DNA for Delivery

So what would you do if a corporation knew your future health risks, family history, physical traits, and even susceptibility to certain behaviors? And what if they could take that information and sell it to the highest bidder? Well, let me introduce you to 23andMe. It’s a corporation that takes the idea that you can send in a DNA swab and they will use that information to trace your family history. This type of testing is called direct-to-consumer DNA testing. Users send in their saliva and receive ancestry data and health predispositions. But the issue is that data is stored, analyzed, and shared technically with consent, but often hidden in fine print that most people do not fully understand. The California Consumer Privacy Act classifies genetic data as “sensitive personal information alongside data such as race, ethnicity, Social Security numbers, phone numbers, or address.” That puts the 23andMe in a unique position to share or sell that information to pharmaceutical companies and other corporations that are interested in the DNA and family lineage of the population.

Did You Read the Fine Print?

There have been multiple reports of individuals submitting their DNA to different companies and receiving conflicting results. A study from ASCLS “identified that 40% of all DTC genetic test abnormal results were false positives.” That alone raises questions about how reliable this information really is. On top of that, this data is not heavily regulated. The FDA and HIPAA do not fully apply to the direct-to-consumer testing industry. Instead, the government relies on the Federal Trade Commission to oversee data protection, but there has been limited regulation, allowing companies to largely self-regulate their privacy practices. Which sounds fine in theory, but not so much in practice. A 2018 survey revealed that” over 40% of companies did not even have documentation explaining how they protect genetic data.”At the same time, when people click “agree,” they are not fully understanding future data use or third-party partnerships. So while it looks like informed consent, it’s not always truly informed. This matters because genetic data doesn’t just reveal information about you but it also reveals information about your family members and even entire populations.

Tyrell-esc

In Blade Runner, the Tyrell Corporation manufactures humans and controls their identity and lifespan. While 23andMe doesn’t create humans, it helps to map and therefore monetize them on a biological level. In both cases, corporations gain power over what defines a human being. This parallel becomes even more concerning when considering how that data can be used. In Blade Runner, replicants are tracked and controlled because their creators hold complete knowledge over their biological makeup. Similarly, when a company holds detailed genetic data, it gains a form of informational control that can influence healthcare decisions, research, and future technologies. Looking at this globally, the United States allows for more corporate freedom and weaker data protections. In contrast, the European Union has stricter privacy laws and stronger consent requirements. This shows that the issue isn’t just American, but it’s globally unevenly regulated. There should be a more standardized system for handling genetic information that doesn’t vary so drastically from country to country. I would argue that we are already entering an early cyberpunk future. Corporations don’t need to dominate physically anymore, they gain power through data ownership. Recently, 23andMe filed for bankruptcy and was bought by a pharmaceutical company. This means that a pharmaceutical company could potentially gain access to large amounts of genetic, health, and family data from users. Even though there are claims that protections will be put in place, history shows that these safeguards are often not enough.

Wake Up People!

This matters for several reasons. First, there are serious medical implications. The unreliability of DTC testing, especially the high rate of false positives, raises concerns about how this data could be used to inform decisions made by pharmaceutical companies. Second, it impacts trust in healthcare and laboratory science. If people rely on private companies for genetic testing and pharmaceutical companies act on that data, it raises a bigger question of where healthcare professionals fit into patient care? At the end of the day, we have to think about who controls biological data. Right now, it is largely controlled by private corporations and pharmaceutical companies. This type of data should be more heavily regulated and ethically managed. Because the future of humanity might not be controlled by those who create life, but by those who own the code of it.

AI Attestation

The AI CHATGPT was utilized to help brainstorm ideas, organize the outline, and revise writing for clarity, grammar, and flow. https://chatgpt.com/share/69efe626-9200-83ea-a765-1e8c72ff87b9

References

Allyse, M. (2013). 23 and Me, We, and You: direct-to-consumer genetics, intellectual property, and informed consent. Trends in Biotechnology, 31(2), 68–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.11.007 Gunsolus, B. (2019, May 29). IMPLICATIONS OF DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER GENETIC TESTING - ASCLS. ASCLS. https://ascls.org/implications-of-direct-to-consumer-genetic-testing/ Jamali, L. (2025, May 19). Struggling DNA testing firm 23andMe to be bought for $256m. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0ln0e5g6kgoPustell , E. (2021, July 19). The Onero Institute. The Onero Institute.https://www.oneroinstitute.org/content/genetic-data-protections-in-the-us-and-eu

