for future implanted and invasive brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) in non-medical populations...

link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12152-025-09612-6

#neuroethics #bioethics #philtech #techgovernance

6/ A precautionary, evidence-based approach is essential. We must not get this wrong. We therefore call for:

• a moratorium on non-medical invasive neurotech.
• development of a mandatory Mental Impact Assessment
• a ban on non-medical implants in children

Read the open access paper:

5/ With neurotech, the stakes are higher—interventions act directly on neural activity. Implantable not only increase “bandwidth”, as often said. Rather, they open new bidirectional channels between brain and digital tech. This will substantially increase risks.

4/ Recent digital technologies (smartphones, social media) provide a clear warning: They have scaled globally before their mental impact is understood. After a decade, individuals, parents, and societal institutions such as schools still struggle to find appropriate ways of using them.

3/ Without such tests, the effects on the human mind are unclear, people cannot make informed use decisions. The Assessment requires interdisciplinary efforts and the involvement of disciplines such as phenomenology, much broader than what is demanded by current regulations.

2/ We propose a moratorium on implantable non-med neurotechnologies until their effects on the human mind are properly understood. Specifically, devices should undergo a Mental Impact Assessment, a systematic evaluation of psychological and cognitive effects under realistic use conditions.

🧠 New paper: “A Moratorium on Implantable Non-Medical Neurotech”

As Neuralink, Synchron, and possibly soon MergeLab funded by OpenAI push the frontier, we ask: are we ready for Brain-Computer Interfaces outside medicine?

➡️Our new paper says: not yet.

"Kein Punkt kann für sich alleine stehen" - Yayoi Kusama

The report also suggest to include freedom of thought in impact assessments, which echoes my idea of a Freedom-of-Thought Impact Assessment for digital technologies.
#neuroethics #humanrights #freedomofthought #technologygovernance

Think Again: Freedom of Thought in the Age of Artificial Intelligence This brief examines the implications for freedom of thought of the new information ecosystem, as well as the potential impacts of AI-based neurotechnologies, which raise fundamental questions about th...

Freedom of Thought: The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights has just published a policy report on freedom of thought, AI, and neurotechnology. I am honored to have contributed and like how it describes the right and applies it to social media.../
www.osce.org/odihr/597450

For those interested in the chapter, it is on SSRN now
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
#legaltheory #philosophyoflaw #criminallaw

We invite scholars from around the world to submit their neuroethics research for presentation at the Neuroethics 2026 conference next April — with opportunities to present virtually or in-person at locations in the U.S., Italy and South Africa.
neuroethicssociety.org/meeting/neur...

Literaturnobelpreis - Krasznahorkai: Der Mann, der keinen Punkt am Ende des Satzes mag László Krasznahorkai ist Gewinner des Literaturnobelpreises 2025. In seinen Romanen entwirft er düstere Bedrohungsszenarien mit einsamen Sonderlingen.

"Nur Gott darf Punkte setzen" - László Krasznahorkai

www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/nur-gott-dar...

„10 Regeln für die Digitale Welt“: 1. Erhebt digitale Technik nicht zum Selbstzweck. 2. Schreibt Maschinen keine Menschlichkeit zu. 3. Schafft Raum für Muße und analoge Begegnung. 4. Garantiert den Erhalt sozialer und demokratischer Kompetenzen. 5. Zerstört nicht die Natur für den technischen Fortschritt. 6. Behandelt Menschen nicht als bloße Datenobjekte. 7. Lasst Euch nicht Eurer menschlichen Potenziale berauben. 8. Verleugnet nicht die Grenzen der Technik. 9. Nutzt Maschinen nicht, um die Freiheit Anderer zu untergraben. 10. Verhindert Machtkonzentration und garantiert Teilhabe.

'10 Regeln für die Digitale Welt' sind nun "in der Welt"! 😊

Ich durfte sie in einer spannenden Gruppe mitdefinieren, u.a. mit @jurgenpfeffer.bsky.social und @paulnemitz.bsky.social.

Hier eine der vielen News dazu:

news.vm.uni-freiburg.de/de/newsarchi...

Kommentare sind sehr willkommen!

1/2

Freue mich, später im Deutschen Theater zu sprechen. Wer vorbeikommen möchte...
www.deutschestheater.de/programm/pro...

Just received my contributor's copy of the CUP handbook on Experimental Jurisprudence by @kevintobia.bsky.social, which may well beome the prime reference for anyone interested in the field, given the many interesting chapters and leading authors.

Call for Papers: New Technologies and Human Rights for the Journal for Human Rights, edition 1/2026 How are AI, social media, and automated systems changing our society, and what do these developments mean for human rights? The Journal for Human…

📣 Exciting Call Papers for The Journal of Human Rights/Zeitschrift für Menschenrechte: „New Technologies and Human Rights“. Submissions from various disciplines welcome. Read more here: www.humanrights.fau.eu/2025/08/08/c...

Number of judicial opinions that cite "A Theory of Law": 9

Ex-Verfassungsrichter kritisieren Umgang mit Brosius-Gersdorf Nach dem Desaster um die Verfassungsrichterwahl kritisieren knapp 300 Rechtswissenschaftler die bisherige Diskussion und das Verfahren als 'unsachlich'.

Rund 300 Rechtswissenschaftler und Ex-Verfassungsrichter melden sich in einem offenen Brief zu Wort. Sie kritisieren darin den Umgang mit Brosius-Gersdorf, eine "unsachliche Debatte" und "mangelnde Vorbereitung" seitens der Politik.

Christoph Bublitz

Honored to give a keynote later at UOC Barcelona on human rights and neurotechnology. Interview with me here:
www.uoc.edu/en/news/2025...

In dramatic reversal, Senate votes to kill AI-law moratorium A GOP-led bid to stop states from regulating AI collapsed after a deal to save it fell through.

In a stunning reversal, the Senate voted 99-1 this morning to strip from Trump's big bill a 10-year moratorium on state-level AI regulations.

Gift link to my story on how it happened and who's celebrating: wapo.st/3TOyiaG

New Viewpoint: Countries allowing assisted suicide should offer candidates psychedelics and support to change their minds. If we truly value life, shouldn't we explore every therapeutic option - even controversial ones - before accepting that suffering is untreatable?
ja.ma/4l2gdls

5/ (Our correspondence was intended for publication before negotiations concluded but it remains relevant). Read it here:
www.nature.com/articles/s44...

YouTube video by Berkeley Engineering A streaming brain-to-voice neuroprosthesis to restore naturalistic communication

4/ ... is matter of human dignity. States should use maximum available resources for making them available. www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGSo...

3/ To avoid this impression, we call on states to use its implementation as an opportunity to live up to their obligations and fill them with life. In particular, we think that providing devices or prostheses that restore essential human capacities as speech, communication or movement ...

2/...the Recommendation focuses more on risks than on potential benefits. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities established numerous important binding obligations of states which are broader than those of the Recommendation. This might be seen as a setback.

1/ UNESCO member states recently concluded negotiations on the first global Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology, to be adopted in November. Our comment in Nature Mental Health examines it through a disability rights lens. While people with disabilities are primary neurotechnology users..

Also interesting, 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘳.
From Sanskrit, the earthly incarnation of godly powers.

On the etymology of 𝘷𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺:

Manly strength (vir) --> inherent powers --> implicit powers --> something not really there, irrealis -> virtual.

(from Heim, The Paradox of Virtuality
academic.oup.com/edited-volum... )

2/ At least when used without consent and outside of medical treatment. What would this imply? Read more in our latest article (behind paywall, send me a message for the file).