3 ms·

Can we please not adopt this as a potential use case for this topic though? Real applications look more like this: Imagine a movement. Follow an intense traini

Can we please not adopt this as a potential use case for this topic though? Real applications look more like this: Imagine a movement. Follow an intense training protocol many times for each possible movement so that the signal processing component actually gets meaningful data it can differentiate and is certain enough that you want to trigger something. After multiple hours of training it might actually get good enough. Input dimensionality for that method would likely be simple action triggers (at least less than a traditional keyboard) instead of a complex concept abstraction. Alternative: Stare at a board of visual stimuli, repeat for a few hours in order to train the system to your brain. Stare at board of visual stimuli again in order to actually use the thing. Again, slow paced and limited input dimensionality. While these invasive models produce better signals than non-invasive BCI, they do not include a feedback mechanism and have far less throughput than using a keyboard. Which is great if you have a medical need for the technology and thus cannot use traditional interfaces, everything else is sci fi. I'm not trying to say that this isn't cool but we should really refrain from painting it as some miracle tech, otherwise we cannot really complain if media adopts that image and misrepresents the whole field again.

trevyn 7y ago
Except that Neuralink clearly stated that they have ambitions for all of this, which is unusual for a company developing a medical device. Also, wouldn’t the stim abilities count as a feedback mechanism?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Because Neuralink wasn't started in order to develop a medical device, it was started with an explicit goal to develop a BCI to ultimately improve the cognitive capabilities of healthy humans.
- tastroder 7y ago
  According to my 1990s graphics card packaging I have a dragon in my bedroom. I wouldn't expect a Musk company to produce underwhelming marketing claims but marketing departments don't change the state of the art in research. Making this sci-fi levels of usable and getting it to consumers are both pretty unrealistic claims. I'm pretty sure you still couldn't get invasive research BCI past an ethics board around here if the patients skull isn't opened out of medical necessity anyway, doing so for fun isn't analogous to getting a piercing or tattoo, it's analogous to chopping off a limb to get a robotic arm.
  - yarg 7y ago
    Sure, it's not like a Musk company ever broke the mold before. The man's not perfect, he's a PR nightmare and his estimates tend to be far enough off to give cause for concern regarding financials. But he's brought us reusable rockets and very usable electric cars in what is still a staggeringly short time frame. What he's doing here makes me nervous, but there's no fucking way I'm betting against him.
    - tastroder 7y ago
      Sure, I didn't want to imply that they won't make money on this. Just trying to give a bit of perspective versus their marketing :) No matter what I think of the feasibility, a Musk-backed commercial player in the field will likely stir something up. With the pace of progress in the field over the last decades, that might just be a good thing.
      - yarg 7y ago
        I'm certainly not saying that what he's doing is all good either. The idea that this is going to be controlled with anything other than a direct connection to an air-gapped computer scares the shit out of me.
    - theon144 7y ago
      > Sure, it's not like a Musk company ever broke the mold before. Well to be fair they really haven't much, as far as technological advancements are concerned. Reusable rockets weren't used before not because we didn't know how to do it, but because it doesn't seem to be economical. The judge is still out on whether SpaceX will actually be able to reuse the first stages in a way that's even remotely useful. And there's even less innovation involved in Tesla cars. The only new thing they bring to the table is Autopilot, which arguably is a huge accomplishment, but not one that's "breaking the mold" in the hypercompetitive autonomous car space right now, and hasn't really delivered on its promises either. What Neuralink proposes is so far ahead in terms of what we even glimpse to be technologically possible I have trouble thinking it's not basically his pet project that is guaranteed to receive press and funding just because the topic is sexy and it has Musk's name of it. If we are ever to get as far as NL implies, it will take more than a single consumer electronics company. tl;dr I'll believe it when I see it.

trevyn 7y ago

Except that Neuralink clearly stated that they have ambitions for all of this, which is unusual for a company developing a medical device. Also, wouldn’t the stim abilities count as a feedback mechanism?

TeMPOraL 7y ago
Because Neuralink wasn't started in order to develop a medical device, it was started with an explicit goal to develop a BCI to ultimately improve the cognitive capabilities of healthy humans.
tastroder 7y ago
According to my 1990s graphics card packaging I have a dragon in my bedroom. I wouldn't expect a Musk company to produce underwhelming marketing claims but marketing departments don't change the state of the art in research. Making this sci-fi levels of usable and getting it to consumers are both pretty unrealistic claims. I'm pretty sure you still couldn't get invasive research BCI past an ethics board around here if the patients skull isn't opened out of medical necessity anyway, doing so for fun isn't analogous to getting a piercing or tattoo, it's analogous to chopping off a limb to get a robotic arm.
- yarg 7y ago
  Sure, it's not like a Musk company ever broke the mold before. The man's not perfect, he's a PR nightmare and his estimates tend to be far enough off to give cause for concern regarding financials. But he's brought us reusable rockets and very usable electric cars in what is still a staggeringly short time frame. What he's doing here makes me nervous, but there's no fucking way I'm betting against him.
  - tastroder 7y ago
    Sure, I didn't want to imply that they won't make money on this. Just trying to give a bit of perspective versus their marketing :) No matter what I think of the feasibility, a Musk-backed commercial player in the field will likely stir something up. With the pace of progress in the field over the last decades, that might just be a good thing.
    - yarg 7y ago
      I'm certainly not saying that what he's doing is all good either. The idea that this is going to be controlled with anything other than a direct connection to an air-gapped computer scares the shit out of me.
  - theon144 7y ago
    > Sure, it's not like a Musk company ever broke the mold before. Well to be fair they really haven't much, as far as technological advancements are concerned. Reusable rockets weren't used before not because we didn't know how to do it, but because it doesn't seem to be economical. The judge is still out on whether SpaceX will actually be able to reuse the first stages in a way that's even remotely useful. And there's even less innovation involved in Tesla cars. The only new thing they bring to the table is Autopilot, which arguably is a huge accomplishment, but not one that's "breaking the mold" in the hypercompetitive autonomous car space right now, and hasn't really delivered on its promises either. What Neuralink proposes is so far ahead in terms of what we even glimpse to be technologically possible I have trouble thinking it's not basically his pet project that is guaranteed to receive press and funding just because the topic is sexy and it has Musk's name of it. If we are ever to get as far as NL implies, it will take more than a single consumer electronics company. tl;dr I'll believe it when I see it.