4 ms·

Do we know what features are already supported? Or rather, what range of features are feasible with the actually implanted technology? There's kinda only two br

Do we know what features are already supported? Or rather, what range of features are feasible with the actually implanted technology? There's kinda only two broad categories of potential features, right? * "Push" (sending out your brainwaves to do stuff) * "Augmentation" (enhancing performance of the brain itself)

dmurray 3y ago
Receiving signals seems like a third.
wilg 3y ago
My guess is just a computer cursor. But I suppose it's possible to enable other stuff once they can iterate on it with an actual person. Update: Yes, sounds like it. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752119586470949056 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752119586470949056
outworlder 3y ago
> Do we know what features are already supported? Or rather, what range of features are feasible with the actually implanted technology? There's kinda only two broad categories of potential features, right? We don't even know if this even happened. Neuralink has not replied to any news networks that I have seen. They have demonstrated a chimp playing pong (decades old tech).
- wilg 3y ago
  Why would a spokesperson from the company saying it to a news network be any more reliable than the CEO of the company saying it publicly?
  - outworlder 3y ago
    You know the answer to that. Regardless, news networks have requested more information. None was provided. Until there's more information, I remain skeptical.
  - ncallaway 3y ago
    Because the CEO of the company is someone who says things publicly that aren't true?
    - wilg 3y ago
      So then why would you trust the company? Wouldn't he direct them to do the same?
      - ncallaway 3y ago
        I would trust a random person who has been hired by Elon Musk more than I would trust Elon Musk. I would trust a random person who has not been hired by Elon Musk, more than I would trust the first random person. So the fact that I would find a Nueralink spokesperson more trustworthy than Musk himself doesn’t say that I have high trust in that spokesperson.
        wilg 3y ago
        Fairly boring argument. My guess is it's true.
        ncallaway 3y ago
        I too evaluate and critique arguments not on their reasoning, but on their excitement factor.
        wilg 3y ago
        You did not make an argument that had any reasoning. You just said who you didn't trust.
pelorat 3y ago
Depends on where you implant it. In this case it's attached to the motor cortex and will allow for controlling a computer, and in this case there's no feedback into the brain itself (no write, only read). Sending signals to the motor cortex is probably not useful even in the device can do it.
thelastquestion 3y ago
The version of the device described on Neuralink’s website for the current trial only reads signals from the brain to control external software. So this is just for providing functionality and daily use to individuals with quadriplegia, not augmenting the brain itself.

dmurray 3y ago

Receiving signals seems like a third.

wilg 3y ago

My guess is just a computer cursor. But I suppose it's possible to enable other stuff once they can iterate on it with an actual person. Update: Yes, sounds like it. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752119586470949056 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752119586470949056

outworlder 3y ago

> Do we know what features are already supported? Or rather, what range of features are feasible with the actually implanted technology? There's kinda only two broad categories of potential features, right? We don't even know if this even happened. Neuralink has not replied to any news networks that I have seen. They have demonstrated a chimp playing pong (decades old tech).

wilg 3y ago
Why would a spokesperson from the company saying it to a news network be any more reliable than the CEO of the company saying it publicly?
- outworlder 3y ago
  You know the answer to that. Regardless, news networks have requested more information. None was provided. Until there's more information, I remain skeptical.
- ncallaway 3y ago
  Because the CEO of the company is someone who says things publicly that aren't true?
  - wilg 3y ago
    So then why would you trust the company? Wouldn't he direct them to do the same?
    - ncallaway 3y ago
      I would trust a random person who has been hired by Elon Musk more than I would trust Elon Musk. I would trust a random person who has not been hired by Elon Musk, more than I would trust the first random person. So the fact that I would find a Nueralink spokesperson more trustworthy than Musk himself doesn’t say that I have high trust in that spokesperson.
      - wilg 3y ago
        Fairly boring argument. My guess is it's true.
        ncallaway 3y ago
        I too evaluate and critique arguments not on their reasoning, but on their excitement factor.
        wilg 3y ago
        You did not make an argument that had any reasoning. You just said who you didn't trust.

pelorat 3y ago

Depends on where you implant it. In this case it's attached to the motor cortex and will allow for controlling a computer, and in this case there's no feedback into the brain itself (no write, only read). Sending signals to the motor cortex is probably not useful even in the device can do it.

thelastquestion 3y ago

The version of the device described on Neuralink’s website for the current trial only reads signals from the brain to control external software. So this is just for providing functionality and daily use to individuals with quadriplegia, not augmenting the brain itself.