Tech companies discover the human brain contains the last remaining information they haven’t successfully monetized.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA – A group of Silicon Valley companies announced Thursday that artificial intelligence capable of interpreting human thoughts is “basically here, provided you squint and own a data center,” according to a product manager who asked to be identified only by his lanyard. Forty minutes later, the same group published a pricing page.
The announcement followed a Financial Times examination of artificial intelligence and brain-computer interfaces. Technology executives called the development the biggest advance in human communication since the invention of language, which they noted had one serious design flaw. It was free.
The Free Tier Comes With Three Ads Per Thought
Under the proposed business model, basic mind-reading service costs nothing. Users must sit through three advertisements before completing any thought longer than six words. Shorter thoughts such as “hungry” or “ugh” are exempt from the ad requirement but remain eligible for a sponsored follow-up.
“We looked at what people actually think about most,” a vice president of growth told a crowd of roughly 200 in a converted warehouse south of Market Street. “It’s lunch. We’ve already signed a lunch partner. I can’t say who, but you’ve eaten their food in a parking lot.”
Premium Privacy at $29.99 a Month
For $29.99 a month, subscribers to Private Mind Plus receive uninterrupted thinking, encrypted personal memories and the ability to privately dislike their relatives. An annual plan costs $299. A family plan covers up to five minds, although each mind must be over 18 and share a billing address, a requirement beta testers described as a dealbreaker with their siblings.
The enterprise tier, priced at $199 per seat per month, lets corporations access employees’ thoughts before they become organized enough to count as complaints.
“We believe privacy is a fundamental human right,” explained one technology executive. “And like every fundamental human right, there should be a convenient monthly payment option.”
What the Research Actually Shows
The pitch leans on a 2023 study in Nature Neuroscience from the University of Texas at Austin, in which a decoder reconstructed the gist of stories from fMRI brain scans. According to a University of Sydney commentary on the work, participants spent up to 16 hours in a scanner listening to podcasts so the system could be trained, and a decoder built for one person performed poorly on anyone else’s brain. Researchers also reported that subjects could defeat the system by thinking about something unrelated.
A company spokesperson described those findings as “early-stage limitations that we plan to monetize as friction.”
A consumer advocate in Oakland was less enthusiastic. “Right now you can beat this thing by thinking about lasagna,” she said. “They want thirty dollars a month for the lasagna.”
Early Users Report Mixed Results
A beta tester in Fresno said the free tier interrupted a thought about changing his oil with an advertisement for oil changes. “It was the right ad,” he said. “That’s what scared me. I booked the appointment before I finished being scared.”
A second tester reported that the three-ad requirement caused her to forget what she had been thinking, which she said was the first time the product had given her any peace.
Regulators Arrive With Paperwork
Lawmakers have begun to pay attention. Colorado became the first state to write neural data into its privacy law when Governor Jared Polis signed H.B. 24-1058 in April 2024, requiring companies to treat brain data as sensitive information and obtain consent before collecting it. In November 2025, UNESCO adopted its Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology, a nonbinding framework built around mental privacy, consent and protection from misuse.
The coalition said it welcomes both. Its consent screen asks users to agree to data collection by thinking the words “I agree,” which the system then reads. A company lawyer said this satisfied the requirement “in a very real sense, from our side.”
Dream Advertising and Other Roadmap Items
Consumer advocates have raised concern that advertisements might eventually appear directly inside dreams. Silicon Valley representatives dismissed the criticism, explaining that dream advertisements would be clearly identified by a small blue checkmark floating over the sleeping individual’s grandmother.
Also on the roadmap are in-app purchases of additional childhood memories, sold in packs of three. The first pack, titled “Summer, Age Nine,” is expected to retail at $4.99. A second pack, “Lost Mitten,” is in testing.
Cancellation Requires Thinking
Investors responded enthusiastically, particularly after discovering that customers would be unable to cancel subscriptions without first thinking about cancellation, an activity the company classifies as Cancellation Intent Detection and bills at $6.99. Shares in several participating firms rose in after-hours trading.
At press time, the product manager with the lanyard had left the building to think about lunch, where he was met by three advertisements.
Five Humorous Observations
- Thirty bucks a month to keep my thoughts private. I’ve been doing it for free since 1987, mostly because nobody ever asked.
- Three ads before I can finish a thought. I can’t finish a thought with zero ads. I start with “I should call my mother” and by the time the ads are done I’ve decided to text her.
- You can’t cancel unless you think about canceling. That’s every gym I ever joined. They just finally found a way to bill for the guilt.
- Ads in my dreams with a blue checkmark over my grandmother. Verified? She’s been gone nine years and she never got verified for anything. The woman was turned down for a Kroger card.
- Premium lets you privately dislike your relatives. Thanksgiving already includes that for free. It’s called a smile and a second helping of casserole.
Disclaimer: This article is satire. It lampoons the possible commercial consequences of mind-reading technology, not established products, prices or corporate programs. Quoted executives and consumers are fictional. Reading this disclaimer is free, but thinking about it is billed at the premium rate, so please stop now and enjoy more satirical news instead.
Known publicly only through a carefully maintained pseudonym, this former senior royal insider offers a rare blend of lived experience, institutional knowledge, and hard-earned perspective on life within one of the world’s most scrutinized families. Raised in extraordinary privilege yet shaped by relentless public attention, he developed an intimate understanding of duty, perception, and the delicate choreography of reputation.
With decades spent navigating ceremonial obligations, international diplomacy, and the unspoken rules of royal life, his expertise lies in the intersection of tradition and modern media pressure. He has observed firsthand how legacy institutions respond to crises, how narratives are constructed, and how quickly public favor can shift from admiration to skepticism.
His insights are informed not only by access, but by consequence. Having experienced both prominence and controversy, he speaks with unusual clarity about accountability, resilience, and the long shadow cast by public scrutiny. Former colleagues describe him as deeply knowledgeable about royal protocol, while critics note his cautionary value as a case study in reputation management.
Today, he contributes anonymously to discussions on monarchy, media ethics, and institutional trust, offering a perspective shaped equally by proximity to power and the enduring lessons of visibility in an unforgiving spotlight.
