Brain-computer interfaces like Neuralink concentrate mental control in corporate hands. Decentralized science offers shared governance over neural data.
Opinion
Opinion by: Andreas Melhede, co-founder of Elata Biosciences
Neuralink’s is turning science fiction into reality. It’s a with hair-thin electrode threads that a surgical robot weaves into the brain’s cortex to read and send neuron signals. These signals are then transmitted wirelessly to a computer, allowing the person wearing the implant to perform actions without needing to move. Elon Musk, Neuralink’s founder, will “give people superpowers.”
Silicon Valley’s vision of a direct brain-computer interface (BCI) sounds exciting. Designed to help people with severe paralysis, Neuralink’s implant allows people to move a cursor, type, or even control a robotic limb using their thoughts alone.
What some in the healthcare industry are failing to consider, however, is that there are profound implications when a single, billionaire-controlled company owns the keys to someone’s mind.
When it comes to the human brain, centralization becomes a direct threat to autonomy. Our ability to control our own thoughts and movements is the most fundamental form of freedom we have. Why should we hand that power over to one person?
Outside of the mainstream, Decentralized Science () is quietly reimagining how brain research can be done and capturing the attention of . It treats neuroscience as a shared public mission rather than a product to be locked inside one company’s servers. Most importantly, it lets people take back control over their brain data.
Bringing the brain onchain
BCI technology has become a global phenomenon. A group of Chinese researchers recently developed a BCI capable of , aiming to aid people experiencing partial or total blindness.
According to their , the “demonstration supports the possibility that externally applied focal stimulation can access functional circuitry known to underlie normal visual perception.”
The results highlight a powerful proof of concept, but also raise an important question: Who controls this capability?
If a third party can control a primary function after a BCI chip is implanted, clear rules must be established to ensure that power is shared fairly. Decentralizing both research and control could be the solution we are looking for.
Developing a future where brain data is both private and shareable would require a clear blueprint. Bringing the brain onchain means using decentralized infrastructure to translate neural signals into secure, verifiable digital data. Data that stays entirely under the individual’s control.
The result?
A secure framework that lets people operate software by thought alone while maintaining absolute mental freedom.
Decentralization matters for the human mind
Our brains generate the most intimate data imaginable. They are a livestream of thoughts most people would not be brave enough to speak, emotions they are unsure they feel and intentions they are yet to fulfill.
Related:
Unlike DNA data, which describes a person’s physical appearance, brain data predicts how one might act or feel, making it one of the most personal pieces of information one could share with the world. To centralize this kind of power is to hand over the operating system of the self.
Decentralization is not a technical preference, but a moral imperative.
When discussing centralized data silos, we often overlook what they actually entail. In essence, it’s ironic: Human existence is defined by the fact that we have complete control over our own minds. No one else has direct access to our private stream of thoughts, and no one should. To give that control to a single company is a direct contradiction of what it means to be human.
In a centralized business model, a single corporation decides how neural data is stored, who can access it, and what commercial incentives shape its use. All of this is often done without asking for patient consent or under lengthy terms and conditions. But unlike with shopping data or browsing history, clicking “I agree” here risks more than just privacy. It risks ceding influence on how one moves and speaks in cases when centralized systems get .
Attackers would no longer just steal patient data; they could interfere with their minds and actions.
In contrast, decentralization distributes that power. It ensures that no single actor can unilaterally access a person’s most vulnerable data and take control over their lives. Encryption keys remain with the user. Access to neural profiles is granted only with explicit consent and can be revoked at any moment.
Most importantly, decentralization also ensures pluralism. Just as open-source software enabled an explosion of innovation on the internet and in banking, decentralized brain networks can foster diverse applications without a single entity dictating the terms and conditions of that mental experience.
Building a collective neural future
The next decade will determine whether brain-computer interfaces become a true public good or a privately owned gateway into the human mind.
Collaboratively designed protocols can set the rules for how devices communicate and how neural information is logged onchain, ensuring that equipment from any maker remains compatible. Token mechanisms can drive researchers to advance decoding techniques, bolster privacy, and underwrite independent security assessments. Consent-driven data commons, protected with zero-knowledge encryption, can supply vast anonymized resources for discovery without exposing personal neural signatures.
Regulation has a role, but widespread involvement fuels the movement. From developers creating mind-controlled games to artists composing music from brainwaves and clinicians crafting neurofeedback therapies, participants become co-owners in a transparent, collectively governed network.
Keeping our thoughts private is an unshakable human right no person should ever be stripped of. So why should we be forced to give up our mental privacy to a single centralized entity?
Bringing the brain onchain in an open, decentralized, and collectively governed way ensures everyone retains full autonomy over their own 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.
