Neuralink Eyes Fundraise at $8.5B Valuation

4/25/2025 at 1:39:28 PM

(No access so haven't read yet.)

I think that the current systems being tested by Neuralink are (1) a connection to motor cortex allowing quadriplegic/locked-in to type/control a mouse; (2) a connection to visual cortex to provide vision for patients with bilateral complete vision loss.

(1) has been documented fairly well; provides some benefit (let's say 10x) for patients beyond eye trackers / sip-puff interfaces but at a cost that is easily 10000x greater. Unclear whether insurance would cover this. Even if they did, total patient population increase per year is probably ~1000, so asymptotic market is tiny.

(2) has not been documented. Historically, there are lot of challenges with cortical stimulation for vision, and the company's distaste for doing science / acknowledging scientific uncertainty makes me skeptical. Same issues as (1) apply if it does work.

I think that people who worry about black-mirror style issues have been overwhelmed by the hype machine. These things are infinitely worse than natural senses and motor control. They are using bluetooth connections and they have no R&D path to increasing bandwidth to neurons in a way that would grow exponentially.

What is possible in this space is something that has real but marginal benefit to a small number of patients. I had hoped that somehow Musk was motivated to solve the insurance and regulatory challenges towards deploying things to these patients, but I think unfortunately that the more their valuation rises, the greater the likelihood that they will close up shop sooner.

by ckemere

4/25/2025 at 3:44:45 AM

500 wpm access to 4 TW LLMs at <1ms latency will feel great!

by mensetmanusman

4/24/2025 at 7:51:34 PM

It's insanity that a company literally developing mind control and mind reading (or as they sanitize it: bidirectional brain-computer interface) hasn't been shut down yet, but here we are.

by Zambyte

4/24/2025 at 7:58:31 PM

I just watched the first Black Mirror episode (latest season). While I'm all for science and progress, I don't see a world where you don't pay a subscription for your brain to work.

by 255kb

4/24/2025 at 9:23:59 PM

Can you explain why?

I get that you can do bad things with it, but that goes for anything that requires brain surgery? Why is this inherently undoubtedly bad and evil?

by bboygravity

4/25/2025 at 2:58:10 AM

Brain surgery is invasive, but the power that the surgeon exercises over the patient is bound to the context of the surgery. Side effects may linger, but the surgeon cannot increase or alter the side effects after the surgery. With Neuralink installed, the owner of the proprietary software that runs on it (because let's be real, there's no way they'd let you control your own brain) has indefinite read and write access to your mind. No thought is private; no action is your own. Everything that happens in your brain happens either because the owners let it, or made it happen.

by Zambyte

4/24/2025 at 9:56:19 PM

There is a market for advertising-subsidized neural implants.

Think of the profit potential of being able to directly influence consumer brains patterns. It's a multi-trillion dollar industry, minimum.

The fear isn't that it's an option; It's creating a world where you can't afford not to. Much like how modern life requires internet participation, the idea of a potential world that requires neural implant participation and the economic incentives described above is viscerally horrific.

by kelseyfrog

4/25/2025 at 3:02:00 AM

> The fear isn't that it's an option; It's creating a world where you can't afford not to.

It's not even just that I couldn't afford not to. It's that in a way, I couldn't choose not to. Anything anyone says that has Neuralink installed is compromised. Any friendly suggestion to grab lunch at Major Chain Restaurant TM could be an ad. Any anecdote could be political campaigning.

It's not just not having it myself, it's the fact that those around me having it is a problem.

by Zambyte

4/25/2025 at 5:50:19 PM

That's a great point I hadn't considered.

What a terrible position to be in if the technology actually helps disabled folks though. On one hand their quality of life may improve. On the other, there may be a huge (possibly justified) stigma on all implanted people due to what you're writing about.

by kelseyfrog

4/24/2025 at 11:20:24 PM

As mentioned by another comment. First episode of season 7 of black mirror paints a really scary and very much likely outcome of this type of tech.

by financetechbro

4/24/2025 at 8:52:25 PM

Jokingly I assume this is how he controls his population once on Mars, for life.

by ncr100

4/24/2025 at 11:04:05 PM

i hope they make the technology really good so it can solve problems in mental health and beyond

by pabna

4/24/2025 at 8:40:26 PM

I wish the worst for this company! May they receive extreme public backlash and never secure the funding they need, please god

by standardly

4/24/2025 at 9:09:32 PM

I’m pretty out of the loop on this one - could I ask you to chime in why you feel so strongly about Neuralink? I knew they were ethicaly in the gray area what with the test animal living conditions etc., but I don’t know much beyond that.

In the long term (if the do have a long term, I expect them to fail due to technical reasons i.e. fibrosis around electrodes not being a solved problem)

by mapkkk

4/24/2025 at 9:21:06 PM

Test animal living conditions?!

Last I checked they where probably treating their animals the best out any research lab world wide?

by bboygravity