Ford Prefect wrote:
Here, let me pare it down even further: if one cyborg can obsolete ten floors of normal people nattering away at 90-100 WPM in cubicles, exactly how many corporations do you think are going to skip the opportunity to shrink their workforce?
If it's cheaper to hire and equip those "ten floors" of meat people than to successfully cyborg one human corporations are likely to stick with meat people, or only hire only pre-cyborged people. If the cost of cyborging is way high, very few individuals will be able to afford it.
Ford Prefect wrote:
2. Uh, hello, if I can think up a powerpoint production in literally two seconds flat, I would obsolete the entire American military industrial complex. If cybernetics develop to the point where people really can just imagine what the want and piece it together by daydreaming, unless your tools are mind reading personal computers you can fit in your back pocket no tool will be able to compete. And if you did have mind reading personal computers that fit in your back pocket you'd be pretty transhuman anyway.
Oddly enough we already have the tech to mount external sensors on a hat or other head covering that picks up the brainwaves of the person wearing it with sufficient discrimination that it can be used to control external devices. So yes, we do, in a sense, have "mind-reading" computers. Still early technology at this point, but it might prove cheaper/easier/fewer side effects than implanting hardware.
Beyond that, you are assuming your hypothetical cyborg has decent imagination, and the ability to organize information. Assuming you don't have an AI doing that (in which case, why bother with a cyborg?), you're relying on native human abilities which vary widely from person to person. There is a reason why two people with the same tools don't produce equal results. That won't change by making them cyborgs, because it's just a different set of tools, it doesn't change the "wet-ware".