like Neuralink's N1 go straight to the source. Thousands of flexible threads penetrate the cortex, listening to individual neurons sing. The resolution is extraordinary—you can hear the electrical whispers of single cells. But the brain doesn't like foreign objects. Over time, the immune system wraps electrodes in scar tissue, signals degrade, and the symphony becomes static. The question isn't whether invasive BCIs work; it's how long they work, and whether the benefits justify the surgery.
found a clever middle path. Synchron's Stentrode slips into the brain through the jugular vein—no open surgery, no drilling through skull. It lodges in a blood vessel adjacent to the motor cortex, close enough to hear the neural chorus but separated by the vessel wall. The resolution is lower, but so is the risk. And crucially, it can be removed or upgraded. For patients with ALS who've lost the ability to move or speak, this isn't theoretical. They're controlling computers with thought right now.
are the consumer face of the technology. EEG headsets that read brainwaves through the scalp. Companies like NextMind (now part of Snap) and Muse have made neural interfaces as accessible as fitness trackers. The catch? The skull is a thick wall. By the time neural signals reach the surface, they're faint echoes of the original. You can detect focus states, maybe coarse directional intentions, but not the fine-grained stuff of thought.
— Bringing back what was lost. Cochlear implants that let the deaf hear. Motor prosthetics that let the paralyzed move. These are uncontroversial miracles.
— Expanding beyond normal function. Faster communication, perfect recall, calculation at machine speeds. This is where things get interesting. If a BCI lets someone process information twice as fast, is that fair in a job interview? In a classroom?
— Creating entirely new capacities. Direct brain-to-brain communication without the compression of language. Synthetic senses—seeing infrared, sensing magnetic fields. Shared consciousness, however temporary. These sound like science fiction, but labs are working on all of them.
— Your neural data should be yours alone. This seems obvious until you consider how current tech companies treat data. Now imagine that data is your literal thoughts. The business model of attention manipulation applied directly to the brain. It doesn't just sound dystopian; it sounds like the end of autonomous personhood.
— Protection against alterations that change who you are. This is fuzzier. We change constantly—"no man steps in the same river twice." But there's a difference between natural change and imposed change. If a BCI modifies your personality without meaningful consent, something precious has been violated.
— Ensuring decisions remain autonomously generated. This sounds philosophical, but it's deeply practical. If your BCI consistently suggests certain options, highlights particular information, dampens specific emotional responses—how autonomous are your choices? The line between assistance and manipulation is thinner than we like to admit.
— Preventing BCIs from creating cognitive castes. If neural enhancement becomes economically essential—if you can't get a job without one, can't compete without enhancement—then "consent" becomes suspect. This isn't hypothetical. Try getting a white-collar job without a smartphone today. Now imagine the stakes with technology inside your skull.
— Every brain is different. Neural patterns that are clear in one person might be invisible in another. The beautiful demonstrations you see in papers don't always replicate across subjects.
— Your neural patterns change day to day, hour to hour, based on fatigue, caffeine, mood, attention. The decoder that worked perfectly yesterday might struggle today.
— Even Neuralink's thousands of channels read only a tiny fraction of neural activity. We're trying to understand a symphony by listening to a few instruments through a wall.
— The brain is a hostile environment for foreign materials. Scar tissue, inflammation, device degradation—these problems have plagued neural implants for decades. No one knows if current devices will function for years, let alone decades.
— Bypassing the slow, lossy compression of language. Sharing thoughts without translating them into words. This appeals to something deep in me—the desire to be understood without the friction of representation.
— Perfect recall of everything I've read, experienced, thought. The liberation from forgetting.
— Handling multiple streams of attention simultaneously. The end of the single-threaded mind.
Yuste & Goering (2017) "Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI" - Nature; Ienca & Andorno (2017) "Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology" - Life Sciences, Society and Policy; Kellmeyer et al. (2019) "Neuroethics of Brain-Computer Interfaces" - Handbook of Neuroethics; Clark (2008) "Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension" - Oxford University Press; Lebedev & Nicolelis (2017) "Brain-machine interfaces: from basic science to neuroprostheses and neurorehabilitation" - Physiological Reviews; Oxley et al. (2016) "Minimally invasive endovascular stent-electrode array for high-fidelity, chronic recordings of cortical neural activity" - Nature Biotechnology; Wolpaw & Wolpaw (2012) "Brain-Computer Interfaces: Principles and Practice" - Oxford University Press; Bostrom & Sandberg (2009) "Cognitive Enhancement: Methods, Ethics, Regulatory Challenges" - Science and Engineering Ethics.