This kind of thing is really held back by BCI tech.

By now, we have smartphones with camera systems that beat human eyes, and SoCs powerful enough to perform whatever image processing you want them to, in real time.

But our best neural interfaces have the throughput close to that of a dial-up modem, and questionable longevity. Other technological blockers advanced in leaps and bounds, but SOTA on BCI today is not that far away from 20 years ago. Because medicine is where innovation goes to die.

It's why I'm excited for the new generation of BCIs like Neuralink. For now, they're mostly replicating the old capabilities, but with better fundamentals. But once the fundamentals - interface longevity, ease of installation, ease of adaptation - are there? We might actually get more capable, more scalable BCIs.

it is a good ilustration of something like moores law, for a comming end point where a hand held device will have more than enough cabability and capacity to do ANYTHING, a meer mortal will EVER require, and the death of options and features, and a return to personal autonomy and responsibility

AI is the final failure of "intermitent" wipers,which like my latest car, is irevocably enabled to smeer the road grime and imperceptable "rain" into a goo, blocking by ability to see

The brain really is quite a machine. I've personally had a retinal tear lasered. It's well within my peripheral vision, and the lasering of course did more damage (but prevents it from spreading). How much of this can I see? Nothing! My peripheral vision appears continuous. Probably I'd miss a motion event only visible to that eye only in that particular zone. Not to mention the enormous number of "floaters" one gets especially by my age (58). Sometimes you see them but for the most part the brain just filters them out.

Where this becomes relevant is when you consider depixellation. True blur can't be undone, but pixellation without appropriate antialiasing filtering...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acKYYwcxpGk

So if your 30x30 camera has sharp square pixels with no antialiasing filter in front of the sensor, I'll bet the brain would soon learn to "run that depixellation algorithm" and just by natural motion of the camera, learn to recognize finer detail. Of course that still means training the brain to recognize 900 electrodes, which is beyond the current state of the art (but 16x16 pixels aren't and the same principle can apply there).

In some situations, you can trade resolution for frequency and maintain quality. 1-bit audio is a thing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_Digital

Sorry to get you confused. This is a different setup. TFA uses the 30x30 and no compressed sensing. The link above uses a single photo detector. They also use an LED matrix, but that's to make the _image_ (I think)