2 ms·
We can only assume that this is taking too long if we assume that Neuralink is somehow able to skip the fundamentals and be successful. As I pointed out above
by SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
We can only assume that this is taking too long if we assume that Neuralink is somehow able to skip the fundamentals and be successful. As I pointed out above Synchron is further ahead, they are making more progress because they were able to meet the required standard, and I think we can all agree standards are important for human trials (or is a few extra human deaths ok if it gets to market sooner?), so I'd suggest it's Neuralink's own fault they can't meet the advancement criteria and not just concerns about animal welfare that are getting in the way.
- naasking 4y agoSynchron was also started 4 years earlier, so it's not necessarily because they are doing a better job. Neuralink is playing catch up in a sense.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago> Neuralink is playing catch up in a sense. Yes, in areas like testing discipline. I don't accept the argument that you can skip past the fundamentals and it'll all just work out because you may be able to help some people quicker. That's everyone's goal in that space - to get implants onto the market as fast as possible.
- naasking 4y agoI know you don't find it plausible, just saying that that doesn't necessarily mean it's incorrect.
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y agoIt is wholly incorrect that you can perform sloppy experiments that lead to excess costs of your research and expect this to be at all respectable or acceptable among your peers just because your research is particularly exciting or potentially useful. If anything, being sloppy is a point against you when you’re working in particularly impactful stuff, because it shows your skills as a scientist aren’t up to the standards of the field you’re researching.
- concordDance 4y agoAren't Synchron doing a much easier task?