Paralysed woman writes her name for the first time in 20 years after having Elon Musk Neuralink chip implant surgery
Audrey Crews became the first woman in the world to undergo surgery earlier this month receiving Mr Musk's Neuralink chip implant, allowing her to control a computer with her mind.
Ms Crews recently took to X to show the world how she was able to select a coloured cursor on screen and sign her name through telepathy.
She showed off how she could also draw pictures, scroll with a mouse and use a keyboard just by thinking.
'I tried writing my name for the first time in 20 years. I'm working on it. Lol,' she said.
'I am the first woman in the world to do this.'
Ms Crews was left a quadriplegic at age 16 following a car accident that left the vertebrae in her neck permanently damaged.
By 2016, tech billionaire Musk co-founded Neuralink with expert in neuroscience in hopes of using AI tech to treat brain disorders.
Three years later he revealed the N1 chip, which is placed on the brain to translate electrical signals into tasks.
Ms Crews is just the ninth recipient.
She underwent surgery at the University of Miami Health Centre where surgeons place over 100 threads, thinner than human hair into her motor cortex after drilling through her skull.
The implant, roughly the size of a 10 cent coin, sends those signals to a linked computer or smartphone with Neuralink's software via Bluetooth, allowing patients with paralysis or neurological conditions to communicate digitally.
'Imagine your pointer finger is left click and the cursor is with your wrist, without physically doing it. Just a normal day using telepathy,' she said.
Ms Crews has also started taking requests of what to draw next, recently sketching a cat, a sun and a tree after being asked by X users.
She's also able to play simulation games testing her accuracy and speed by having her cursor track points on the screen as they change.
Mr Musk even replied to a post about Ms Crews' story.
'She is controlling her computer just by thinking. Most people don't realise this is possible,' he said.
While the technology won't allow her to regain movement of her limbs, the advancement has so far impressed Ms Crews who hopes to make the most of it by writing a book about her experiences.
The chip is powered by a small battery that charges wirelessly.
Asked if she ever imagined being able to communicate in such a way again, Ms Crews had one response:
'Not in all my wildest dreams, but the future is here.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Did Donald Trump just give China a major advantage on AI?
Last month, the Trump administration quietly reversed one of its own policies by lifting a ban on US tech giant Nvidia's H20 microchip exports to China. For anyone who has followed Donald Trump's erratic record on trade, another U-turn might not sound like a notable development. But this time, the stakes are much higher because these microchips are critical to powering the next generation of artificial intelligence. Whichever country dominates microchip production will likely lead the global AI race, with massive implications for military strategy and economic output. For nearly three years, the US has tried to keep these powerful chips out of China's hands. Now, by reopening the door, has Mr Trump handed Beijing a major advantage on AI? We spoke to three experts to explain how we got here. Back in April, the Trump administration banned H20 microchip exports to China, toughening restrictions put in place by the Biden administration. It has since reversed that decision. According to Jason Van Der Schyff, a fellow at Australian Strategic Policy Institute's technology and security program, this backflip may be in response to the booming black market demand for high-powered US chips in China. "Over a billion dollars worth of restricted chips were smuggled into China in just a few months," he said. "The reversal may be a pivot by the administration, recognising if you don't offer a legal channel for the slightly degraded chips, buyers will simply go around you." Professor Shahriar Akter, who specialises in the study of advanced analytics and AI at the University of Wollongong said this move seems to follow "a philosophy in Silicon Valley that if you sell more" it will pour more back into "your research and development". Associate Professor in Information Systems at Curtin University, Mohammad Hossain, suggested the Trump administration is trying to kill two birds with one stone. The US is trying to maintain leverage in a broader geopolitical trade-off involving China's critical exports, rare earth elements, while "keeping China dependent on US technology", he said. Nvidia is the tech giant behind these highly sought after microchips and it is led by CEO Jensen Huang who is the ninth-richest man in the world. The H20 is a step-down from Nvidia's top-tier chips (H100 and B200) and was specifically designed to comply with US export restrictions while catering to the Chinese market. "Basically, [H100 and B200 chips] can do things much faster than the H20," Mr Van Der Schyff said. "If we consider how quickly AI is moving any impediment that could be brought to time more than anything is going to maintain that US strategic advantage." While the H20 is less powerful, Mr Van Der Schyff warns that "these aren't toys … even slightly downgraded chips still enable model training at scale". "If you're concerned about national security, letting an adversary access chips that are only one rung down the ladder still poses a strategic risk." While the US hopes to stall China's progress in artificial intelligence, experts warn this strategy may have the opposite effect. China's push to dominate AI is already underway and restricting exports to only H20 chips incentivises them to accelerate domestic developments. "At present in the world, 50 per cent of AI researchers are being produced by China alone," Dr Akter said. Chinese tech giants like Huawei and Biren Technology have been ramping up their own AI accelerators. "Huawei's chips are already being deployed in major training clusters," Mr Van Der Schyff said. Still, China's domestic developments trail behind industry leaders like Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's Samsung when it comes to cutting-edge manufacturing. "There isn't necessarily a danger that China catches up overnight but these restrictions do however give Beijing a clear incentive to sort of go all in on industrial policy for their own semiconductors to accelerate domestic progress," Mr Van Der Schyff said. "We've seen this play out previously with 5G and also with aviation." All three experts cautioned that it's difficult to gauge China's true AI capabilities. "Given the closed nature of China's systems and their propensity to not always tell us the truth", it's unclear how much China's artificial intelligence has developed, Mr Van Der Schyff said. Dr Akter used an analogy to explain the uncertainty: "There are two types of AI technologies", one is called glass box and the other is called black box. "Glass box technology is basically explainable AI, which is open source and we can explain where data is coming from and how it is being used to develop AI models and what would be the outcome." Whereas, black box technology is the opposite, we cannot trace back to the source of the data and we cannot tell what models have been used. That opacity makes it difficult for the rest of the world to assess whether Beijing is playing catch-up or quietly pulling ahead. The country that has the upper hand in microchip production will likely lead the global AI race and that has significant repercussions, experts said. "The country that dominates compute will dominate AI, and AI will shape everything from military planning to economic productivity."
