[EEG] Fwd: Emotiv Developer Program : SDK & Headset Available Now

[Mitch Altman]

I wouldn't want to encourage anyone to break the law and reverse-engineer anything that isn't open for such.  Playing with something on the bench is another story.

 

 

Open-source is scary for a lot of people.  Especially in the realm of hardware.  People in our culture are so well trained to think that everyone will steal their shit.  I agree with you that if their hardware and software are special, then they should open it up so others may benefit and improve upon it for them (which we would all do for free!).  But such is the world of proprietary-ness.

 

 

Mitch.

 

 


 

------------------

 
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:31:47 -0700
> Subject: Re: [EEG] Fwd: Emotiv Developer Program : SDK & Headset Available Now
> From: jtfoote at ieee.org
> To: maltman23 at hotmail.com
> CC: eeg at lists.noisebridge.net
> 
> According to Jean, the signals are encrypted. And DMCA
> notwithstanding, I doubt they would let anyone get near a headset
> without signing away their ability to reverse-engineer it. Does anyone
> know of a headset in the wild?
> 
> The fact that they are spending engineering effort on encrypting
> signals rather than making the thing interoperate is a huge warning
> sign to me. If their software is really as special as they claim they
> shouldn't need to do that.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Mitch Altman<maltman23 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > $10,000 ??!!  I was thinking, like, $500.  I agree that giving them money to
> > do free R&D for them is not worth it.  If we could get one for free, it
> > would be easy enough to see what signals are passing back and forth between
> > the hardware and software -- if we could get one for free...
> >
> >
> > Mitch.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------
> >
> >> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:46:07 -0700
> >> From: jtfoote at ieee.org
> >> To: eeg at lists.noisebridge.net
> >> Subject: Re: [EEG] Fwd: Emotiv Developer Program : SDK & Headset Available
> >> Now
> >>
> >> According to Rachel's email, the Research Plus license costs $10,000.
> >>
> >> But even if it were only $100, I personally would be extremely
> >> reluctant to give them any money at the moment. While it might be fun
> >> to hack, the chances that you don't sign away your ability to do that
> >> with your license agreement is pretty much nil. Let alone the
> >> drawbacks of a proprietary API , I still think they are promising far
> >> more than they can deliver, and would like to see actual users with
> >> actual results outside their PR machine.
> >>
> >> (And I'm not the only skeptic:
> >>
> >> http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/consumer-electronics/gaming/loser-mental-block)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I will be occupied this weekend at Robogames, and won't be able to
> >> attend on Sunday, sorry!
> >>
> >> -Jon
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> EEG mailing list
> >> EEG at lists.noisebridge.net
> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/eeg
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > EEG mailing list
> > EEG at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/eeg
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/neuro/attachments/20090610/7d760900/attachment-0003.html>