Talk:Neurowear

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Furry Low‑importance

	Neurowear is within the scope of WikiProject Furry, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to furry fandom. For more information, visit the project page.FurryWikipedia:WikiProject FurryTemplate:WikiProject Furryfurry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Thoughts"

Edits like this, claiming that measuring EEG is the same as reading thoughts, are simply incorrect, regardless of whether or not there is a source for them. This is not a matter of opinion; this is a basic fact about what the electroencephalogram is. EEG records electrical signals that are present on the scalp; it does not "read thoughts". (We can sometimes infer, based on characteristics of the signal recorded, something about the person's mood, but that still does not mean EEG is recording people's thoughts--that would be like seeing a person laughing, inferring that they find something funny, and then calling yourself a mind-reader.) We should not be repeating information known to be incorrect just because a sensationalist source mentions it.

Plus, the edit linked above is simply cherry-picking one source that makes the sensationalist claim, while ignoring numerous other sources (already in this article) that have accurate descriptions:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20079609-1/robotic-cat-ears-for-humans-an-ears-on-test/: "It relies on electroencephalography from a single sensor placed on the forehead to read a person's brain waves"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/necomimi-mind-controlled-cat-ears_n_1894993.html?utm_hp_ref=technology: "record[s] low-level electrical output from the brain" (this source also mentions that comparing EEG to mind-reading is "sensational[ist]".

The version of the lede I had written is scientifically accurate and not in conflict with any decent sources. The current version, on the other hand, is sensationalist junk that is simply false. The fact that a reliable source repeats this junk doesn't make it not junk. Part of the job of a good Wikipedia editor is to filter out the crappy sources from the decent ones, rather than just mindlessly repeat what sources say (which is all you can do when you're an editor who doesn't understand basic science but is trying to write about a scientific topic). The better version should be restored. rʨanaɢ (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say "reading" thoughts? Nowhere. Obviously no one is thinking "I want to move my left nonexistent cat ear up." Your version makes it sound like wearers have to wrinkle their brow or something. CallawayRox (talk) 20:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It says "thoughts and emotions", which is not at all what EEG measures. My version says nothing at all about wrinkling brows; it says the cap measures EEG, which is exactly what it does. rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Neurowear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]