> then you'll probably see power-users slowly trending to it Think of it like this. If you have the choice between a regular mouse with 3 buttons, and a mouse

> then you'll probably see power-users slowly trending to it Think of it like this. If you have the choice between a regular mouse with 3 buttons, and a mouse with 22 buttons that randomly flies off to some direction for 3 seconds every 2 minutes or so, which would you chose as a power user? Obviously the first, because reliably having 3 buttons is just so much better than a wonky mouse even if it does have 19 more buttons (that you likely wont use anyway). It's not really a case of them needing to find a new paradigm, the technology needs to get to a place where someone (like the interviewer) cant at the very very least just pick it up and use it. And after that they need to get to a point where it's reliable and consistent. EEG headsets have been trying to get there for some 10-15 years now without much luck, and these guys might have a good funding pitch claiming that "it's different, we are using muscles!" (EEG headsets pick up your facial muscles as well, but lets forget that for a second) and of cause "We're using Machine learning to build a model!" (machine learning has already been employed on EEG headsets naturally, but it's not a problem of analyzing the signals, it's about getting consistent signals from hardware that freaks out if a metal cart is nearby). I'm not saying these guys can't do this, I'm just saying that nothing they've shown or done puts them apart from the other companies who have spend 10 years failing to provide something other than cool looking demos in the field.