Strange, this post of yours seems normal, the previous one was auto-dead. I stand by my opinion that the way this research is being presented is misleading and

Strange, this post of yours seems normal, the previous one was auto-dead. I stand by my opinion that the way this research is being presented is misleading and blown out of proportion. That doesn't mean, however, controlling stuff with EEG is not awesome. It is. I must admit that I don't understand what the realtime claim in this case is supposed to be though. While there is always overhead due to signal processing, the reaction time is also tied to how much data you need to reflect a state change with enough confidence to trigger whatever the output device is. There is a lot of inherent inaccuracy in this measurement process, which makes sense when you consider the electrode's distance from the EM emitter and the tissue in between. So what does realtime and accuracy actually mean in this case?