So, for example, the machine can predict "a hammer" but can't figure out if it's connected to the justice system or fixing a loose wooden plate.

That seems very low resolution and brittle. Simple sleight of hand magicians can trick the visual cortex of their audience. They often do it to other people, but nothing prevents one to do it on himself, therefore, tricking the system. (hypothesis)

> Our results cannot guarantee that all choices are preceded by involuntary images

Yes, but that is not stopping the researchers from gloating about a less than impressive discovery.

I don't quite see this as groundbreaking as some others do. Life, at its core, is about making choices. What wasn't selected through those choices has been effectively eliminated.

From the very beginning, when organisms first received sensory input and could act on it, life has been shaped by a process of selection through choices. It makes sense that choice is so fundamental to all living things.

What I think confuses some people is the debate about determinism. To me, it feels less of a dilemma when you consider the inherent randomness of reality. This randomness influences both the choices we make and the range of choices available to us. We always make choices, based on many factors, and because some of those factors are unpredictable, not all of our choices are entirely predictable.