[cc2562]

Interesting article. You say that different 'spheres' of the Internet controlled by different geographic elites is a problem...but one unified internet controlled by one elite/group of people would be even worse. At least the way I is, we can compare different opinions and seek out alternative truths - however untrustworthy and unreliable they each may be.

[jauntywundrkind]

What you say is completely correct. But I have only vague guesses at how you got to talking about a unified internet controlled by one elite/group. T

This article is explicitly talking about protocols to let neurons talk with each other. Directly. About disintermediation. So, I'm not sure what your seeming sense of alarm is here. Provided the protocols do what they say on the tin. I feel like your getting tripped up on fear uncertainty and doubts, but it's exactly what's trying to be addressed here, so it's really confusing to see your post. From the article:

> This separateness is not the biggest problem; what is more dangerous is that in each of these versions of the Internet, the neurons can’t talk and express themselves directly to each other.

[sharipova]

I think a local first alternative and a direct connection of nodes in the network would lead to a healthier network if we think of it as a nervous system that connects us

[sharipova]

actually, I agree, one unified internet that is controlled by one group could be even worse than the different parts we have today