"brain-computer interface" and "typing" should not go in the same sentence
why?
Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
121–130 of 132 posts
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect much of the population either doesn't type much, or doesn't make much of an effort to type faster. My average is in the 140-160WPM range (to try to type at 40WPM consistently I would have to be deliberately slow, as even one-handed I'll easily go over 60), although I never learned touch-typing formally; I attribute it to spending extensive amounts of time in using IM, which basically forces you to type quic…
How do you manage to sustain 140-160 WPM? I consider myself a very fast typist, and I don’t think I ever broke 100 WPM (it’s the maximum I ever got in one of those typing tests)
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel obligated to mention https://typeracer.com
https://monkeytype.com is much cleaner IMO if you're not trying to battle anyone.
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to type "semi-competitively" (aka just spending a lot of time on typeracer.com) and could get around 170 WPM if I put enough effort into it. (At least when I was younger. Probably slower now.) 18 WPM would make me feel like a snail. However, I feel fairly confident that within 1 - 3 decades some kind of BCI will let any user surpass the equivalent of 200 - 300 WPM after a bit of training. And hopefully even wi…
> 18 WPM would make me feel like a snail. On the other hand, this interface is for people who have a current typing speed of approximately 0 WPM (or ~8 WPM if they were lucky enough to have the previous leading BCI technology available to them). So it's all about perspective.
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are tasks like responding to emails and adding comments limited by typing speed ? I would have guessed most typing tasks aside from copying text are limited by knowing what to type.
Pretty much all of the time I'm typing natural language (chat apps, emails, writing this comment here) I'm going to be limited more by my typing speed (~120WPM) than by the speed at which I can think of the words I want to type. A pretty trivial demonstration of this is that I can talk much faster than I can type, and I would expect that you can too.
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty much all of the time I'm typing natural language (chat apps, emails, writing this comment here) I'm going to be limited more by my typing speed (~120WPM) than by the speed at which I can think of the words I want to type. A pretty trivial demonstration of this is that I can talk much faster than I can type, and I would expect that you can too.
I can talk much faster than I can type, but I have much higher standards for precision and language quality when writing. When I write in natural language, I almost always carefully read through my message once or twice before sending. I don’t think doubling my typing speed (currently around 80 wpm, I guess) would save much time.
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#127> A machine learning algorithm then decodes the brain patterns associated with each letter, and a computer displays the letters on a screen. The participant was able to communicate at about 90 characters, or 18 words, per minute. > By comparison, able-bodied people close in age to the study participant can type on a smartphone at about 23 words per minute, the authors say. Adults can type on a full keyboard at an ave…
same same.
we had to type at least 60 wpm in middle school in order to pass the "typist class" (around 2000) thou i did not maintain that level.
edit: clarification downthread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27423762
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought Apple had a patent on this technology, interesting to see others do it
Apple was extremely late to the boat and it was one of first high profile features people said was blatantly copied from Android which had Swype and Swift Key for years
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect much of the population either doesn't type much, or doesn't make much of an effort to type faster. My average is in the 140-160WPM range (to try to type at 40WPM consistently I would have to be deliberately slow, as even one-handed I'll easily go over 60), although I never learned touch-typing formally; I attribute it to spending extensive amounts of time in using IM, which basically forces you to type quic…
How do you manage to sustain 140-160 WPM? I consider myself a very fast typist, and I don’t think I ever broke 100 WPM (it’s the maximum I ever got in one of those typing tests)
(You'll know that you're buffering when you take a typing test and by the time you see that you've mistyped something you've already typed several more correct words, so it pays to be accurate before you try to buffer ahead.)
Re: Brain-Computer Interface Smashes Previous Record for Typing Speed
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use swipe-style input (don't know whether it's actually swype) for most things. It's somewhat annoying that it can't tell the difference between words with identical swipe patterns. I find it more annoying that it can't even attempt to render words that it doesn't know. The reason is exactly the same as its inability to distinguish "isn't" from "orange" -- there just isn't enough information in a swipe to identify…
I think Swype could rely more on repeatable patterns. Eg if you're swyping in a straight line and want a letter included from that you should do a little loop on it. Eg with "our" I do a little loop on "u" and it doesn't pick "or" anymore. But it does then also pick "out"... It should be way more accurate on the starting and ending characters. If I'm starting with "i" I'm not going for "orange". One thing that freque…
The whole point of using a very-low-fidelity input method is that it's faster. How much care and effort are you planning to put into entering each word?