Do you feel as though you can be anonymous? If you wanted to scrub yourself from the internet forever, could you? The simplest answer is no. (Maybe if you’re in witness protection, but that is the government changing your life, and not you). There is always a chance that your data can be hacked, stolen, or your face put on the internet. For a specific example, I will address the Rayban Meta Glasses. Meta itself has been no shy stranger for its encroachment on user data. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Meta, testified in a trial questioning Meta’s data concerns in 2024 (Milman, 2024). There is simply no denying that if you own any Meta device or service, that there is a significant chance that there is excessive data collected on you. That includes: Facebook, Instagram, Rayban Meta Glasses, WhatsApp, and Threads, for short. Meta was accused of sending the data of over a million Facebook users to servers in the United States (Milman, 2024). Data and privacy is something that is an essential human right. There should be an option for such to be compromised. Your data should never be compromised without your knowledge and used in something unknown. Although this should be a standard, it is not, and remains a prominent issue. This issue has also been set physically. Specifically looking at Meta glasses, the company that has already breached users’ privacy countless times, has created a product that can further breach people's privacy. Upon initial release, many people were unaware of the use of Meta glasses, considering they look like regular glasses or shades. A person can record someone’s face and actions without anyone but them being aware. So not only is there a big company that is able to breach your data, they made a product allowing anybody that owns it to encroach on your privacy without your knowledge. This is not solely a western issue. The lawsuit against Meta in 2024 was called by the European Consumer Organization (ECO). Meta owns two social media platforms, that is not going to solely be a western issue. This is going to be a problem essentially anywhere the servers work. Products such as Meta Glasses are typically going to be a western issue, however. Situations such as the trial concerning Meta allows for checks to be made, however, the data was still breached. It is more so a warning of the public than a complete halting of the process. This is an issue many platforms face, and not each one will be brought to trial. Since it is more of a global issue, it does seem to have more checks. Again in this instance, Meta is being questioned by a European company. This is very similar to Ghost in a Shell which has everyone connected to a neurointerface controlled and surveilled by the government. There is no such thing as private in Ghost in a Shell, and with the actions of many current companies, there is little privacy left.

References Milman, O. (2024, February 29). Meta faces complaints in Europe over 'massive' and 'illegal' data processing. CNN. cnn.com

I attest that no AI was used

What Animal Would I Merge With

If I could be merged with any animal, I think I would choose a raven. Ravens are considered to be some of the smartest birds and have a mind comparable to that of a young child and great apes (Pantoja-Sánchez, 2020). Therefore, when transforming or merging, there would be minimal cognitive differences or capabilities. I also find the traversal abilities to be interesting. Flying is something humans have always dreamed of. From the stories of Icarus to the invention of the Wright Brothers to sending the first man to the moon in 1969. Flight has always been something that has been a craving, yet is impossible due to organismic limitations.

What Would Change?

The idea of flight and a reinforcement of intellectual abilities is what most interests me. I feel as though, because ravens are mentally similar in comparison to an organism that is within the evolutionary branch as humans, my concept of humanity would not be as threatened. My idea of humanity is the ability to relate, empathize, and communicate with the world I am a part of, socially and physically. I do not think that humanity is selective in the treatment of other humans, but rather an interaction with other living organisms and the environment. Anything you interact with, should be shown your humanity by respecting and being compassionate about it to the extent you can be. The advancements should be an addition to my already developed sense of self, rather than a complete change.

Humanity

With this merge, I don’t feel as though my own humanity would be changed, but how others would piece me into theirs would. If you look at something as simple as race, most people would sympathize with someone that looked similar to them. Though some people, due to an racist ideology, solely sympathize with people that look like them, especially if they are white. Already seeing the aspect of racism, I believe there would be a disconnect from humanity by forcible removal by others. I feel this further goes into Haraway’s theory on cyborgs and Janelle Monae’s The ArchaAndroid. The two deal with intersectionality and how people’s ideas need to expand before that can be done. There is a foundation already of who gets to be definitely recognized, and as new identities are explored and allowed to be present, the foundation is supposed to expand. Supposed to is the main idea, however, perspectives can be stubborn, especially if it undermines it to be at a disadvantage. There are instances of people with a socio-economic advantage, who are typically white, that feel as though expanding the foundation for new identities and supporting and allowing equity for the times it was unrecognized, as unfair. Take DEI for example. Now imagine people that are upset at equity, feeling as though it’s unfair, to see a hybrid person with enhanced abilities because they were born of two different organisms. I feel as though I am an enhanced person. My humanity would be stolen from me, rather than changed due to hybridization.

