Andrew Huberman· PhD
You know, it doesn't happen, like, immediately. This is something that took weeks to train the algorithm to interpret it correctly.
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
You know, it doesn't happen, like, immediately. This is something that took weeks to train the algorithm to interpret it correctly.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
On the first day we were able to train the algorithm on you know a data set of like maybe about an hour and a half to get to about 50% accuracy.
And then over the next I would say about six days the performance just got better and better and then by about you know like a week into this she was up into the 95 100% range.
And then over the next I would say about six days uh the performance just got better and better and then by about you know like a week into this she was up into the 95 100% range.
And on the first day we were able to train the algorithm on you know a data set of like maybe about an hour and a half to get to about 50% accuracy.
Um so we started with a very simple vocabulary of about 27 words. Um the the words that we chose are the NATO code words. Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo. Uh we did that because um we could measure basically the accuracy of the decoder that was analyzing those brain signals and translating them into those 26 different code words.