Facebook to acquire CTRL-Labs, a startup for controlling computers with the mind
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
I'll wear a tinfoil hat on this one.. but not knowing what possible behavioral/emotional/matchable patterns might exist in my waves is a bit terrifying. Thanks no thanks Facebook. If there even was a company I'd trust with my brain signature, it's sure as hell not you.
edit: I should note, it sounds like this is not specifically brain waves.. but still. My opinion in this arena doesn't change hah.
It's creepy af. But 20 years ago when you told someone about the privacy intrusions of smartphones, people would've been creeped out as well so I'm pessimist and saying it will come.
New products may not get investment because the user is hopelessly attached to the old product through some a reward signal hardwired into their brain.
On the other hand, learning and studying could feel awesome with such tech. And mind altering substances might not be a requirement.
As we get more powerful tech, I think we should work towards ways of bending the tech toward positive outcomes.
Hopefully (or not).
Most hardcore gamers I know (not many to be fair) think it's a gimmick.
From what I've heard dizziness is still a problem (motion sickness).
I for one just want some AR thing I can easily read text on.
The Roomba is a successful product, (10% of the market in the US, most sold vacuum clearer). But it's not what we thought the market for robots at home would be. I remember Gates perpetually betting on robotics as the next hit.
Same for Apple Watch, not as ubiquitous as a iPhones, but pretty popular.
If everything seems like a failure compared to smartphones, maybe we shouldn't use it as a benchmark.
Its here to stay, but the motion problem isn’t solvable in the near future
I'm a bachelor so I have a huge empty space in my living room. When I first got the quest I could walk around freely in a 12x12 area, and the first thought that went through my mind was "holy shit, if I could just keep walking this would be incredible. Like, I never want to stop incredible". If they can ever sort out the treadmills, or it becomes common to open up large gymnasiums for group VR sessions, I could see it becoming way more interesting.
I find most reporting done on VR that claims dizziness is a problem is often repeated by journalists that haven't actually tried VR themselves. If you haven't checked it out, I'd recommend finding a friend with a headset and going to town on it for a few hours. :)
And don't worry, AR is (probably) coming eventually.
Anecdotally, it seems like the Quest beautifully handles experiences designed for VR, and has a bit less success with improving media designed for traditional consumption (watching movies, which seems like it could be a phenomenal experience, still just makes me want to watch on a TV).
Not the GP, but in my experience, yes, they have. Problem is none of the games we want to play are available. It's a neat sideshow, but the headset gets stored away soon enough and we go back to the games we want to play.
I have yet to see a VR game I would pour a ton of time into. Right now I'm playing WoW, Zelda: Link's Awakening, and Mario Maker. Perhaps someday I'll be able to play a game like WoW in VR, but we're not there yet. Zelda and MM wouldn't play well in VR. So where's the "killer app" (ugh)? I imagine it will come, but I haven't seen it yet, which is why my headset is collecting dust.
Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for VR (I was an early adopter and even toyed around with a dev lot for a while). Problem currently is that the library of games I want to play just doesn't exist.
Like I just bought No Man's Sky since they added VR. I thought I'd only play it for 20 minutes just to see the algorithmically generated worlds but I ended up spending 20 hours in it in VR. I felt like a little kind full of wonder and glee everytime I jumped in a ship and took off. I felt like a little kind building a camp. I felt like a little kid when I found a water planet and launched and rode a submarine. Same with drilling through an entire mountain. It was amazing to "be there" instead of "looking at a picture of another character being there" (normal 3D games not in VR). It's not a great game yet IMO but just being in these situations in VR blows me away.
Breath of the Wild is my favorite game of all time but I was disappointed it was not in VR once in a while. I wanted to just be able to look around with my head not the R stick. I also like VR games where controls are in the world, not the buttons. Like reach over your shoulder to grab your sword and hold up your shield not press Y and old R.
I'm actually surprised Blizzard hasn't made VR WoW and hasn't either added facial capture attachment or pushed Valve/Oculus for one. If there was a low-res device that could capture your mouth shape and eyes so that your in game character could match your expression I'd think the enjoyment/addiction level of playing WoW would be 10x whatever it was at WoW's peak.
I agree the good content isn't there for VR yet and there isn't enough of it. I also agree there may never be a big market for many reasons. But, the moments VR's strengths shine I'm blown away and can't go back.
The only uncapped VR experiences I've tried so far were Beat Saber, Rec Room and VR Chat. At the time of writing I'm at 99 hours of Beat Saber.
They have probably invested a bit in fine mouse motor skills and the like, and would have to essentially start over if VR games become the norm.
