5 Mind-Bending Truths About the Next AI Revolution
Beyond ChatGPT: 5 Mind-Bending Truths About the Next AI Revolution
Public fascination with artificial intelligence is currently cantered on Large Language Models like ChatGPT, which have reshaped our understanding of machine capabilities. We marvel at their ability to generate human-like text, images, and code from simple prompts. But this focus on AI as a tool for processing our external commands obscures a far more intimate and profound technological revolution that is already underway. A new frontier is emerging at the direct interface between AI and the human brain, where the technology is moving beyond analysing what we type to interpreting what we think. This convergence of AI and neurotechnology carries implications that are far more personal than any previous breakthrough. What happens when AI moves from processing our words to interpreting our thoughts? The answers, unfolding across law, ethics, and even on Main Street, are redefining the very boundaries of the self. Here are five truths that reveal the contours of this new world.
1. AI is Learning to Read Minds, Not Just Text
While the world is focused on LLMs, recent breakthroughs in that field "pale in comparison to an emerging frontier – foundation models for human brain data." Instead of being trained on text and images, these pioneering "Brain Foundation Models" process real-time neural signals from technologies like electroencephalography (EEG) and functional MRI (fMRI). Their purpose is to capture and interpret "the live workings of the human mind" itself, enabling applications like diagnosing epilepsy, powering silent speech interfaces, and running wearable EEG devices.
Stephen Scheeler, CEO of the neurotechnology company Omniscient, frames this shift perfectly. His company is at the forefront of this new domain, moving beyond language to map the brain's complex electrical circuitry.
"We're sort of the OpenAI of the human brain. We build large brain models, not large language models.”
This represents a profound evolution in artificial intelligence. For years, AI has excelled at analysing the external outputs of human cognition—the text we write and the images we create. Now, it is beginning to capture and interpret the internal workings of the human mind. This leap from analysing external expression to interpreting internal thought forces a fundamental re-evaluation of where a person ends and their technology begins.
2. Your Brain May Soon Need a Lawyer
The rise of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) integrated with AI introduces unprecedented risks that conventional data privacy laws are ill-equipped to handle. These systems can potentially exploit subconscious neural signals, steering our choices below the level of conscious detection and eroding what is known as "cognitive liberty." This creates a critical vulnerability for users due to "verification asymmetry": you cannot directly observe or validate how your neural signals are being interpreted by an AI, leaving you uniquely open to manipulation.
To address this, researchers have proposed a novel solution: embedding the legal principles of fiduciary duty directly into the AI's architecture. Fiduciary relationships are a legal tool specifically designed for situations of profound information asymmetry; as one paper notes, "...the law imposes loyalty, care, and confidentiality on one party precisely because that party wields potentially exploitative power over intimate, personal information that the other party cannot easily monitor or verify." Making the AI a fiduciary would legally obligate it to act solely in the user's best interests, much like a doctor is bound to their patient.
This is a ground-breaking concept because it moves the conversation beyond data privacy. It aims to protect our personal autonomy and freedom of thought from subconscious manipulations, creating a framework of trust for a future where technology has direct access to our inner cognitive life.
3. The Line Between You and Your Tech is Legally Disappearing
Our legal system is built on a foundational and seemingly obvious distinction: the line between a person and their property. But the emergence of "cyborgs"—or "part human, part machine complexes"—is actively challenging this core concept. As technology becomes more deeply integrated with our bodies, the law is struggling to keep up.
Consider the real-world case of a quadriplegic veteran whose specialized mobility assistance device was damaged by an airline. The event rendered him bedridden for 11 months, causing ulcers to develop. Yet, the airline argued its liability was limited to damage to property, not injury to a person. This highlights a deep legal incongruity where harm to an integrated device is not seen as harm to the individual, even when the consequences are devastating.
This blurring is not just theoretical. In the 2014 US Supreme Court case Riley v California, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that modern cell phones are so pervasive they might be considered "an important feature of human anatomy." The law is being forced to reconsider its most basic boundaries, questioning whether a device that is functionally part of you is a tool you own or an extension of who you are.
By constructing medical devices as risk objects … we fix them in time and substance. They are what they are at the time of implantation: objects discrete from persons. They are conceptually removed from the embodied (or at least conjoined) future for which they are destined.
4. 'Cognitive Enhancement' is No Longer Sci-Fi—It's Becoming a Human Right
The debate over enhancing human capabilities is moving from philosophical thought experiments to actual legislation. Countries like Chile are pioneering laws on "neurorights," seeking to establish new human rights for the age of neurotechnology. Among the most complex of these is the proposed right to "fair and equitable access to cognitive enhancement."
This immediately raises challenging questions. The debate shifts when moving from restoring function (therapy) to improving the function of healthy individuals for competitive or personal advantage—what some ethicists call a "medicine of desire." This includes pharmacological enhancers, or "smart drugs," which are considered the most accessible and low-cost method of recreational neuroenhancement.
The legal recognition of a right to enhancement creates a profound ethical dilemma. If society accepts that cognitive enhancement is possible, does it then have an obligation to ensure access is equitable, preventing the creation of a new, neurocognitively enhanced elite? The move to codify neurorights is therefore forcing a global conversation about justice, equality, and whether society is prepared to manage the emergence of a neuro-enhanced class of citizens.
5. The Real Human Augmentation is Happening on Main Street, Not in Secret Labs
While brain implants capture the imagination, the first wave of true cognitive augmentation isn't happening in a lab—it's being deployed by entrepreneurs. The AI revolution's most immediate impact is its role as a "cognitive co-pilot" for small business, acting as a massive force multiplier for entrepreneurs and small teams.
According to AI expert Tim Warren, highly accessible and often free AI tools are allowing "motivated people" to get a "huge amount out of this." Small companies are now able to fulfil complex marketing, design, and writing needs that once required significant capital and specialized staff. This isn't about altering biology; it's about amplifying human capability.
This trend gives smaller, more agile businesses a "first mover advantage" over larger corporations that are often burdened by legacy systems and slower decision-making processes. While headlines focus on futuristic bio-hacking, the real revolution is AI serving millions of people in their daily work. This widespread, accessible form of human augmentation is scaling human potential on a massive scale, right now.
Conclusion
The AI revolution is proving to be far more personal, complex, and consequential than just mastering language. It is pushing us to redefine the boundaries between minds and machines, people and property, and therapy and enhancement. Whether our integrated devices are seen as property or personhood, and whether cognitive enhancement becomes a right or a privilege, are no longer abstract questions—they are the immediate architectural choices for our shared future. We are actively negotiating the terms of our future relationship with technologies that don't just serve us, but have the potential to merge with us.
As AI becomes an extension of our minds, who should write the terms and conditions for our own thoughts?
Useful references;