References Pantoja-Sánchez, S. O., Bouchard, J., & Pika, S. (2020). Ravens parallel great apes in physical and social cognitive skills. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 21070. doi.org

I attest that no AI was used on this.

Spider-Man 2 (2004) is widely considered the best Spider-Man movie of all time. Peter Parker is grappling with his identity as Spider-Man encroaching on his non-superhero persona. Peter finds himself battling his Spider-Man persona and momentarily loses his powers, and gives up his role as New York City’s protector. For so long, Spider-Man was the highest priority and not Peter Parker, which cost him greatly in every aspect. Only until an equilibrium was found to allow the dynamic between either persona to be fluid rather than a rigid belief of putting Spider-Man first, did Peter’s powers come back. He was then capable of to be one being containing two different foundations. This is exactly what Donna Haraway’s Cyborg theory embodies. Haraway’s theory accentuates that established conflicting roles are not purely one against the other, but rather a complex, fluid, and dynamic symbiosis (Philosopheasy, 2025). Peter Parker and Spider-Man co-exist in the same being, and when there was no established mutualism, there was conflict between the roles of man and hero. Similarly, High School Musical explores the issue. Troy Bolton is pulled between his role as a star athlete and as a main cast member in musical theater. His dynamics between each of his roles were unstable, and a purist agenda was pushed to be one or the other. This mindset was very closed off and conservative, and it limited Troy to one realm rather than a transgressive identity that opened a realm of intersectionality. With a newly established identity, exploration is inevitable. Back to Spider-Man 2 (2004), a physical manifestation of the exploration would be with the main antagonist, Doctor Otto Octavius, better known as “Doc Ock.” Doctor Octavius spent his life’s work on a project similar to Neuralink. His invention would allow someone, with the help of an implanted chip, to control prosthetic arms with their mind through AI. This is a perfect example of the beneficial aspect of topics often rooted in the negative atmosphere of the cyberpunk genre. Doctor Octavius is a brilliant and extraordinary researcher who was intentional with his work and its benefits. It is not until an incident causes the implanted AI chip to override and erode his mind that Doc Ock prevails. While Peter Parker (a.k.a. “Spider-Man”) is dealing with a man vs. role conflict, Doctor Octavius is dealing with a man vs. machine conflict. The invention itself would have been monumental, but due to the corruption caused by AI, it was turned into a weapon to be used with ill intention. Focusing on the invention itself, it would have opened doors for those incapable of moving their own body. The invention could have been used for accessibility for the disabled, allowing them to possess the ability to provide for themselves in ways prevented by their body alone. It could have been used as tools for blue-collar workers dealing with heavy loads, and minimizing the risk of accidental injuries or developing chronic pain caused by a physically demanding work environment. The intersectionality of man and the machine, often a warning in the cyberpunk genre, is not always negative. Boundaries need to be pushed to begin to open the minds of humans and explore the possibilities for advancement. Janelle Monae’s The ArchAndroid similarly expands on the need to explore to push possibilities into inclusivity. Monae explores an Afrofuturistic society as the character Cindi Mayweather, who is a cyborg in the literal sense. Throughout the album, the character is constantly trying to break the social barrier, the “Great Divide,” separating humans and machines. Cindi is trying to show society that when you cross these boundaries, there are unlimited and boundless opportunities for self-exploration and a new sense of unconfined freedom. Peter Parker lost his powers when his personas were clashing due to a confining mentality that solely focused on one aspect of his identity until he gave each their respect. This newfound sense of self can create a new identity and intersectionality that was not recognized previously. Doctor Octavius’s invention, for instance, dared to blur the lines of man and machine and could be used to allow accessibility to those who were not able to interact with the world that way. The social and technological future depends on pushing boundaries and exploring new possibilities and mindsets in order to allow for diversity, intersectionality, and identities that are not linear and binary.

