To actually capture words you have much better chances reading the brain while writing the word with a pen because you are actually sending a signal from the brain to your hand, which is what they did here (even if he doesn't actually have a hand to move, the brain still can emit the very same commands): https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/brain-implants-let-para...
The study you quoted uses similar principles.
>I don't think it is anything like simulating a mechanical action like throwing a ball, just saying a word alters brains in completely different ways depending on the person
It's exactly like imagining throwing a ball. A disproportionately large amount of the motor cortex is used for facial muscle and tongue control. Look up the "cortical homunculus".
>for example saying "spider" reminds me of spiderman and there is little I can to stop such through from happening
These BCIs can't tell whether or not you're thinking about Spider-Man, otherwise they'd be used on terrorists to get information. Instead, they're mainly focused on broad fitting synchronisation of M1 neurons (indicating rest)
>To actually capture words you have much better chances reading the brain while writing the word with a pen because you are actually sending a signal from the brain to your hand
Real movement does produce much more consistent results than imagined movements, but it doesn't translate well to the target market for BCIs (people with severe motor disabilities)
>even if he doesn't actually have a hand to move, the brain still can emit the very same commands
It doesn't work like that in real life. With no feedback, we're back to square one with the "imagined movement".