The Australian
2 days ago
- The Australian
Elon Musk's Tesla ordered to pay $375m in Autopilot case
The jury found Tesla's system partly responsible for a crash in Key Largo that killed Naibel Benavides Leon and injured her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, according to attorney Darren Jeffrey Rousso, a partner at the law firm that represented Angulo and Leon's family. The plaintiffs had alleged that Autopilot was to blame when driver George McGee's Tesla careened into a Chevrolet sport utility vehicle, killing Leon and injuring Angulo. The jury awarded $US200 million ($309m) in punitive damages, plus $US59 million in compensatory damages to Leon's family and $US70 million in damages to Angulo, according to court records. Since the jury assigned one-third of the blame to Tesla, whose CEO is billionaire Elon Musk, the compensatory damages will be reduced, Rousso said, with the total impact of the jury award totalling $US242 million after these reductions. 'Justice was done,' Rousso said. 'The jury heard all the evidence and came up with a fair and just verdict on behalf of our clients.' Tesla will appeal the decision, according to its defence attorneys. 'Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeapordise Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology,' Tesla said through its legal team. 'The evidence has always shown that this driver was solely at fault because he was speeding, with his foot on the accelerator – which overrode Autopilot – as he rummaged for his dropped phone without his eyes on the road,' Tesla said. 'To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash. This was never about Autopilot.' Read related topics: Elon Musk Motoring From Pakistan's 'Eighth Wonder' to Romania's serpentine masterpiece, these five roads push drivers to extreme limits where altitude sickness is just the beginning. The Weekend Australian Magazine Simon Davidson has been photographing Australia's classic and custom car scene with an artistic eye for decades. He especially loves to shoot burnouts.
ABC News
2 days ago
- ABC News
Tesla ordered to pay $375 million in fatal autopilot crash
Victims of a fatal 2019 crash caused by an autopilot failure in a Tesla Model S will receive $US243 million ($375 million) in damages after a jury found Elon Musk's electric vehicle company liable. Jurors in a Miami federal court on Friday, local time, awarded the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon and her former boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, $US129 million in compensatory damages, plus $US200 million in punitive damages, according to a verdict sheet. Tesla was held liable for 33 per cent of the compensatory damages, or $US42.6 million. Jurors found the driver, George McGee, liable for 67 per cent, but he was not a defendant and will not have to pay his share. "Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. "Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries," he added. Tesla said it will appeal. "Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardise Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," the company said. Tesla shares fell 1.8 per cent on Friday, and are down 25 per cent this year. The plaintiffs had sought $US345 million in damages. Their lawyers said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot. Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without going to trial. In June, a judge rejected Tesla's bid to dismiss the Florida case. Experts said Friday's verdict may spur more lawsuits, and could make future settlements more costly. "It's a big deal," said Alex Lemann, a law professor at Marquette University. "This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgement in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its Autopilot technology." The verdict could also impede efforts by Mr Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles and robotaxis it plans to start producing next year. As Tesla's electric vehicle sales fall, much of its nearly $US1 trillion market value hinges on Mr Musk's ability to pivot the company into robotics and artificial intelligence. The trial concerned an April 25, 2019, incident where Mr McGee drove his 2019 Model S about 100 kilometres per hour through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder. Mr McGee had reached down to pick up a cell phone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV. Ms Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 23 metres to her death, while Mr Angulo suffered serious injuries. "We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash," said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology. "The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software," he said. "That's a big deal." Tesla, in its statement, said Mr McGee was entirely at fault. "To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash," the company said. "This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs' lawyers blaming the car when the driver — from day one — admitted and accepted responsibility." Reuters