It seems that you have not tried VR. Please do try (preferably using a decent headset). The experience is incredible – at least for a while.
The problems are:
- locomotion. If teleportation makes sense in the game, then its fine. If you actually have to walk (really walk, not a vehicle), then yes, it is a problem. Since your playing area is constrained, you can't really move that much. If you move using the joystick, then your brain gets conflicting signals, and you may get motion sickness.
– resolution. If you have to read lots of things, it's not confortable. You can do it, but not for long. Which brings me to
– comfort. The headsets are not really that heavy. But because they basically seal your peripheral vision, they have to be relatively tight, which gets unconfortable. The materials used also mean it may get sweaty. For PC, also have cables you need to worry about, although it's not that big of a deal.
– setup. This is getting better. HTC vive used lighthouses, Rift used cameras. They were finnicky to get working correctly(additionally, the Rift required two extra high speed USB ports). They are both changing tracking technologies so this is already improving.
– price. These things are currently not cheap. Nor is replacing them every generation. For PC, you also need a good system, as it now has to push two images at a higher resolution and way higher refresh rates. If your system is underpowered and the game lags, you will become nauseated.
Problems aside, once we have cheaper and more portable systems, I expect the usage to skyrocket. The tech is far too entertaining for its own good :)
I’m sure it’s very cool, but I’m not into games and don’t really want to be.
I played SimCity and World of Warcraft when I was a kid and it was enough for me to see how addictive and yet unfulfilling they are to me.
I still spend way too much time on the computer, probably a lot more, but I'm building something of my own, which is incredibly rewarding. Not judging, I just try to stay way from games and Netflix series for this reason.
What I'd love and pay an absurd amount of money would be an AR glasses where I can comfortably read for hours lying on a hammock or on commute.
Something that surprises me is why the software industry dictates using VR controllers, rather than giving the option of just using VR purely for 3D vision; the games supporting VR generally are separate versions of the original ones, with teleportation system.
My guess is that if a middle-ground approach was an option, there would be a larger adoption.
When Oculus Rift first released, the VR controllers weren't ready. Most demos were "3D vision" only (i.e., no input), and games used an Xbox One controller. As a Rift pre-orderer, I gave many demos to people in those early days.
Almost every single person looked around, said, "oh my god, this is incredible", and then raised their arms and tried to look at their hands.
Being unable to see your hands breaks immersion, while having the agency to literally reach out and interact with the virtual environment tricks your brain into believing it's real.
VR controllers aren't dictated by the software industry. They're demanded by nearly everyone that has used VR.
Free, ad-supported products are all about short term gratification because it costs us nothing today. Instead if we consider the long term when making these choices, then an investment in a paid no tracking product would be a better decision.
The problem is that the experiment itself showed the majority chose the short term gratification.
I think in my core, freedom of choice is extremely valuable to me and so I tend to resist as much as possible attempts by others to control any amount of that choice for me.
Having said that, it means I also respect the choice of others to take the free product because the internal math on their side is different and they see it as the better decision for them. As long as we are all thinking through the decisions, then whatever we each choose is right for us.
This is an interesting claim that I've heard before. Is there some way to measure the subconscious effect of advertising? It feels like a bit of a bogeyman to me.
ref: https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/06/marshmall...
In short, it's a wearable band that uses electrodes to measure your forearm muscles' activity (electromyography, or EMG), coupled with accelerometers to capture motion. It's awesome technology, but contrary to all the "neuro" buzzword bingo, you can't "control computers with your mind" – you have to physically contract the muscles in your forearm, just like if you were using a mouse or keyboard. This video gives you an idea of what the device is actually capable of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD4efk8T2X4
Either way, it's exciting to see this kind of tech make it into the consumer space. Even if it doesn't catch on with AR/VR, it will have a lot of positive effects for researchers as well as for users with accessibility and mobility challenges.
Walking down the street with AR glasses right now sucks because you can't actually do anything without disruptive gestures (holding your hand to your face, talking out loud to nobody, etc). If you could tell the glasses what to do simply by making small imperceptible movements in your hand, that's a huge leap forward towards making AR actually something usable
So, it's not just the forearm muscles' activity, but the actual neuron impulses.
They could then acquire companies more "quietly".
Mark should also take a page from Larry's book and transition to the background more while lettings someone else run Facebook.
With Google my #1 concern is they'll shut it down. With Facebook I know it's going to sniff up all my data it can get its grubby hands on (which is also the #2 concern with Google if the product survives)
In any case on the subject I don't want anything but my own hardware processing anything thought related. That is not something the cloud should be involved in
In the most charitable case imaginable, users would be invited to enable the feature in software and experience mind control of their games, uav's, or whatever.