References Monáe, J. (2010). The ArchAndroid [Album]. Bad Boy; Wondaland Arts Society Philosopheasy. (2025, January 14). Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Theory and reimagining identity. Substack. https://www.philosopheasy.com/p/donna-haraways-cyborg-theory-and Raimi, S. (Director). (2004). Spider-Man 2 [Film]. Columbia Pictures; Marvel Enterprises Turner-Williams, J. (2025, May 18). Janelle Monáe's 'The ArchAndroid' invited us to free our minds. AFROPUNK. afropunk.com

I attest that no AI was used

Contrary to popular belief, social media has been around for nearly three decades. It is only recently, within the last twenty years, that it has truly become a standard. Human connection has been around since the dawn of time, yet social media has offered instant connection across nearly any distance. Although this is a huge accomplishment in the technological space, it has impacted people’s connection to humanity. You are now able to connect screen-to-screen, but not have human-to-human interactions. During 2020, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) truly took flight in the eyes of the media. People were recording altercations involving black individuals and police officers that would often be fatal. At first, sympathy was a driving force for change, but it slowly bled to a cold detachment. You could be sitting at home, on TikTok, and see a post showing the uncensored murder of an individual, scroll, and see members of the Hype House dancing to a popular song. This is also seen currently, where Palestinians would grab your attention with a trendy video, then cut it to a pleading message and unveil the horrors happening in their homeland. At first, there is moral compassion and an invocation of humanity seeing these atrocities, but over time, it becomes normal, and like any other post that did not trigger a dopamine response, it is scrolled past. Though this is a current struggle, it can closely mirror the cyberpunk genre. In cyberpunk, there is a disconnect in humanity due to the prevalence of technology or progression. There is also a need to stay in the space that is ideal to them, which is often the cybernetic version that has been established by an algorithm. It would be ideal for a person to scroll past an emotion-involving video to stay in the safety that the algorithm has created. Social media has twisted empathy into something unrecognizable in terms of the textbook definition. It is reported, in an American study, that people have a harder time responding to emotions, others, and their own, the more they use social media (Martingano, 2023). This is something that cyberpunk has warned about: losing connection with yourself and others. Li states, “The limitations of a physical body, the uncontrollable emotions in humanity, these are considered as flaws and obstacles as the path toward the ultimate utopia. The pursue of it is in fact, not building a better society for next generations but falling into a well of a ‘soul-less’ world, a world of human slave themselves by information and technology, in other words, slaved by instrumental rationality.” Rather than the installation of bionic limbs or AI chips to insert technological control, social media has taken over human emotion. There has been a shift in humanity that is less than human. People can no longer connect the same way as they did prior to the rise of social media. There is a rise of narcissism, apathy, and a dimmed sense of morality (Martingaano, 2023). If we continue to scroll past atrocities in favor of dopamine-safe content, we risk fulfilling the genre’s prophecy: a world where we are perfectly connected by technology, yet completely alone in our indifference.

References Martingano, A. J. (2023, May 9). Social media and empathy around the globe. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/what-do-you-mean/202305/social-media-and-empathy-around-the-globe Li, H. (2022). Reflection of modern society through cyberpunk. BCP Social Sciences & Humanities, 16, 600–604. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpssh.v16i.518

A SHEIN haul. A try-on. An OOTD caption with “shirt from SHEIN” slipped in like it is no different from saying where you got your coffee. That is what makes this version of corporate power so easy to miss. It does not always look dramatic. It looks fun, fast, and affordable. But cyberpunk has never really been about neon lights alone. Its real warning is about corporations that become so powerful, so fast-moving, and so protected from accountability that they start shaping daily life more effectively than governments do. That is what makes SHEIN such a striking real-world example. Its success depends on making affordability feel harmless. But cheapness does not erase cost. It simply pushes that cost somewhere else onto workers, onto the environment, and onto regulatory systems struggling to keep up with global platform commerce. By making cheap goods feel innocent while hiding the labor exploitation and environmental damage behind them, SHEIN reflects the corporate logic at the heart of cyberpunk and shows how easily real-world companies can normalize human expendability when profit moves faster than regulation.

Cute clothes ugly system

One reason SHEIN is so effective is that it does not rule through fear. It works through convenience, low prices, and design choices that make buying feel almost automatic. As Ding explained, fast fashion thrives partly because consumers psychologically distance themselves from its harms. Shoppers often tell themselves that the damage is indirect, that everyone participates in the same system, or that one more order will not matter (Ding, 2025). Ding also points to “temporal discounting,” where people prioritize short-term enjoyment and price over longer-term environmental damage such as waste and emissions (Ding, 2025). SHEIN’s model intensifies that pattern. Its ultra-fast production cycle turns digital trends into products within days, making gratification immediate while keeping the consequences abstract (Ding, 2025). Corporate power today does not always depend on open coercion. It can work through seduction. The easier it is to click “add to cart,” the easier it becomes not to ask who made the product, under what conditions, and at what environmental cost.

