From: Rob Sacks (editor_at_realization.org)
Date: 2002-01-24 01:53:02
Hiya,
> Jim: Since Rob is not willing to offer his source code,
> "someone" needs to write some open source code modules.
> John: Rob isn't willing to share his source simple because he
> followed exactly what you want to do...CODE First think second.
lol.
> John: My approach is different from Robs what I want to produce
> is a frame work for the program.
No, actually, I agree with that. The ideal thing would be if
somebody would write a working framework so everybody
can add various things to it.
Actually, my REAL opinion is that none of this talk matters
very much, because the decisions aren't going to be made
by talking. They are probably going to be made by
some single person here who takes the initiative, writes a
simple working version of the program (could have very
limited functionality), and puts the source code out for
everybody else to add to.
As for Jim's remarks about starting with something simple,
this may surprise him, but I agree completely with what he
says -- when it comes to WRITING programs. I always write
programs that way. Start with something incredibly simple,
get it running right away, and add to it gradually.
But writing is one thing, and planning is another. What
we've been doing here is planning -- looking ahead to
see where we want the program to end up.
The two things are perfectly compatible with each other.
> Jim: Rob keeps offering to design these fancy biofeedback
> interfaces if someone would only tell him what they are!
Well, not exactly. Rob keeps asking experienced users
to design fancy interfaces, because Rob wants to know what
they want.
> John: I have to go out now so more ranting later. :-)
Hurry back. You're my favorite ranter so far. :)
-- Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: John Morrison
To: buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 8:07 PM
Subject: RE: [buildcheapeeg] Re: SOFTWARE: FIRST THINGS FIRST
Jim I can see where you're coming from and I can agree up to point.
> A message to the over enthusiastic software group.
> FIRST THINGS FIRST.
> Before you guys get too fancy, first you need to build something that WORKS.
We have something that works in fact we have a lot of software out there that works.
> Andreas has outlined the correct path.
> The ElectricGuru is a half solution and but it might be useful in trouble shooting Andrea's or Joerg's EEG input stage.
Good so we have something that is working and can be used to trouble shoot the hardware
So now we can work on a piece of software that goes beyond JUST WORKING!
> Since Rob is not willing to offer his source code, "someone" needs to write some open source code modules.
Rob isn't willing to share his source simple because he followed exactly what you want to do...CODE First think second.
> First you need an interrupt driven RS232 input module that streams the EEG data to the "hard drive" without loosing any bytes.
WHY?
Most people probably won't want to save every trace they make and HDD activity is VERY SLOW.
> Then you can pick off data from the buffer to analyze.
> Then you can draw the oscilloscope display for 2 channels. There are several choices of how to display this.
> Then you can do the 2 FFTs and display the right and left channel FFT bins. There are several ways to display the FFT.
> ( My personal opinion is that you "absolutely must" have time slices of FFT bins or sometimes called a waterfall display if there is only "oneof you" doing the biofeedback "training". )
> Now if there is enough time left over, you can look at the bins, make decisions and drive a biofeedback module.
> Then back for another look at the buffer.
Sounds like a long process and a lot of back tracking and when you reach the end how long is this program going to be used when something else is introduced.
> The point I am making is that this "simplistic" program has to workbefore you go off solving "biofeedback protocols" and designing fancy screen, and doing audio and/or visual feedback.
ElectricGuru is a simplistic program that works and we've got it!!
What we are doing is building a frame work for these things to fit into.
If we were working in Java (I do work in C & C++ as well) I could give you a quick frame work in a few days and a debugged working one in a week!
> Rob keeps offering to design these fancy biofeedback interfaces if someone would only tell him what they are!
Good on him. :-)
It's the people that aim hi (And achieve) that give us the results.
> FIRST THINGS FIRST, get an actual "brain wave monitor" working so that you guys can see what is "really" there.
ElectricGuru
> You are trying to solve a problem before you know what the problem is!
That is what good program design is all about!
> Not everything that you have read about brainwaves and neural feedback is actually true!
Tells us about it so that we can learn from what you've learned already.
Juergen P. (Jim) Meissner
Check out my Website at www.MeissnerResearch.com
Read about the benefits of the Brain State Synchronizer sounds for improving your life and health.
My approach is different from Robs what I want to produce is a frame work for the program.
This doesn't preclude you from writing a quick program that works but it ensures that the program you write can be reused.
AND if gives us the opportunity to do things like trying different filters, different displays, different devices without rewriting the rest of the program.
John
P.S
I have to go out now so more ranting later. :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:37 BST