I must note the incidence of direct brain interfaces that appear to promise that thoughts themselves will soon be, insofar as they are not already, both ascertainable and deliverable, via technological means. See Neuralink, et alia.
Insofar as this interface remains unobtainium, your point is valid. However, in the case that human thoughts are actually affectable, then sovereignty simply doesn't exist.
As unpleasant as it may be to contemplate, this is real, and is already possible to certain parties, albeit in limited extent. To what degree it is possible is both debatable, and dependent on technological prowess.
Given our nascent understanding of the brain, such prowess is most likely limited, at present, to state actors. It is certain, however, that such prowess will promulgate, and it may be quite soon that apps that provide such capability could be available.
Whether anyone able to directly impact people's thoughts will make that technology available is both unlikely, and, perhaps, the best possible outcome.
Food for thought.
I think for now they can only correlate the thoughts with the impulses on the brain in certain sectors.
So that to me looks like just metadata. You think of a car, some neurons fire up on one side of your brain.
And the brain changes every second as synapses are changing, so it's pretty hard to "read thoughts" this way.
I don't think they will be able to connect things to your brain any time soon.
The artificial prosthetics are easy, since they are connected to your nerves, which are specifically delivering those impulses to your arm or leg.
However decyphering thoughts is a whole other area. At least I hope mind reading technology is impossible.
Because if it's possible, then we are really really fucked. Orwellian slavery will then be the norm.
While such direct brain interface might enable a slavery that would make Orwell look like a basket of puppies, I tend to optimism in that regard. Elon Musk is on it, and I am strongly convinced of his personal altruism. He walks his talk.
He also succeeds at seemingly impossible tasks.
Neither is he alone in his pursuit of a functional neural interface, and I believe the majority of people after that goal aren't doing so to achieve some nefarious purpose. There are certainly some that are, though, and nothing is guaranteed.
Once the post market economy has rendered obsolete all forms of money, the need for exchange, and non-point source production has become ubiquitous, there will simply be no need for power over people. While psychopaths and AI might do evil, most people aren't psychopaths, and given some form of neural interface, people will have the capacity of AI personally.
I suspect, in the end, the few, the proud, the malignant, will just be utterly outnumbered by all the rest of us, and AI is unlikely to become superintelligent prior to superior neural interfacing enabling people to make AI obsolete.
It's not something that could be stopped anyway.
I wish us all luck =)
This will not happen. :D
Exchanges will always happen, and using money is always more efficient than bartering, so techno-communism will not happen.
Well, as I said, first they have to make ordinary computers malware proof. If they can't do that simple task, then messing up neural implants could cause a lot more damage than some silly ransomware malware.
I'm not referring to communism, but the complete lack of any need for a market. Given continued development of personal manufacturing (3d printing, all the rest), nanotechnology (foraging nanobots, for example), and brain computer interface (allowing access to the resources on the internet directly to our brains, rather than through screens), and the software to coordinate all these things (which will grow as the tech develops), why will we need to market our labor, or surpluses we produce? We won't need any resources we don't possess. Food, power, water, air, clothes, all of these and the rest of the products we need can be produced by the ecosystem of devices we own.
I fail to see any product or service necessary to be marketed, and bought and sold, given time and engineering development of the technology presently available.
Can you point to any specific things or ideas that aren't able to be manufactured by the personal devices we will have in a few decades? Srsly, I'm not being dogmatic, and would like to consider any specifics you might think relevant.
As to malware, I couldn't agree more. Perhaps, when our brains are directly interfaced with hard and software, the intrusion of some malware would be felt just as we feel the bite of a flea today.
Either we will solve the malware problem, or it will eventually solve us, I am sure. The present chaos is simply too counterproductive to remain part of a functional system, although I might be too cynical, and neglecting the biological models of the development of the eukaryotic cell, and how viral DNA is incorporated into our own.
Perhaps there is a level of malware that is tolerable, after all.
I dunno.
Thanks for your reply =)