Bryan Johnson argues that neural interface devices must operate on two principles: users consent to wearing them and control their own data. He compares recommendation algorithms from Google, Netflix, and Spotify to mind reading, warning that emerging neural tech needs transparent, user-centric practices instead of the profit-driven data harvesting the tech industry has normalized.
So what do you think about data privacy and data privacy in terms of the kernel devices? There's two fundamental principles driving how we deal with data. One is individual control and individual consent. Anytime somebody puts on an interface, they do both those things. They consent to it and then they have control of their data. And with that pillar, we think that really sets the stage for how neural data can become something we trust and something that is used for our benefit, not for our detriment. And that's largely what's happened over the past couple decades with the rise of the Internet and technology, is that data has been gathered about us, not for our benefit, but for the corporation's benefit. A lot of people talk about this device as a mind reading device. If you think about it, Google is doing mind reading when they auto complete your search and Netflix is reading your mind when they suggest movies and Spotify, etc. We just don't frame it as mind reading. I think there's a quote in the movie Unusual Suspects where the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was believing humanity he didn't exist.
