Colorado lawmakers want to protect people’s privacy from machines that can read thoughts
A panel of lawmakers approved legislation that would make Colorado the first in the nation to protect people’s biological data from technology companies, raising worries that new machines could be come so powerful they could read thoughts.
The House Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 1058, which expands upon the Colorado Privacy Act’s definition of “sensitive data” to include biological and neural data.
Under the measure, biological data means information that provides a “characterization of the biological, genetic, biochemical, or physiological properties, compositions, or activities of an individual’s body or bodily functions.” It includes neural data, which the bill defines as “information that concerns the activity of an individual’s central nervous system or peripheral nervous systems, including the brain and spinal cord, and that can be processed by or with the assistance of a device.”
The bill specifically targets consumer-facing neurotechnology devices, such as sleep trackers and neurofeedback devices, as data from technology used in a medical setting — such as an EEG, for example — is already protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
Several medical professionals spoke in support of the bill, including Dr. Rafael Yuste, a neurologist and neurotechnology expert.
“I’m here to alert you and make the argument that the same devices we’re building to help the patients can be used to map mental activity and to change mental activity,” Yuste said. “As one of the scientists that is on the forefront of this field, I have to alert the representatives of the people that this technology has to be regulated.”
“It’s very powerful,” Yuste added.
The bill’s sponsors, Reps Cathy Kipp, D- Fort Collins, and Matt Soper, R- Delta, and Sens. Mark Baisley, R- Sedalia, and Kevin Priola, D- Aurora, said they introduced the legislation to proactively regulate emerging technology before something detrimental occurs.
The lawmakers cited recent breakthroughs in neurotechnology, including Meta’s “mind-reading” AI, as well as a group of scientists who were able to recreate a song solely from brain activity.
While many of the witnesses who testified expressed excitement about the recent technological innovations and future advances, they also raised worries that unchecked progress could lead to negative, unintended consequences.
“I see the promises of these technologies first and foremost,” said Dr. Sean Pauzauskie, a neurologist in Fort Collins. “I want to promote their innovation, while at the same time, I’m here as a patient advocate. These are powerful tools that are rapidly evolving the ability to read neural data, including your thoughts. At the same time that I want to see these technologies benefit patients, I feel I owe it to them to ensure that the data that are being collected are safe.”
During the hearing, several proponents, including Ruthie Barko of TechNet, a bipartisan network of technology executives, advocated for an amendment to refine the bill’s definitions. Barko proposed a more precise definition of biological data and a narrower scope for neural data because the original version of the bill would include technologies like augmented and virtual reality, which some argued should be excluded.
The bill’s sponsors brought forth an amendment to provide enhanced protection for future technologies with yet-unseen capabilities.
“The future is here, and this bill really reflects that,” Soper said. “What our bill seeks to do is be the first in the nation of its kind, a second in the world of its kind, to really be able to look at protection of our thoughts.”
The country of Chile passed legislation in 2023 saying data relating to an individual’s “biological profile” cannot be used without consent.
The judiciary committee voted unanimously to pass HB 1058.
Article written by Marissa Ventrelli, Coloradopolitics.com, marissa.ventrelli@coloradopolitics.com