Numerous US patents cover BCI (1990s +). It's legitimate. Numerous US patents also cover key aspects of DNA (1980's +), which translate into BCI.
When experimental vaccines were mandated, the greatest majority complied, denying the small minority their legal rights to decide over their bodies. Turning on those who tried to defend human rights, have long-term.social consequences. Groupthink denounced and targeted the ethical ones. One life was worth more than another. The US Constitution became ineffective. Those were collective, freewill choices. Fast Forward to BCI. What if it were mandated? Personal opinions aside, who voted for these governments who disown human rights at free will? Would it have mattered if the majority voted differently? Probably not. The "roadblock" is a personal thing. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but ultimately, US citizens can go live in most countries. Many "wintered out" the pandemic abroad, free of mandates. Many would flee from mandated BCIs. Reportedly, the vaccine is similar to a BCI antenna. Who really knows? Techno dictatorships went too far years ago. When the first A bombs were experimentally dropped on a country that didn't even start a world war. Nature, if not humans, still give us the right to decide over how we, as individuals and collectives, chart our paths. Only an individual can change its gestalt. However, it's often justified via selective ethics. Spare a thought for those people, with the same natural human rights as us, who don't have many options, other than to shut up and comply. Propagating a false narrative how humans don't have free will is conditioning tbe masses for robotic and zombified compliance. Anything goes, even using individuals as a food resource. Scientifically, that seemingly aims to standardize the lowest level of cognitive consciousness in society, for the masses. On Mon, 12 Jan 2026, 16:26 John Rose via AGI, <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, January 12, 2026, at 8:22 AM, Quan Tesla wrote: > > Why roadblock progress due to emotional dissonance, instead of advancing > to natural potential in resonance with self and nature? > > > Participating in deciding standards, protocols and laws of technology as > monumental as BCI is not roadblocking. Those who are preventing > participation are. Currently there are no laws as far as I can tell meaning > that you have to assertively declare your thoughts as your own if you wish > to maintain some semblance of legal control and ownership. And the > protocols are being specificized by? It's easy to assume that all tech > innovation is great progress and someone somewhere will in good faith make > unbiased decisions without conflict of interest where the people concerned > are hindrances when in fact history often proves otherwise. Protocols and > standards decisions lay out the framework of the whole thing, look at how > internet standards and communication protocol decisions determined > technological development of the last several decades. Small wrong choices > have massive outcomes that have to be dealt with indefinitely. That's why I > indicate this as a compressed component of the future as well as > consciousness being protocol in relationship to information theory. > *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + > delivery options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> > Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0518db1e3a0c25c5-Mf6c4b78baf18624ad62b06a1> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T0518db1e3a0c25c5-Mc0ce9c2f1731c1fbaaeaf966 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
