Ani Aslanyan: The Hidden Dangers Beyond the Rise of the Machines

Опубликовано: 2 августа, 2025

Neurointerfaces are emerging as a key element in modern medicine, yet projects in this field encounter several challenges. Ani Aslanyan, the founder of the Telegram channel «All about blockchain, the brain, and WEB 3.0 in Russia and worldwide,» discusses what impedes the advancement of future surgery and the role of blockchain in this context.

Ani Aslanyan (A.A): The foundation must be based on science in all its dimensions, from biology to creativity. Without this, there won’t be any breakthroughs. Specifically, I identify a few critically important technological directions.

First, artificial intelligence—not just conceptually, but its profound development and integration across all sectors: biology, physics, mathematics, and chemistry. Second, the creation of new materials—without competitive «hardware,» there won’t be a strong domestic AI or other technologies.

Third, space—it no longer exists in isolation but is closely intertwined with AI and quantum technologies. Fourth, neurointerfaces—the era of Steve Jobs’ smartphones is over; traditional input methods are outdated, and the future lies in direct brain interaction. Finally, biotechnology—I firmly believe this sector is awaiting its ChatGPT-moment, marked by an explosive surge in public interest.

However, the main prerequisite for all of this is the psychological readiness of society and decision-makers to embrace the new. Those who are stuck in the past and live off its successes are incapable of creating the future.

FL: Do cryptocurrencies have a place among these groundbreaking technologies?

A.A: Cryptocurrencies are more than just a technology; they represent a new financial ecosystem, which is self-evident and doesn’t require further discussion. However, a significant issue in Russia is the resistance from regulators, particularly the central bank.

Elvira Nabiullina, the head of the Central Bank, has repeatedly expressed her unwillingness to relinquish control over cash flow to decentralized systems with unclear jurisdictions. Thus, the tightening of regulations, including fines for online payments in cryptocurrency, is predictable.

FL: You previously mentioned that only 10% of officials understand blockchain. Has the situation changed?

A.A: I may have overestimated at that time. Today, I believe that only about 0.1% of officials understand blockchain. This understanding is limited to one thing: how to transfer or convert their savings into cryptocurrency.

Even this is done with the help of assistants. The psychology of officials is structured so that they find it difficult to grasp complex technologies. They have different priorities and ways of thinking. They operate on the principle: «Technology is complicated; I just need to find someone who knows how to do it.»

FL: How realistic is the OKX forecast for the widespread acceptance of stablecoins and the tokenization of 10% of the global GDP in the coming years?

A.A: The OKX forecast is not new—it entirely echoes the analysis from the giant BlackRock, which manages the capital of the world’s strongest players. BlackRock has long emphasized the inevitability of asset tokenization (from gold to government bonds) and a radical transformation of the entire financial landscape.

These forecasts can be trusted because BlackRock identifies real trends and capital flows. This is facilitated by the establishment of regulatory conditions in key jurisdictions like the U.S., where venture capital firms like a16z lobby for their interests and develop strategies for the administration, as well as Hong Kong and particularly the Gulf states, which view the crypto industry as a quick means of economic leverage.

The concurrent boom in investments in deep tech, such as in neurotechnology (over $2.3 billion in 2024), further supports this.

FL: Are there promising projects in the field of neurointerfaces in Russia?

A.A: Honestly, there are no projects in Russia at the level of leading American or European companies right now. The only notable exception is the Neiry project, thanks to Mikhail Lebedev, a key figure in the industry who was involved in the foundation of Neuralink. He created the world’s first bidirectional neurointerface, allowing the brain to send commands to a computer while the computer relays signals back to the brain.

On a global scale, the year 2025 will be pivotal—the neurointerface industry is emerging from its «box» and entering a phase of active clinical trials. The investment boom is massive: Elon Musk’s Neuralink attracted about $650 million this year. Furthermore, the startup Science, founded in 2021 by Max Hodak, received $104 million in the same period and outperformed its competitor in some regulatory aspects. This indicates investors’ belief in the forthcoming demand for technology, especially since the U.S. has allowed the first commercial company to sell invasive neurointerfaces to patients.

FL: What excites you about AI, and what causes you concern?

A.A: I oppose sensational claims about «AI domination» or the impending replacement of half the workforce. Modern AI is simply not at that level yet. I’m impressed by Google’s strategy through DeepMind. Unlike OpenAI, they focus on generative AI—Google understands that the path to true strong AI (AGI) lies in understanding how the brain works.

They’re investing immense resources in neurobiology and mapping connectomes (complete neuronal networks) of model organisms such as fruit flies or mice—this is a colossal scientific endeavor that almost no one else is undertaking at this scale.

As for my concerns, the real risk is not a «machine uprising,» but rather the transfer of control over socially significant systems (like in the public sector) to shortsighted individuals who will blindly follow AI recommendations without critical reflection. However, achieving this scenario would require years of implementation. In other respects, fears are often exaggerated by those profiting from them, either by promising untold riches or selling «threat research.» The key is critical thinking and understanding the motives of those speaking.

FL: Is there room for memecoins in scientific research?

A.A: I’m against memecoins and don’t understand their relevance. These are not the types of assets one should invest in. If you want to reach a specific target audience with your project, you need to use appropriate tools.

However, memecoins appeal to a very young audience that isn’t currently capable of investing in science. Large firms supporting deep tech or scientific labs typically do not consider such options. Additionally, launching a memecoin requires investment and can adversely affect the project’s reputation due to the risks of failure.

Subscribe to the podcast: