Opinion by: Andreas Melhede, co-founder of Elata Biosciences
Neuralink’s first-ever brain implant is making science fiction a reality. It’s a device the size of a coin with ultra-thin electrode threads that a surgical robot uses to weave into the brain’s cortex for reading and transmitting neuron signals. These signals are sent wirelessly to a computer, enabling the implant wearer to perform actions without physical movement. Elon Musk, Neuralink’s founder, has emphasized that the aim is to “give people superpowers.”
The vision of a direct brain-computer interface (BCI) from Silicon Valley is thrilling. Designed to assist individuals with severe paralysis, Neuralink’s implant allows them to control a cursor, type, or even manipulate a robotic limb using just their thoughts.
However, a crucial aspect often overlooked in healthcare is the serious implications of a single billionaire-owned company having access to someone’s mind.
Centralization threatens individual autonomy regarding the brain. The ability to manage our own thoughts and movements is fundamental to our freedom. Why should we surrender that authority to one individual?
Meanwhile, Decentralized Science (DeSci) is quietly transforming brain research, gaining traction in scientific communities. It approaches neuroscience as a collective public endeavor rather than a product confined to corporate servers, allowing individuals to regain control over their brain data.
Bringing the brain onchain
BCI technology is now a global trend. Recently, a team of researchers from China developed a BCI that can alter what a subject perceives to assist people with partial or total blindness.
Their findings suggest that external focal stimulation can engage the functional circuitry crucial for normal visual perception.
This notable proof of concept poses a significant question: Who maintains control over this capability?
If a third party can dictate a primary function after a BCI chip is implanted, strict regulations need to be established to ensure equitable power sharing. Decentralization may very well present the solution we need.
Creating a future where brain data is both private and shareable requires a clear framework. Bringing the brain onchain involves utilizing decentralized infrastructure to convert neural signals into secure, verifiable digital data that remains entirely under the individual’s control.
The outcome?
A secure structure allowing users to operate software solely through their thoughts, while preserving complete mental freedom.
Decentralization matters for the human mind
Our brains produce the most personal data imaginable, reflecting thoughts, emotions, and intentions many hesitate to voice.
Related: Elon Musk’s Neuralink seeks patients globally to try its brain chips
Unlike DNA, which describes physical characteristics, brain data can forecast actions and feelings, making it extraordinarily personal. Centralizing this power equates to surrendering the very operating system of one’s self.
Decentralization is not merely a technical choice; it’s a moral necessity.
When discussing centralized data repositories, we often skip over their real implications. Ironically, human existence hinges on our complete mastery of our minds. No one should have direct access to our private thoughts, and granting that control to a single entity contradicts the essence of being human.
In a centralized business model, one corporation dictates how neural data is stored, who can access it, and the commercial incentives guiding its use, often without seeking patient consent or under cumbersome agreements. Unlike shopping data or browser history, agreeing to these terms risks more than privacy—it puts control over one’s actions and speech on the line if centralized systems get hacked.
Attackers could steal not just patient data but also manipulate their minds and behaviors.
Conversely, decentralization distributes this power, ensuring that no single entity can accessed a person’s most sensitive data or assert control over their lives. Users retain their encryption keys, and access to neural profiles requires explicit consent that can be withdrawn at any time.
Furthermore, decentralization fosters pluralism. Much like how open-source software spurred innovation on the internet and in finance, decentralized brain networks can encourage a variety of applications without a single organization dictating the experience.
Building a collective neural future
The next ten years will establish whether BCIs transform into a public resource or a privatized portal into the human psyche.
Collaboratively created protocols can govern device communication and the logging of neural information onchain, maintaining compatibility across various manufacturers. Token systems can incentivize researchers to enhance decoding techniques, bolster privacy, and support independent security evaluations. Consent-driven data commons, safeguarded by zero-knowledge encryption, could offer extensive anonymized resources for discovery while protecting personal neural identifiers.
Regulation is crucial, but broad participation energizes the movement. From developers creating mind-controlled games to artists composing brainwave-based music and clinicians designing neurofeedback therapies, stakeholders become co-owners in a transparent, collectively governed network.
Maintaining the confidentiality of our thoughts is an inalienable human right that no one should forfeit. So why should we have to relinquish our mental privacy to one centralized organization?
Bringing the brain onchain in a transparent, decentralized, and collaboratively governed manner guarantees that everyone maintains full autonomy over their minds.
Opinion by: Andreas Melhede, co-founder of Elata Biosciences.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
