Can a machine read what you are thinking?

In the author's speculation, the world's population could be experiencing telepathic communication that no one has consented to. It is not limited to words. It can reach any of the physical senses. - Verbal communication. It can be heard aloud on the neurotech bullhorn. - Inside the skull. With the ears held shut, it can still be experienced internally, through voice-to-skull (V2K) technology. - Phantom sensations. Something felt on or in the body that has no visible cause. - Augmented reality visuals. Images added to what a person sees (see The Diving Ecosystem, Capability 9). None of it has been consented to. Statements suggest that most of it is weapons development, carried out by certain organizations within a union of approximately 200 organizations that has been sold access to the population of the United States, and of other countries. That rests on statements alone and is unverified. On the record: the microwave auditory effect is documented in laboratory research: pulsed microwaves can be heard as clicks or buzzes that seem to come from inside the head. No published research shows it delivering speech to a person at a distance. The feeling of something crawling on the skin, and brief glimpses of things that are not there, have many known medical causes and are worth a doctor's assessment (see The Diving Ecosystem, Capability 9). From the author: "Wouldn't a mobile

Diving is the process of establishing a brain-to-brain connection with another human being. According to statements, and to human experience, it can be done with a computer or without one. This concept sets out the author's hypothesis of how it works without a computer, and why that matters. This concept is the author's speculation. It does not assert that the process exists as described. Every statement recorded in the journal is an external communication; read this concept under the Critical Disclaimer. The author has had no training. Everything here is hypothesis, drawn from his own experience and from what he has heard on the bullhorn. It is offered as a set of questions more than a set of instructions: is this how it works? The first rule: permission. Never enter someone's body, or connect to someone neurologically, without their permission. There is one exception. If you are being harassed, and someone is pressing you to raise your hand, to let them into your home with offers of "relief from suffering" or "assistance," do whatever you can to capture a physical description of them, so that you will recognise them if they come to your door without permission. If they do, do not open the door; call 911. Speak only for yourself. None of this has been confirmed or verified, and it needs to be. The author can speak for himself, but not for you. On this subject, never speak

A hypothetical system, suggested to be a military deployment, that supports telepathic communication. Its suggested purpose is to give an invading force full transparency over all communication within enemy territory. That transparency would cover more than speech: through the Diving process, with or without a computer, it would reach the memories of people inside that territory. This concept is the author's speculation. It describes a hypothetical system and does not assert that the system exists. Every statement recorded in the journal is an external communication; read this concept under the Critical Disclaimer. Do not reward their presence: the author's caution In the author's experience, the system is generally used to provoke people and draw them out of their homes. When it began, in 2023, the voices presented themselves as the spirit world. Once the author researched neuroscience and realised they were human beings, he ended every relationship with any so-called invisible friend, anyone communicating on the system. The author's view is that it is vital not to reward their illegitimate presence. Rewarding it erodes the constitutional rights of everyone around you, and your own most of all, and it puts your life at risk. Their refusal to share contact details through any public, accountable channel is a serious red flag. For anyone experiencing this kind of communicatio

Consumer neurotechnology already exists and is already sold: EEG headbands for meditation, focus trackers, sleep monitors, gaming headsets. In April 2024 the Neurorights Foundation published an assessment of the privacy practices of thirty such companies. Twenty-nine of the thirty appeared to have access to the consumer's neural data with no meaningful limitation on that access. Twenty-nine could transfer data to third parties, and twenty said so explicitly. Fewer than half — fourteen of thirty — gave the consumer any stated right to delete it. Only twelve offered both withdrawal of consent and deletion. Eight had no publicly available privacy policy at all. Nothing here was hidden. These are the companies' own published terms, read carefully by people who then counted. The question of who owns what a brain emits is not waiting on some future technology to become urgent. It was answered commercially, in advance, in documents nobody reads.

The question has been asked seriously and tested at scale, and the answer is not the one either side tends to expect. In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans. That classification is real and is widely cited. It is worth knowing what the tier means: 2B is the agency's weakest positive category, used where evidence is limited and a link cannot be excluded, and it holds several hundred agents. Since then the question has been examined far harder. A systematic review commissioned by the World Health Organization, published in Environment International in September 2024, screened more than five thousand studies from 1994 to 2022 and included sixty-three. It found no association between mobile phone use and cancers of the head, including among long-term and heavy users. It is the most comprehensive assessment to date. A group of researchers has published a methodological critique of it, and that dispute belongs in the record alongside the finding. Precaution for children persists in policy anyway. France banned mobile phones in schools in 2018, and several national authorities advise limiting children's exposure — on the reasoning that a child's exposure starts earlier and continues longer, not on a demonstrated harm. The documented risks of the devices children actually wear

One facial-recognition company has been fined roughly €90 million by four European regulators for collecting people's faces without asking, and ordered to delete data in Australia and Canada. Over the same period, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement paid it $12.75 million — one of those the largest facial-recognition purchase ICE has made. Its American class-action settlement was paid in company shares rather than cash. One arm of government is penalising what another arm is buying, and nothing in this record shows the two ever meeting.