I envision this might end up like laptop lid cameras: there won't be a hardware disconnect switch for the feature so people will put tape over the sensor pads if they don't trust the hardware not to read their eeg.
I don't understand how this could possibly work with an armband. They presumably are reading electrical signals from motor neurons, but why do they fire if there's no movement? Is it possible that they are detecting incredibly small movements that are involuntarily caused by thinking about moving your hand?
There have been commercialized versions of this tech already. The Myo was Kickstarted in 2015 and then acquired by CTRL-Labs. I have one and that generation of the tech was still tricky to use effectively.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/312488939/myowaretm-har...
Here's a pretty decent paper on the quite long history of Brain-Machine Interfaces: https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/physrev.00027.20...
https://youtu.be/oD4efk8T2X4?t=83
(I linked to the specific time when it starts.)
What I think FB is probably going to use it for:
* Some sort of peripheral to "unlock" advanced features in FB, which will basically give them a never-ending stream of neural-data to train models on.
* Ad impressions, no need to track clicks anymore, if user reacted to it in a "positive" manner they will be getting a cut.
* Bundle with Oculus (Something like: https://youtu.be/D8pB8sNBGlE?t=638)
Looks very interesting, but I would prefer it not to be owned by facebook.
If that's all they're doing, the title of this post is very misleading (and consequently, most of the comments in this thread are irrelevant).
Did you watch the full video? They show someone playing Asteroids without any movement. Movement is not required.
To be fair this concern is not only about Facebook, I'd have similar concerns now about anyone, but Facebook have already shown themselves to be bad actors. Fool me once, etc.
Having dozens of employees and four years of development period with VC money suggests that they have something more than just a POC.
With any great technology/innovation, the next obvious question always is, how can it be used at a mass scale, so that it gets accepted as just another part of a person's life. To put it another way, how can it be assimilated into the common services/products that we consume in our daily lives. Only then it will produce the value that it's makers were hoping for.
So what kind of void could this technology fill?
That depends on the vision of the creators and those who own it. I guess, if it was Apple that was buying this startup, we would see very different end usage of it.
If it was Google, we would see something absolutely different. If it was Amazon, who knows what they might use it for?
But since it is Facebook, we have to feel a bit apprehensive.
Because what is it that Facebook intends to do in long term? What is it's vision? Being one of the biggest tech companies in the World right now, it is of paramount importance that we know what do they intend to do with the tech they acquire?
And this tech could be revolutionary! It is the kind of stuff that we read in Sci-Fi. Hope they make something good/useful out of it.
Facebook now knows the name, location and details of your bank, doctor, where you work, your family, your accountant, your psychotherapist etc.
Apple - Dragon (Pile of gold. Ancient. Has good variants.)
Amazon - Lich (Seeks to conquer everything)
Netflix - Djinn (Not actually as scary as the rest.)
Google - Illithid
With the article hint about mind reading, mind flayers (or Illithid) connect their minds together in huge cities. They are also famous for manipulating minds with their psionic abilities.
Beholders have plenty of (non-googly) eyes and look everywhere, gather ancient knowledge, gather various artifacts, but usually don't care about you except for when they zap you for coming too close.
Djinn are masters of illusions rocking you with dreams while they drain you.
The lich (or maybe semi-lich soon) is in the business of dealing time. He has a special relationship with time, which allows him to trade advantageously to fill its boundless ambitions.
The cash hoarding behavior and love of beautiful shiny things is indeed a characteristic of dragons.
In my head, the compromises CTRL-Labs are making is brilliant and I believe it can create a compelling product.
This could FINALLY be the keyboard killer. I would love something I can walk and use easily, use from a reclining position, and avoid having to use my hands for typing while programming.
I have bad wrist pain from typing all day, so I am sure to use only ergonomic keyboards and mice and take frequent brakes. Not having to deal with that would be great.
In order to activate the band, you simply imagine yourself buying a product from one of the advertising partners.
Conversely, an underdeveloped BSides local to you is a good opportunity for you to get involved and make a name for yourself in the local sec scene.
I'd like to be bought please.
We are literally going to lobotomize our species in a quest to get people to click ads.
I mean most of Facebook seems to be:
20% of
- saying "I was at this location"
- pictures of food
- pictures of people's kids
- pictures of people at events like concerts, family gatherings, etc.
- complaining about traffic/weather/money
and 80% of
- reports of memes
People whose Facebook interaction is pretty much just the above, which is probably the majority, aren't really going to achieve much more in life without Facebook, whether it's reading your brain or not.