Behind the haul

That illusion depends on keeping labor conditions difficult to see. Reporting on SHEIN’s planned IPO noted that U.S. lawmakers called on the company to prove its products were not linked to forced labor, especially through concerns about sourcing tied to Xinjiang (Wexton, 2023). The same report showed that congressional committees and multiple state attorneys general scrutinized both its supply chain and its trade practices. SHEIN denied the allegations and said it maintained a zero-tolerance policy on forced labor, but the deeper issue is larger than any single statement of denial (Wexton, 2023). When a company’s supply chain is so vast, global, and opaque that lawmakers, consumers, and even investors struggle to verify its claims, accountability becomes weak by design. That is where the cyberpunk comparison becomes most useful. The danger is not simply that abuse may exist. The danger is that the system is structured in a way that makes human suffering easy to bury behind convenience, scale, and distance. When labor becomes invisible enough, expendability becomes easier to normalize.

Faster than the rules

If cyberpunk warns about corporations moving faster than governments, SHEIN’s regulatory troubles are a strong real-world example. A 2024 report explained that SHEIN and Temu benefited from the de minimis exemption, which allows imported goods under a certain value to enter the United States without duties and processing fees (Neely, 2024). Officials argued that abuse of this loophole undercut workers and businesses while flooding the market with low-value imports. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas also warned that the scale of these shipments made meaningful screening difficult (Neely, 2024). The same pattern appears in Europe. In February 2026, EU regulators opened a formal probe into SHEIN under the Digital Services Act over illegal products and parts of its app design, including gamified shopping features, reward mechanisms, personalized recommendations, and transparency around how products are prioritized (“EU opens probe into Shein,” 2026). That matters because SHEIN is not only selling products. It is also shaping attention and behavior through platform design. This is corporate power in a distinctly modern form. It does not just respond to desire. It helps produce it.

Maybe this is what cyberpunk looks like now. Not only in skyscrapers and sci-fi spectacles, but in hauls, try-ons, discount codes, and apps that make constant shopping feel playful instead of political. A SHEIN order can look light, harmless, even ordinary. But behind that ordinary feeling is a business model built on distance from workers, from waste, and from accountability. So, are we heading toward cyberpunk’s corporate dominance? In some ways, we are already living inside a softer version of it. Not the loud version, but the scrollable version. The one that arrives in your feed, learns your taste, and shows up at your door before anyone has time to ask why it was allowed to be this cheap in the first place.

References

Neely, A. (2024, September 19). Biden targets Shein, Temu with import rule. DMNews. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a6D0R-51K1-F03F-K2DW-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

Wexton, J. (2023, November 29). Shein's IPO raises questions about alleged forced labor. CE Noticias Financieras English. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a69S1-3HD1-DYY9-03SF-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

(2026, February 17). EU opens probe into Shein over illegal products and app design. domain-b. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a6HXS-D7N3-SBT4-T1X9-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

Ding, Y. (2025, December 19). Why shoppers buy fast fashion even if they disagree with it. The Conversation – United Kingdom. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a6HG1-2663-S00V-P01S-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

AI Attestation

The content of this post is my own, and AI was used only to assist with planning and editing.

Cyberpunk fiction has always imagined a world where corporations replace governments as the dominant power in society. In these stories, companies don’t just sell products, they control survival itself. Among all industries, pharmaceutical corporations stand out as the most unsettling example of this idea, because they operate at the intersection of profit, life, and bodily autonomy. When the thing keeping you alive is owned by someone trying to maximize profit, the line between science fiction and reality begins to blur. What once felt like an exaggerated warning now feels increasingly plausible. In fact, many of the core themes of cyberpunk are already visible in today’s pharmaceutical industry.

One of the clearest parallels is access as a weapon. In cyberpunk worlds, life-saving drugs and enhancements are reserved for those who can afford them. This is no longer purely fictional. In the United States and beyond, insulin prices have skyrocketed, cancer treatments can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and some essential medications are removed from the market simply because they are not profitable enough. Research on drug pricing and access shows how pharmaceutical systems can restrict availability of essential medicines and reinforce inequality. Survival, in these cases, becomes conditional, not on medical need, but on economic status.

