Privacy in the Era of AI, BCI, and BBI

 

When I wrote Privacy Fantasies back in 2010, it was meant to be a provocation—a thought experiment about a world where privacy collapses under the weight of ubiquitous mind‑reading technology. In that imagined 2210 scenario, a simple wearable called Mind‑X allowed anyone to sense others’ emotions, thoughts, and intentions in real time. Secrets evaporated. Society reverted to a globalised version of the pre‑modern village, where everyone knew everything about everyone else.

I didn’t frame it as dystopia. I framed it as inevitability. Technology would push us there; governance, responsibility, and honesty would help us adapt. “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” Resistance is futile, so shape the future rather than fear it.

Back then, smartphones and social media were only beginning to nibble at the edges of privacy. The idea of collective openness, almost a shared consciousness, felt like science fiction.

So where are we in 2026?

Closer than I expected in 2010.
But still decades, perhaps centuries away from the full Mind‑X dream.

Yet the building blocks are emerging with startling speed.

The Technical Foundations Are Falling Into Place

1. Mind-reading is no longer science fiction

Modern BCIs can already decode:

• inner speech
• intentions
• emotional states
• even pre‑conscious signals

Some systems achieve ~74% accuracy on imagined sentences. Others translate thoughts into speech for paralyzed individuals almost instantly. AI models reconstruct images and words from brain activity with eerie fidelity.

Early consumer‑leaning devices, Omi’s forehead sensor, Meta’s neural wristbands are crude but unmistakable steps toward everyday neural interfaces.

2. Emotional sensing is accelerating

Non‑invasive tools can detect attention, stress, arousal, and other basic states. This is the first glimmer of the “sense emotions during conversations” capability I imagined in 2010.

3. Brain-to-brain interfaces (BBI) are emerging

We now have small groups sharing simple neural signals. High‑bandwidth implants (Neuralink and its competitors) are scaling rapidly. Telepathic collaboration—at least for willing participants—is no longer fantasy.

Timelines: A Realistic Trajectory

2030s–2040s (10–20 years)

• Consumer BCIs for self‑use
• Opt‑in emotional sharing between couples or teams
• Early BBI networks for specialised groups
• AR glasses with rudimentary “emotion sense”

2050s–2080s (30–60+ years)

• Something approaching Mind‑X
• High‑fidelity passive neural sensing
• AI‑mediated transparency in professional or intimate settings

The full 2210 vision

• Possibly never in its pure form
• Or 100–200 years away
• Not because of technology alone, but because of ethics, law, and human resistance

Many neuroethicists argue that comprehensive, non‑consensual mind access may be physically impossible—or legally forbidden.

The Real Barriers: Ethics, Law, and Human Nature

Neurorights are rising

Chile has already legislated them. The US, EU, and others are debating them. Neural data is being treated as sacred, akin to DNA or fingerprints. Non‑consensual mind‑reading may become the ultimate red line.

Consent will be the cornerstone

Future systems will likely be:

• opt‑in
• granular
• AI‑filtered

Instead of total transparency, we may get enhanced empathy, a softer, more human version of the dream in most parts of the world. With exceptions??

Adaptation is already underway

Just as photography, the internet, and smartphones forced society to renegotiate privacy, neural tech is triggering the next wave of debate. My 2010 “fantasy” is colliding with reality, but with guardrails.

A Glimpse of the Future: My Recent Visit

I recently visited a nearly completed brainstorming centre of a high‑powered agency. At its core sits an AI‑controlled orb, part facilitator, part moderator. Every participant around it is tracked continuously: heart rate, facial expressions, micro‑gestures, body language.

A room where biomarkers become part of the conversation.

Is this transparency?
Is this enhanced collaboration?
Or is this the first step toward institutionalised emotional surveillance?

The answer depends entirely on governance and intent.

Harari’s Warning: A Faster Shift Than We Expect

Listening to Yuval Noah Harari’s recent podcast (By 2030, the World Will Be Unrecognizable), I was struck by his argument that by 2030, the world will be unrecognisable. Not because of gadgets, but because AI will reshape the very foundations of human society, identity, agency, belief systems.

In the context of BCI and BBI, this raises a profound question:
Can individuality survive when thoughts become shareable?

My view: yes, but only through responsibility and design.
We are building tools that could dissolve individuality, but we are also building the governance frameworks that could preserve it.

Where We Actually Stand

We are on the ramp.
The acceleration since 2010 has been extraordinary.
Precursors to the Mind‑X world may emerge in our lifetime, or certainly in our children’s.

But the “village of minds” future remains a distant horizon, shaped as much by values as by technology.

The core insight from 2010 still holds:
We cannot stop this trajectory, but we can steer it.

And the conversation we are having today is exactly the kind of responsible engagement that will determine whether this future empowers humanity, or overwhelms it.

Tail Piece

The truth is this: leaders today are still debating privacy as if we’re in 2010, while the technology has already leapt into 2030. We are entering an era where the human mind becomes a data source, where emotions are measurable, intentions are inferable, and collaboration may soon happen at the speed of thought. And yet most boardrooms are still stuck arguing about cookie banners and data‑sharing policies.

The gap between technological reality and leadership imagination has never been wider.

AI, BCI, and BBI are not “future issues.” They are governance issues, competitive issues, national‑security issues, and societal‑stability issues. The organisations that treat neural data with the same casualness as digital exhaust will face existential backlash. The ones that build guardrails early will define the norms the rest of the world follows.

This is the moment where leadership either evolves, or becomes irrelevant.

Because the next wave of disruption won’t ask for permission.
It won’t wait for regulation.
It won’t pause for ethical debates.

It will simply arrive.

And when it does, the question for leaders will be brutally simple:

Did you shape the future of mental privacy—or did you sleepwalk into it?

 

“We may not stop the merging of minds, but we can still decide what it means to be human.”