BRAIN OS AND THE (RE)EVOLUTION OF HUMAN INTELLIGENCE – Tether.io

This post was originally published on this site.

Everyone is talking about AI. Do you think it will surpass human intelligence? And what consequences will this have?

We need to focus primarily on how artificial intelligence will transform the workforce and job market. For instance, AI will be a key component of humanoid robots’ brains. Tesla is already producing them, and I believe that within the next 5 years, every automotive company is likely to produce their own version. This makes sense because automotive companies already have the assembly lines and engineering expertise to produce all the small components needed to build them. We’re already amazed by what AI can do today—imagine what it will do in 5 or 10 years, and then think about what it could do when integrated into a humanoid robot. It’s already confirmed through commercial orders with current manufacturers that major fast-food franchise chains and other chains, for example, in the transportation sector, will test humanoid robots within their processes. AI is already skilled in programming tasks and will soon be able to enhance itself. I have no doubt that in the future, it will write code 10 times more efficiently and effectively than the best programmer on Earth. I consider myself an excellent developer with thirty years of experience, yet I’m pragmatically aware that in the coming years, AI will be able to perform this type of work better than I can.

But AI doesn’t have human creativity.

That hardly matters. 80% of jobs in the world, 80% of the time, don’t require extreme creativity—just the ability to think objectively and correctly execute tasks. I’ll probably be criticized for this statement, but I believe it’s important to be extremely objective when analyzing a technology’s impact on society as a whole. The line between human creativity and AI’s artistic “simulation” is already very thin today. I therefore believe it’s likely that in the next 5-10 years, we won’t be able to tell whether an artistic production was created by a human or a machine.

So humans risk becoming irrelevant?

The tech industry is heavily investing in AI with the potential to replace humans in various sectors. While various regulations will try to limit the negative effects on society, the reality is that trying to limit this revolution will be like using a teaspoon to empty an ocean. To remain relevant, humans will need to be able to think and create in more complex ways than they can today. We need a mathematical coprocessor directly connected to our brain—something that helps us think much faster. The human brain, though incredible, is limited. Extremely creative, but modest in terms of processing capacity. If we could equip it with high-speed access to all information available on the planet and computing power thousands of times greater than current levels, we could ideate, create, discover, and innovate faster, but most importantly, we would have the opportunity to remain the most intelligent species on Earth. This isn’t guaranteed if we don’t evolve faster than machines. The intelligence gap that exists today between a fish and a human could exist in the future between a human and an intelligent robot. Ironically, we’re creating the conditions that could lead to that future ourselves.

However, with a chip connected to our brain, we could combine the natural creative abilities of the human mind with significant computational power. This approach, for example, could allow scientists to develop a deeper and more precise understanding of the universe, physics, our own bodies, and the environment we live in, all at an exponentially faster rate than current processes.

Let me give a simple example to illustrate the fundamental issue. You’re a journalist. Imagine wanting to write an article: you think about it, process it in your mind, then you have to type it on a computer in a language (English or Italian, in your case), then review it with your eyes, think, and use your fingers again to make changes. It takes hours, and in the end, the initial thought you had in mind is still much more detailed and colorful, having been diluted by the inherent compression of natural language. Natural language can only express an approximation of thought, as the complete set of available terms is limited. To be completely expressive, a language would need infinite terms to describe every small detail of a thought. Impossible and impractical, obviously. The Italian language has only about 50,000 common terms to describe the entire universe around us.

Think about a simple perfume: our minds can perceive almost infinite nuances, but if we try to describe them, we can only do so approximately. Or think about the concept of love: we have just one word that cannot represent the infinity of variations of the feeling. Imagine the complexity described above and apply it to scientific research.

If instead we could do all these processes in our minds, removing the steps needed for thought transmission, the loss of quality, and the approximation or alteration of the initial information, and could directly use thought representation to communicate with others, the message would be incredibly more precise. The more we use external systems (including natural language—Italian, English, Chinese…), the more these conditions affect the precision of the result.

Again, imagine the potential impact of this enhancement on accelerating scientific advancements. Therefore, to stay relevant, humans will need to increase their intelligence, which can be achieved by enhancing the brain’s computational abilities.

Obviously, it’s crucial that this potentially invasive technology be in the public domain and not owned by a few entities. Tether is therefore interested in developing it openly and in collaboration with universities worldwide, allowing free access to the technology. Through its investment in BlackRock Neurotech, Tether is backing a true pioneer in brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Unlike other companies like Neuralink, which are still in the early stages of development and testing, BlackRock Neurotech has been at the forefront of BCI innovation for over a decade and has devices actively used by 40+ patients worldwide. BlackRock’s technology has enabled individuals with paralysis to control robotic limbs, type using their thoughts, fly drones and even regain communication abilities—proving its real-world applications and adoption.

Similarly, Tether Data is spearheading the development of BrainOS, an open-source platform that aims to democratize access to advanced brain augmentation tools. By ensuring this technology remains decentralized and transparent, Tether is advancing its commitment to empowering individuals through ethical and open innovation. Together, these efforts not only demonstrate Tether’s dedication to fostering revolutionary technologies but also ensure that advancements in human enhancement prioritize accessibility, collaboration, and freedom for all, rather than being monopolized by a select few.

Regarding AI regulation in the EU, where do we stand? As usual, is Europe more concerned with regulation than innovation?

The EU is attempting to regulate AI without understanding it fully, while politicians promote this as a means of safeguarding citizens. However, the global AI revolution is unstoppable. For Europe, therefore, there is a strong risk of remaining at the tail end of a world that is inexorably moving toward the future. What I’m saying is supported by facts. One can simply examine the data on technological investments in European companies and startups.

Excerpt from Paolo Ardoino’s interview with Marcello Bussi, originally published in Milano Finanza, January 28, 2025.