Closely tied to this is the idea of the body as a commodity. Cyberpunk frequently explores the unsettling concept that people no longer fully own their own bodies. Instead, biology becomes something controlled through corporate systems: enhancements that require payment or treatments that can be withheld. In reality, this is reflected in pharmaceutical patents, genetic ownership, and the commercialization of biomedical innovation. Scholars examining biotechnology and ethics highlight how ownership of genetic material and treatments raises serious concerns about autonomy. These developments suggest that the cyberpunk idea of “renting your own body” may not be far-fetched.

Another disturbing connection is regulatory capture. In cyberpunk fiction, corporations effectively become the regulators, shaping the rules that are supposed to limit them. While we are not fully at that point, there are clear warning signs. Agencies like the FDA are often criticized for being influenced by the industries they regulate through lobbying and institutional ties. Research into pharmaceutical governance shows how these relationships can shape policy and regulatory decisions. These barriers make it difficult for smaller competitors to enter the market, reinforcing the dominance of large corporations.

Cyberpunk also frequently depicts experimentation on vulnerable populations, and this too has real-world parallels. History provides clear examples, such as the Tuskegee syphilis study, as well as ongoing concerns about clinical trials conducted in developing countries where regulations may be weaker. In these cases, the people who bear the greatest risks are often those with the least power, a pattern that mirrors the exploitative systems seen in cyberpunk narratives. Perhaps the most direct example of cyberpunk becoming reality is addiction as a business model. The opioid crisis, driven in large part by Purdue Pharma, demonstrates how a corporation can knowingly create dependency while continuing to profit. This scenario feels almost identical to a cyberpunk plot, where the line between healer and dealer disappears entirely. The company responsible for treating pain becomes the same entity that profits from prolonged suffering. All of these trends lead to the most unsettling parallel of all: pay-to-survive healthcare. In cyberpunk worlds, basic health is not a right—it is a service you must continuously pay for. Today, we see echoes of this in people rationing insulin, relying on crowdfunding for medical treatments, or being denied care by insurance systems. Survival is no longer guaranteed; it is negotiated. Because of these patterns, it is difficult to argue that cyberpunk is merely exaggeration. Instead, it functions as a warning, one that we are increasingly failing to heed. The pharmaceutical industry demonstrates how corporate power can extend into the most fundamental aspects of human life. When profit incentives are tied directly to survival, the risk of exploitation becomes unavoidable.

That said, we are not fully living in a cyberpunk dystopia—yet. Regulatory systems still exist, public awareness continues to grow, and global differences in healthcare models show that alternative approaches are possible. However, these safeguards are constantly under pressure, and their effectiveness depends on continued public scrutiny and political action. Ultimately, cyberpunk is not just predicting the future, it is reflecting patterns already present in our world. The question is no longer whether we are moving toward a cyberpunk reality, but how far we are willing to let that transformation go. If access to life itself continues to be shaped by corporate profit, then the dystopian worlds imagined in fiction may not be fiction for much longer.

Cyberpunk Says...

Cyberpunk fiction often depicts large corporations as more powerful than governments themselves, with a wide scope of capabilities and very little consequence to their gross misconduct. Human lives are reduced to a question of profit and loss, as was the case with the Tyrell Corporation in Blade Runner.

This dystopian perspective is truly not that removed from the real world. Capitalism itself relies heavily on the question of prioritization: to prioritize anything outside of generating revenue immediately risks the very foundation of a multitude of organizations. It's why Disney treats animators terribly, and why the niche marketplaces of webcomics or galleries severely underpay and mistreat their content creators.

The American military-industrial complex, which includes defense contractors, government agencies, politians, and soldiers quite literally infiltrate every single level of international society (Weber 2019). Ghost in the Shell serves as wonderful propaganda, arguably, in favor of the militarization of technology; the line between military and civilian life dissolves completely, as facial recognition and drone tech are as heavily utilized in the media as they are in the modern world.

Everyone's Favorite Military

Glancing Over Numbers

Lockheed Martin, one of the largest defense contractors in the United States, perfectly depicts the blend of corporate profit and national defense.

In the year 2020, Lockheed recieved over $75 billion in Pentagon contracts, a figure that was somehow more than the entire budget of the State Department and USAID combined (Hartung & Semler 2025). In spite of critiques for the F-35 fighter jet being overpriced and underperforming, Lockheed continues recieving massive funding with little to no governmental oversight, mirroring the Tyrell Corporation's prioritization of technological dominance over all ethical obligations.

The military-industrial complex thrives on constant conflict, which directly impacts the quality of life worldwide and the national budget. In 2023, the budget for the military reached $1.14 trillion dollars; for contrast, the budget for public health that same year was $100 billion. The budget for education, just to further the point, was $84 billion.

