[bnegreve]

I am also skeptic of the whole thing, but they say this:

> After 12 further days, the patient was able to reliably increase or decrease his neural activity to hit one of two “target” tones.

Isn't that evidence that this is not random noise?

The only thing that could be left to human interpretation is the "increase of activity" (I'm assuming "activity" is a signal with high dimensionality). But it is easy enough to build some metric, and demonstrate the answers are not random.

I have just enough faith in peer reviewing to hope that the paper would have been rejected without this experiment.