On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 10:45 +1000, David wrote: > On Sunday, 4 August 2019 11:40:47 AEST Karl Auer wrote: > > > > > > > > I can't imagine thought commands being better fidelity. > > You know better than to use the argument from personal incredulity > > :-) > [...]the device picked up nerve signals from speech muscules > [...] > This is a vastly different proposition to decoding thoughts.
Well - yes and no. And you still need to decode the speech. > I think that identifying a concept from brain activity before it's > been verbalised is science-fiction stuff. Look around - thousands of things that we take for granted in our daily lives were once "science fiction stuff". I've no idea whether it will ever work well enough that I can think "Hal, make me a coffee" and expect to see a nice cuppa appear before me, but I would say that current work is very promising. Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer ([email protected]) http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer http://twitter.com/kauer389 GPG fingerprint: 8D08 9CAA 649A AFEF E862 062A 2E97 42D4 A2A0 616D Old fingerprint: A0CD 28F0 10BE FC21 C57C 67C1 19A6 83A4 9B0B 1D75 _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
