The first Neuralink implant in a human malfunctioned after several threads recording neural activity retracted from the brain, the Elon Musk-owned startup revealed Wednesday.

The threads retracted in the weeks following the surgery in late January that placed the Neuralink hardware in 29-year-old Noland Arbaugh’s brain, the company said in a blog post.

This reduced the number of effective electrodes and the ability of Arbaugh, a quadriplegic, to control a computer cursor with his brain.

“In response to this change, we modified the recording algorithm to be more sensitive to neural population signals, improved the techniques to translate these signals into cursor movements, and enhanced the user interface,” Neuralink said in the blog post.

The company said the adjustments resulted in a “rapid and sustained improvement” in bits-per-second, a measure of speed and accuracy of cursor control, surpassing Arbaugh’s initial performance.

While the problem doesn’t appear to pose a risk to Arbaugh’s safety, Neuralink reportedly floated the idea of removing his implant, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The company has also told the Food and Drug Administration that it believes it has a solution for the issue that occurred with Arbaugh’s implant, the Journal reported.

The implant was placed just more than 100 days ago. In the blog post, the company touted Arbaugh’s ability to play online computer games, browse the internet, livestream and use other applications “all by controlling a cursor with his mind.”

  • Soggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    You’re presupposing that surgical implants can’t be more responsive, intuitive, speedy, or sophisticated than an external device. The eye trackers are very useful but objectively pretty limited. Non-invasive EEG is weak and distorted because there is skull and more brain in the way, so “resolution” is limited.

    If better outcomes are possible by putting electrodes as close to the signal source as can be, why not explore that option?

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      It feels ridiculous that I even need to say this, but you don’t do it because the risk:benefit ratio is lopsided as hell.

      Risks: die from sepsis, have your body reject the implant, the parent company goes out of business and your implant no longer functions (this has happened with several startups), etc

      Benefit: move mouse and click faster

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        Move mouse and click faster is a big deal when it’s the only way you can interact with the world. And it’s just a mouse right now, but what about robotic hands? A thought-controlled wheelchair? A tiny bit of agency? Technology is iterative and built on failure, and you want to tell the people trapped in non-functional bodies that it will never get any better?

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Move mouse and click faster is a big deal when it’s the only way you can interact with the world.

          I feel like I’m doing nothing but repeating this: the only way to do that is not with an implant! It’s not implant or nothing!

          And it’s just a mouse right now, but what about robotic hands? A thought-controlled wheelchair? A tiny bit of agency? Technology is iterative and built on failure, and you want to tell the people trapped in non-functional bodies that it will never get any better?

          Right now it is not those things, and I’m going to need you to step way the fuck back since your starting premise is that I’m not physically disabled and have no loved ones that are or could benefit from safe, effective adaptive technology. Maybe if it was your cousin or sister you’d have a little more concern about just tossing them into a meat grinder because some tech bro thinks “go fast, break things” is a policy that can and should be translated to human health.

          I do not and will not accept disabled people being sacrificed in the name of progress. They can’t even do this shit in fucking monkeys, bro. Come on.

      • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s experimental tech, I wouldn’t want to be the Guinea pig either.

        However, if I was quadriplegic and could only use the somewhat limited external tech, and a significant portion of my life was interacting with a computer. Fuck yeah the risk is worth a performance boost. Especially considering this is going to be a lot safer and more powerful when it hits the mass market

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          There is no such thing as an implant or surgery with no risk of sepsis or rejection. The risk may be low in young, healthy patients (ie, not people who are quadriplegic because that leads to many other health concerns with surgeries), but it’s never zero.

          If you’re cool with risking that, okay, that’s your body. Personally I want to live.

          • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I never said it was, and for some people it will be worth it.

            I’m not going to get Elon’s stupid chip, I’m just saying it’s not as one sided as you say