The Department of Homeland Security recieved more than seven times the funding for the Centers for Disease control over the past seven years. The Congressional Budget Office found that the U.S. military could save $100 billion without changing the country's national security strategy, and a Department of Defense study found $125 billion in unnecessary back-office expenses could easily be trimmed. Instead, recent years have found an increase in military budget, cutting even more funding from healthcare, education, public transportation, energy, and housing (National Priorities Project 2023).

Glancing Over Policies

The military industrial complex does not merely include manufacturing weapons. It shapes foreign policy, surveillance practices, and domestic policing. Defense contractors lobby Congress, fund think tanks, and advocate for contracts that continue their powerful hold on global politics, much like cyberpunk's themes of surveillance capitalism.

Globally, the military destabilizes various countries by promoting military solutions over diplomatic ones. There are a plethora of examples: currently, America's seige on Iran stems from America's military support of an ongoing genocide, and the American support for Middle Eastern suffering stems from American interests in natural resources and political alliances.

America's bombing of a girl's school in Iran served no political interests, offered no economic benefit, and established no military strategy outside of maximizing harm and grief to leverage against American enemies, the vast majority of whom are merely civilians.

Glimpsing Our Future

The unchecked growth, lack of transparency, and prioritization of profit absolutely indicates that cyberpunk was right. Corporations influence foreign policy more than diplomats. Surveillance is privatized. War is automated; people have been expecting a so-called "World War III" for nearly a decade. Profit literally dictates what matters more, fear tactics or a school's worth of elementary lives.

Works Cited

Hartung W.D. & Semler S. (2025). Profits of War: Top Beneficiaries of Pentagon Spending, 2020 – 2024 (2020) Costs of War | Brown University. Available at: https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/paper/profits-war-top-beneficiaries-pentagon-spending-2020-2024.

‌National Priorities Project. (2023). The Warfare State: How Funding for Militarism Compromises Our Welfare. National Priorities Project. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2023/warfare-state-how-funding-militarism-compromises-our-welfare/

‌ Weber, R. N. (2019). Military-industrial complex. In Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/military-industrial-complex

‌

AI attestation: No AI was used in the creation of this post. Genuinely none; I'm far too passionate about how horrifying America's military industrial complex is to rely on some computer telling me what I know. I know this was very late in being written, and I'm truly so sorry.

In classic cyberpunk stories like Blade Runner and Neuromancer, corporations don't just influence society-they run it. Governments fade into the background while companies decide who lives comfortably and who is left behind. What once felt like dystopian exaggeration is starting to look increasingly familiar. Today, real-world tech corporations are shaping democracy, labor, and even human identity in ways that echo these fictional worlds.

One of the clearest examples comes from Amazon and its treatment of gig and warehouse labor. Reports from sources like The New York Times and BBC have documented intense productivity tracking, algorithmic management, and harsh working conditions. Workers are monitored in real time, their movements optimized for efficiency, and their performance judged by systems they cannot question. This resembles the dehumanized labor structures seen in cyberpunk fiction, where individuals are reduced to data points in a corporate machine.

Similarly, Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook) demonstrates how corporations can influence democratic processes. Investigations into misinformation and targeted political advertising covered by outlets like Reuters and The Washington Post-show how platform algorithms can amplify certain voices while silencing others. In Neuromancer, the Tessier-Ashpool corporation manipulates global systems from behind the scenes; today, algorithmic control over information flows raises similar concerns about who really holds power in society.

Another powerful example is OpenAl and the broader Al industry. Al development is concentrated in a small number of private companies, giving them outsized influence over the future of work, creativity, and knowledge. As Al tools automate tasks once performed by humans, the relationship between labor and value becomes increasingly unclear. This directly connects to cyberpunk themes, where technology often displaces human agency while enriching corporate elites.

These developments raise an important question: are we actually heading toward a cyberpunk future, or is this just a hyperbolic critique? The answer is somewhere in between. While corporations today wield immense power, they are not entirely unchecked. Governments still regulate industries, public backlash can force change, and investigative journalism continues to expose harmful practices. For example, antitrust cases in the United States and the European Union show that legal systems can still challenge corporate dominance.

However, the conditions that enable cyberpunk-like worlds are undeniably present. Globalization allows corporations to operate across borders, often avoiding regulation. Digital platforms scale rapidly, creating monopolies or near-monopolies. Most importantly, users willingly participate in these systems-trading data, labor, and attention for convenience. This dynamic reflects what scholars call "surveillance capitalism, where human experience itself becomes a resource to be extracted and monetized.

