Whoever added that background soundtrack should be shot.
Yeah I thought it was interfering with the interview too.
Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
41–50 of 88 posts
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#42Heh. Remember back in the day when pacemakers were being hacked remotely because admin passwords weren't even changed from the default, on top of outdated wireless protocols? Oh right that's today! Hardware makers often aren't good at software, not to mention software updates. And even that gets wonky, like when Microsoft update got hijacked. Point is, if we can't get IoT 100% right, or even 90% right, how can we tru…
Even worse, what if you have artificial eyes and one day the manufacturer blocks your vision functionality because you did something they disagree with politically? It used to be your account would get banned, now with cancel culture you can be banned from participating in media and society altogether, tomorrow maybe your ability to participate in your own body's functionality may be subject to the whims of the censors and the morality police
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#43I do a significant amount of breakthrough device fda/eu regulatory work in the BCI area. For those interested, its worth reading the FDA guidance: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidan... .
Regarding security, I think people would be really freaked out by the scope of attacks. One infusion pump I worked on this year was succesfully attacked over 200 times.
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#44this is a very appropriate thing for Valve to be working on considering their logo
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
The signals you pick up between 0.5 Hz and 40Hz are mostly likely "population" level signals or put another way the average activity of millions of neurons spread across large swaths of the brain. A good analogy re: trying to decode the brain from EEG would be akin to trying to decode what is going on in a soccer match but only using the noise of the crowds.
How are signals up to 10Khz generated? I thought the absolute refractory period of a neuronal action potential limits the rate at which they can fire.
From start to finish, an individual action potential lasts about 1ms, followed by a few millisecond refractory period. There is probably not much biologically-relevant activity happening at faster timescales.
However, one often wants to "sort" spikes so that those arising from individual neurons are grouped together. To do so, you need to sample fast enough to capture the shape of the action potential, not just the fact that it happened. This usually requires sampling rates in the 10s of kHz. (~30 kHz would be good).
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#46I'm not a huge anime person, but there's one I've watched that seems a bit relevant. In _Accel World_, they wear this thing on their neck called a "Neurolink" and basically are able to connect to things like the Internet or private networks (school, home, hospital) wirelessly with it. I believe it takes over signals coming to and from the brain. But they also have a wired connection mode so they can do that or do a special direct, wired connection with someone they are close to.
The ramifications of access like that are described surprisingly well in the show.
For instance, two close friends (they're in a relationship but young enough I'd just consider them close friends) use the direct wired connection feature because they feel comfortable enough doing so. But at some point one of them decides to use that private access to plant a virus of sorts. While the purpose is irrelevant here, it does show how brain connections, especially between people, can become increasingly vulnerable.
The main plot point of the anime though, is this game application that can be installed to the Neurolink, and basically it has the ability to also wipe away or hide memories.
While what Newell is talking about is still a ways away, it's interesting to consider exactly what we may need to be worried about when the time comes.
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#47Heh. Remember back in the day when pacemakers were being hacked remotely because admin passwords weren't even changed from the default, on top of outdated wireless protocols? Oh right that's today! Hardware makers often aren't good at software, not to mention software updates. And even that gets wonky, like when Microsoft update got hijacked. Point is, if we can't get IoT 100% right, or even 90% right, how can we tru…
Even worse, what if you have artificial eyes and one day the manufacturer blocks your vision functionality because you did something they disagree with politically? It used to be your account would get banned, now with cancel culture you can be banned from participating in media and society altogether, tomorrow maybe your ability to participate in your own body's functionality may be subject to the whims of the censo…
Anyone who signs away to a corporation their right to see deserves whatever results from such an arrangement.
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#48> the experiences that you will have are things that you will be created and edited for you [..] > sleep will now become an app that you will run where you say I need this much sleep, I need this much REM I find this to go in a bizarre awkward direction. We as humans have self regulating capabilities that are to be tapped with some "self work". Is that a bad thing? Why are we trying to change that and create an app t…
Please tell me in great detail how I can go to sleep within 15 minuten of laying in bed. I'm very open to self work.
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#49All the talk of implants makes me wonder what's possible without a direct physical link to the brain. Like using an EEG to measure brain signals and transform them into instructions, images, etc. Here's some research where they use the EEG to train a model that reconstructs what people are seeing in their visual cortex [0] All the reconstructions are super low resolution, but I wonder how much better they can get? I'…
Doesn't reconstruction like this rely on the decoding mechanism being trained on the original images? This doesn't scale to reconstructing any visual image, only to differentiating between those the decoder has already seen. It doubt very much that it reconstructs from the visual cortext. That is a non-trivial task with fMRI which has a much higher SNR than EEG.
Here's their preprint.
It's basically using a pretrained VGG network as a latent space, which lets them synthesize images.
Re: Gabe Newell on brain-computer interface technology
#50That looks like an awful over complicated way of performing a lobotomy.