I absolutely agree that the technology has plenty of use cases and that the paper the article's written about presents an interesting new perspective on security. I was, however, annoyed that the article's title and opening paragraphs seem to take something relatively elementary (it's a feasibility study!) and frame it as some sort of Inception-esque mind-hacking situation.
In other words: I agree about the value of the idea. I think, however, that there's a huge disconnect between the information and how it's being presented.
