Speaker unverified: uncertainty

Transcript context

…I think there’s something I’m excited about from the technology side and some I’m excited about for understanding how this technology is going to be best situated for entering the world, so I’ll work backwards. On the technology entering the world side of things, I’m really excited to understand how this device works for folks that cannot speak at all, that have no ability to bootstrap themselves into useful control by voice command, for example, and are extremely limited in their current capabilities. I think that will be an incredibly useful signal for us to understand really, what is an existential threat for all startups, which is product market fit. Does this device have the capacity and potential to transform people’s lives in the current state? And if not, what are the gaps? And if there are gaps, how do we solve them most efficiently? So that’s what I’m very excited about for the next year or so of clinical trial operations. On the technology side, I’m quite excited about basically everything we’re doing. I think it’s going to be awesome. The most prominent one I would say is scaling channel account. So right now we have a 1,000-channel device. The next version we’ll have between 3 and 6,000 channels, and I would expect that curve to continue in the future. And it’s unclear what set of problems will just disappear completely at that scale and what set of problems will remain and require for their focus. And so I’m excited about the clarity of gradient that gives us in terms of the user experiences we choose to focus our time and resources on. And then also in terms of even things as simple as non-stationarity, does that problem just completely go away at that scale? Or do we need to come up with new creative UXes still even at that point? And also when we get to that time point, when we start expanding out dramatically the set of functions that you can output from one brain how to deal with all the nuances of both the user experience of not being able to feel the different keys under your fingertips, but still needing to be able to modulate all of them in synchrony to achieve the thing you want. And again, you don’t have that appropriate set of feedback loop, so how can you make that intuitive for a user to control a high dimensional control surface without feeling the thing physically? I think that’s going to be a super interesting problem. I’m also quite excited to understand do these scaling laws continue? As you scale channel count, how much further out do you go before that saturation point is truly hit? a super interesting problem. I’m also quite excited to understand do these scaling laws continue? As you scale channel count, how much further out do you go before that saturation point is truly hit? And it’s not obvious today. I think we only know what’s in the interpolation space. We only know what’s between 0 and 1,024, but we don’t know what’s beyond that. And then there’s a whole range of interesting neuroscience and brain questions, which is, when you stick more stuff in the brain in more places, you get to learn much more quickly about what those brain regions represent. And so I’m excited about that fundamental neuroscience learning, which is also important for figuring out how to most efficiently insert electrodes in the future. So yeah, I think all those dimensions I’m really, really excited about. And that doesn’t even get close to touching the software stack that we work on every single day and what we’re working on right now. Yeah, it seems virtually impossible to me that 1,000 electrodes is where it saturates. It feels like this would be one of those silly notions in the future where obviously you should have millions of electrodes and this is where the true breakthroughs happen. You tweeted, “Some thoughts are most precisely described in poetry.” Why do you think that is?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.