Comment from Anonymous

Thank you for allowing me to comment on this. I agree the neurolink is valuable for amputees and specific medical operations, but it still should require explicit permission from the patient as to what goes onto be formal. You see, once the patient is hooked up to the machine they should be permitted to press a button or some form of acknowledgement to say yes or no or maybe. The brain may decide something without the patients permission, and is a fleeting thought perhaps. Here are some ideas: I request the FDA implement the following safety and ethical requirements for BCI manufacturers: Intent Verification: Devices must be designed with "fail-safes" that distinguish between a passing thought and a firm intent to act. Purpose Limitation: Manufacturers should be restricted from recording neural activity in brain regions unrelated to the device's therapeutic goal (e.g., motor cortex vs. regions associated with memory or emotion). Subconscious Filtering: Requirements for "on-device" processing that filters out subconscious neural noise before it is transmitted or stored in the cloud. Informed Consent for Data Mining: Clear separation between consent for medical use and consent for the commercial use of neural data. The human brain is not just another data source; it is the seat of our identity. It requires a unique level of protection. Thank you, Adele Hughes