Am I the only one who sees the "holes" in this?

> without any contact between the two

Well, the "thoughts" were sent through the internet, so there's a link there

> "You can actually transmit information directly from one brain to another brain without intervention of the senses."

I guess that if you are interpreting the information as light, there's intervention of sight.

Still interesting though, huge pontential here.

This is a case where an article's title, rather than distorting an article's content, makes a claim not supported by the article at all.

In a telephone conversation, we link two brains by way of sound waves. A text-based chat uses light waves. A video call uses both. This experiment uses electrical stimulation of neurons, but in all these examples, well-understood physical methods are used to transmit information from place to place -- it's not telepathy as that term is defined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepathy

Quote: "Telepathy (from the Ancient Greek τῆλε, tele meaning "distant" and πάθος, pathos or -patheia meaning "feeling, perception, passion, affliction, experience")[3][4] is the purported transmission of information from one person to another without using any of our known sensory channels or physical interaction." [emphasis added]

How is electrical stimulation of neurons not "physical interaction"? Is execution by electric chair defined as telepathy?

Same content free article was posted a while ago with a slightly different BBC link, bbc.com vs bbc.co.uk

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8277986

It's no more informative the second time around.