10 ms·
A comment from techcrunch: As the scientist who first published data on neuronal firing in the brain of freely-behaving primates (available at: Ludvig N. et al
by mrwnmonm 6y ago
A comment from techcrunch:
As the scientist who first published data on neuronal firing in the brain of freely-behaving primates (available at: Ludvig N. et al., 2001, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, vol. 900, pages 179-187) , I am curious to see this demonstration. I also know that in order to make any meaningful link between a human mind and a computer one must record the identified firing of at least 5 billion neurons from the "mind-generating" association cortex in behavioral and environmental contexts -- which is absolutely impossible with each and every currently available and envisioned electrophysiological technique loved or not, claimed or not, advertised or not by Musk.
--- Nandor Ludvig, MD, PhD
Source: https://tcrn.ch/3b3YGGC https://tcrn.ch/3b3YGGC
- kevinskii 6y agoThank you for joining the discussion. What do you think about the counterargument that they don't need to create a full mind-body interface, that they could offer a lot of benefit just by doing simpler things like predicting limb movements?
- mrwnmonm 6y agoIt is not my comment, I just found it interesting. Sorry for the confusion.
- sneak 6y agoHe and his teams seem to have been quite successful with other businesses and ideas that were within the limits of known technology: electric cars and orbital rockets and LEO communications satellites. All of these things existed before (and all credit to the mountains of hard work of SpaceX and Tesla for polishing and improving them as much as they have). Perhaps he’s not pushing the envelope enough if they haven’t attempted the actually impossible yet. I’ll be cheering for them in any case; the impossible has a pesky habit of becoming possible in the decades that building some of this stuff takes. There is no shame in trying to do the impossible and failing; proving the current impossibility of hard things has value.
- itsoktocry 6y agoI'm not sure any of those things you mention are "successful businesses". Interesting technologies, sure. But they have yet to prove they can make a dime off any of them. So far they are nothing but capital burning enterprises. (No,Tesla is not profitable)
- atombender 6y agoTesla has reported profit the last four quarters: https://fortune.com/2020/07/22/tesla-earnings-q2-2020-profit-tsla-stock-sp-500/ https://fortune.com/2020/07/22/tesla-earnings-q2-2020-profit.... Are you saying their quarterly earnings reports are fraudulent?
- RivieraKid 6y agoI would say they could be fraudulent, certainly in the gray zone. Their profit in 1H 2020 was just $120M despite receiving $780M from regulatory credits, which is not sustainable and scalable. If governments stop giving Tesla money, they're deep in the red again.
- TeMPOraL 6y agoThe government gives Tesla money because Tesla is proven to actually pay that money back with interest.
- RivieraKid 6y agoThey're not paying the money back with interest.
- atombender 6y agoYou're moving the goal posts. They're profitable, and the fact that a large part of their revenue is regulatory credits doesn't change that. There's a risk that they may not receive regulatory credits in the future, but we're not there yet.
- etrautmann 6y agoI work on these brain machine interfaces - the 5 billion number is made up but his point that we need high bandwidth is reasonable. I think the right answer is much lower, depending on the desired application.
- charliemil4 6y agoYes — and putting down on ‘only one bit’ of information as output is the same as saying ‘no one will want a computer’
- etrautmann 6y agoSorry, I don’t mean to imply that I work at Neuralink, but I work on BMI devices in general.
- jv22222 6y agoNandor Ludvig follow up comment: > I did watch this presentation for an hour -- but it was so painful for me to experience this scene of incompetence and mockery of neuroscience getting worldwide attention simply because of Musk's money (while true scientists lose their jobs because of the lack of NIH or NSF grants for their quality research) that I add some sentences here and just leave. They did not show how their robot-controlled microelectrodes actually penetrate into the cortex and find cells -- because, as every single-cell recording expert knows, this is the difficulty: not just to move each microelectrode close enough to the targeted neuron but to make sure they can be kept there for long periods while not damaging the cell either. To do this, as claimed by Musk with 1,000 microelectrodes within an hour with "surgery without anesthesia", in the pulsing brain with no neurosurgeon present is not just impossible but even its proposal is an outright embarrassment for people with more education than the Twitter-audience encouraged to send their questions. Enough. Carl Sagan's prophetic 1996 book "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" predicted an America sinking in "superstition and darkness". This time has arrived. -- ---Nandor Ludvig, MD, PhD I must say, it does feel like history repeating itself. It seems that anyone who is an expert in a field that Musk enters ALWAYS bets against Musk. And then, in the fullness of time, they are often proven to be wrong because Musk finds another way they couldn't imagine - probably because he works as a multi domain expert and from a viewpoint of first priciples. It will be interesting to see if that is how this one plays out.
- refulgentis 6y agoIt makes me sad that a technical comment from someone in the field thats widely echoed somehow compares to funding an EV and space travel startup. No one claimed Musk couldn't do that...
- charliemil4 6y agoI really want to know the inflammatory response over the long run — this feels too good to be true.
- nprateem 6y ago> I also know that in order to make any meaningful link between a human mind and a computer one must record the identified firing of at least 5 billion neurons from the "mind-generating" association cortex in behavioral and environmental contexts Wrong. I'm no brain scientist, but this fungus [1] shows the way. If the scope of the device is sufficiently constrained it wouldn't need to interact with 5 billion neurons. > They did not show how their robot-controlled microelectrodes actually penetrate into the cortex and find cells -- because, as every single-cell recording expert knows, this is the difficulty (below) If the difficulty lies in actually embedding the implants, then a biological solution such as this fungus should be used, with the work being done to genetically engineer it to make it programmable through a device. Just mail me my royalties. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/11/how-the-zombie-fungus-takes-over-ants-bodies-to-control-their-minds/545864/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/11/how-the-...
- zimpenfish 6y ago> If the difficulty lies in actually embedding the implants, then a biological solution such as this fungus should be used That article says that the fungus doesn't go anywhere near the brain. "Hughes’s team found that fungal cells infiltrate the ant’s entire body, including its head, but they leave its brain untouched."
- dandanua 6y agoIt's good that they are trying to do such stuff, but a lot of their goals are indeed impossible. This is like taking a running processor, connecting to a couple of its legs and trying to figure out what an operating system is currently doing.
- sixQuarks 6y agoImpossible is a word that has been often used with SpaceX and Tesla. I would be careful using that word to describe anything Elon is working on.
- dandanua 6y agoI like Musk, he is an awesome manager and inspirer, and clearly technically smart. But the actual breakthroughs come from the actual science by the actual scientists. And the actual scientists know how little do we know about the world (and brain in particular).
- nscalf 6y agoThis is a great example of the walled garden. There is a serious issue where experts refuse to accept that outsiders can have impact on their field. Let’s say neuralink does fail, it’s still very likely they push the field forward in some meaningful ways. Most likely they will innovate on hardware pushing the curve for what is possible outwards. But sure, let’s diminish all work that isn’t done by academics as impossible and merely false advertising. Track records don’t matter if you don’t have the degree.