[hericium]

I'd stay away from a corporation attempting to mess with my brain. Especially Elon Musk's corporation. The guy shows tyrant tendencies, made people pay monthly for unfinished software in upfront-paid "self driving" cars, exploits and endangers his employees for profit and is a COVID-downplaying dick using his influencing potential to endanger even more people.

I consider Elon Musk too unstable and unethical sociopath to trust that Neuralink would be used to better mankind, not just Elon Musk. The dude wants power.

[api]

I will say no to any kind of direct neural interface run by anyone with any kind of connection to “the cloud.” I must have absolute control over it or absolutely not. The only exception would be something used by a proper doctor to treat an actual medical condition.

A neural link could be thousands of times worse in terms of privacy invasion, addiction, and “rabbit hole effect” brainwashing than anything we have now. Phones and home assistants are invasive but they are not merging with our biology. One can put them down or disconnect them.

History has shown that overt malice or ill intent is not required for things to go evil either. All you need is perverse economic incentives and/or feedback loops leading to destructive emergent behaviors.

So no, absolutely not.

[hericium]

> The only exception would be something used by a proper doctor to treat an actual medical condition.

And in an off-line setting. But sadly, we're going a different route, into consumer-hostile XaaS model. With medical equipment, too.

[londons_explore]

But if the choice is that or be a vegetable for a few weeks before my family decide to pull the plug on me, I'll take musk/zuckerbergs brain implant, as I suspect many people would.

[supperburg]

He did a ton of good things too. I would say the good outweighs the bad, especially since FSD has started to pan out in the past few months.