I still don't know why so many conspiracy theorists are against transhumanism.
There's certainly elements of it that can and will be negative. It will widen the gap between the rich and the poor and there's a lot of circumstances where where the technology can be used the violate bodily autonomy. That doesn't even touch on the subject of potential killswitches. But the concept? It could do a lot of good.
Your father's heart failed? Replace it with a machine heart that's healthier that his original ever was. Your sister was born blind? Attach cybernetics to allow her to see (we're already doing that in some cases). Even for the cosmetic stuff... Why should we care if Johnny Guitar replaces his hands so be can play the guitar faster?
The issues are never the issues people actually seem to have, IMO.
There is a big difference between installing a single contruct, such as an artificial heart, and merging the human body with cybernetics. A heart, a bionic hand or leg, even eyes don't delegate control of the brain to an outside entity. The transhuman morphing they are trying to sell us on, however, is usually portrayed as being directly wired into the brain. Augmenting or even replacing cognitive functions opens up the possibility of controlling a person's sense of identity, awareness, privacy and yes, physical autonomy.
We already know it's likely that they have found ways to turn fully organic humans into slaves and assassins, on an individual basis. If a mass amount of people were linked to some communal hard drive, wouldn't it be that much easier for the PTB to turn whole swaths of humanity into an instant army of whatever they needed, at the push of a few buttons. One minute, you're washing your dishes, the next, you're marching in formation into the neighboring city, with no choice to refrain from killing anyone identified as a Target. Who decides who is a target? Not you, that's for sure. Granted, that's a worst-case scenario, but the thought of any of us being forced to act against our own will, by an unseen hand, is enough to make one recoil in disgust. You wanna give them a digital invitation to do so? I don't.
Imagine a world where the concept of War isn't country vs. country but company vs. company, with consumers being the cannon fodder, whether they want to participate or not. It's a globalist's dream-come-true. The hard wiring negates the need to educate or employ the people. Just feed them some vita-slush through a tube, and present as many channels of simulated mental stimulation as they can handle. We're already half way there!
Or how about a world in which your memories are just bits of code, able to be modified, deleted, traded in or out at another person's will? We have a number of science fiction stories in popular cutlure that deal with that particular iteration, and none of them work out in humanity's best interests.
And even in a best-case scenario, what happens if such a mass-mind link gets hacked? I just started watching an interesting show on Amazon Tv, called "The Feed." It's about a family of scientists who've basically created a mass uplink, like a combined fb/twitter/youtube/wikipedia being fed directly to your brain. They sell it as all-improvement, all-safe, no-risk. But it gets hacked, and people start breaking down, doing violence, even to their own loved ones, and the family/company scrambles to find out "whodunnit" and why. I won't divulge any spoilers, but it's worth watching, for it touches on the themes of freedom of choice and autonomy that I've mentioned here.