It's also worth noting that this is not just an American issue. In Europe, stricter data privacy laws like the GDPR show a different cultural approach to corporate power. Meanwhile, countries like China have their own complex relationships between corporations and the state, where government control and corporate influence are deeply intertwined. These variations suggest that while cyberpunk themes are global, their expression depends on cultural and political contexts.

Ultimately, cyberpunk is less a prediction and more a warning. The genre exaggerates trends already present in society to make them visible and urgent. Corporate power becomes dangerous not simply because it exists, but because it goes unquestioned. This is where critique-through journalism, activism, and even classroom discussions-plays a crucial role. By analyzing these systems, we create the possibility of resisting them.

We may not yet live in a world dominated entirely by corporations, but the parallels are too strong to ignore. The question is no longer whether cyberpunk is realistic-it's how much of it we are willing to accept.

References (APA 7th Edition)

Bucher, T. (2018). If..then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press.

European Union. (2016). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). https://gdpr.eu/&

Kang, C., & Frenkel, S. (2021, October 25). Facebook papers show struggle to curb misinformation. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/

Satariano, A. (2020, February 17). Europe's new rules for big tech. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/

Stone, B. (2021). Amazon unbound: Jeff Bezos and the invention of a global empire. Simon & Schuster.

Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13(2), 203-218.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs.

It Doesn’t Feel Like Fiction Anymore

I used to think cyberpunk was doing a bit too much. Corporations running everything and treating people like they’re disposable felt exaggerated. But the more I started paying attention to how certain companies actually operate, the more that line between fiction and reality started to blur. Not completely dystopian, but close enough to make you pause for a second.

Take Amazon. It’s known for convenience, but behind that is a system where workers are managed heavily by algorithms. Reports from The New York Times and MIT Technology Review explain how warehouse employees are constantly monitored, with productivity tracked in real time. In some cases, those systems can even determine discipline or termination with little human involvement. This article explains it clearly: . That kind of setup feels very similar to Neuromancer, where human labor is reduced to output and efficiency rather than treated with care.

When Convenience Comes at a Cost

The same idea shows up in how information is controlled. Meta and Google collect huge amounts of user data and use it to decide what people see online. According to Reuters, these data-driven systems have influenced political messaging and voter behavior, which raises real concerns about how much control these companies have over public perception. This piece explains more: . It reflects the same quiet but powerful influence we see in Blade Runner, where corporations shape not just technology but how reality is experienced.

Who Really Controls the Narrative?

Healthcare makes this even more real. Eli Lilly has faced major criticism over insulin pricing in the United States. A New York Times report highlights how some patients have had to ration insulin because of the cost. shows how serious that situation is. This mirrors Machinehood, where access to essential resources depends on corporate decisions rather than basic need. It stops feeling like a distant issue and starts feeling personal, especially when something so essential becomes tied to profit.

So… Are We Heading There?

I don’t think we are fully living in a cyberpunk world, but I do think we are moving in that direction in certain ways. Corporations today have a lot of influence because of technology, global reach, and sometimes limited regulation. In the United States, that influence can grow quickly, while places like the European Union show that stricter policies can actually push back on corporate power.

I also don’t think this is just an American issue, but it does show up differently depending on the country. Some governments are more willing to step in, while others rely more on the market to regulate itself. That difference really matters. It shows that this kind of future is not inevitable, it depends on choices, policies, and how much accountability people demand.

What makes cyberpunk so interesting is that it is not just predicting the future, it is critiquing what is already happening. It exaggerates corporate power just enough to make the patterns impossible to ignore. It invites people to question systems that might otherwise feel normal.

We are not fully there yet, but we are close enough to recognize parts of it in real life. And I think that recognition is important. Because once you see it, you cannot really unsee it, and that is usually where change begins.

References

Hao, K. (2019). How artificial intelligence is shaping Amazon warehouse work. MIT Technology Review.

Herman, B. (2019). The cost of insulin in America. The New York Times.

Paul, K., & Jourdan, A. (2018). The role of data in modern political campaigns. Reuters.

Soper, S. (2021). Inside Amazon’s warehouse productivity system. The New York Times.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs.

AI Attestation

I used AI tools to assist with brainstorming and refining this post, but all ideas, analysis, and final writing reflect my own work.