We sat down with her to discuss the path that led from smart devices to smart minds, the challenges of building meaningful technology, and what innovation really means in 2025.

You’ve worked across so many frontiers – from multimedia chips and AI to biomedical research. What connects it all for you?

Natalya Segal: Curiosity. I’ve always been drawn to things that don’t make sense at first. Whether it was optimising GPUs or decoding brain signals, the underlying drive was the same: Can we make this more useful and solve problems that real people are struggling with? I also like challenges that force me to think across boundaries of particular disciplines – where physics meets psychology, or code meets compassion.

You clearly often “see patterns that others don’t.” How do you cultivate that kind of thinking?

NS: Invention starts from paying attention to things that are wrong, that are not working. Instead of becoming angry about that, you ask yourself, what can be done about it, what can be done differently. Then let you mind wonder. Eventually it starts suggesting solutions and doesn't let you rest till you do something about it. Over time, I learned to let the mind do this trick only when I think the topic is important enough. You start by noticing what feels off – an inefficiency, a contradiction, an unexplored space – and then follow that discomfort with curiosity.

I also try to avoid silos. Some of the best ideas emerge when a physicist, a doctor, and a designer all misunderstand each other just enough to spark something new. This approach thrives when an inventor is surrounded by experts in different fields, so highly beneficial for interdisciplinary research and interdisciplinary projects.

You’ve led and mentored interdisciplinary teams all over the world. What’s a common mistake you see young innovators make?

NS: Rushing to solution, chasing the next novel technology before spending enough time understanding the problem. It is extremely important to understand the customer, the pain point, the potential use case, this may lead you to refining the problem. It is also very important to spend time understanding the available data, its value and problems then working to find the solution in iterations. And also – persistence matters. Most great inventions are 5% inspiration, 95% not giving up while pivoting your way finding the solution.

You’ve successfully changed domains several times. What advice would you give to someone trying to reinvent themselves in tech?

NS: Learn the language of the new field, not just the tools. Respecting a field’s vocabulary builds trust – and collaboration. And don’t carry your ego from the old world. Bring your curiosity. Reinvention is really about being brave enough to be a beginner again.

I would add that it should be a combination of a great opportunity and curiosity for the field. For that we need to be in a position to wait for the right opportunities, so it is easier as career progresses. It also becomes easier to learn, with lots of information online. University programs become more and more accessible. One good thing we got from the times of Covid is remote and hybrid learning. Most of the lectures are recorded, this is convenient for everyone and it hugely benefits people with attention deficit as a byproduct. Though I believe in scientific community building and in hybrid approach to learning, remote learning is a huge game changer – if everybody can use online materials from Stanford or Cambridge, course levels in other universities needs to keep up with their level. I am genuinely impressed with the level of conversations we have with graduate students at Bar Ilan and it is a lot due to this openness in education (in learning materials).

What has leadership taught you?

NS: Great leaders find a way to create a safe space with great energy for the inventors to thrive and inventions to be born. They create alignment with goals and needs of the stakeholders (company, board, grants, industry) and maintain visibility and transparency with them. Great leaders gently push the inventors to the needed by the real world and also fuel the spirit of curiosity and innovation. Those leaders are rare to come around, but I was extremely lucky to work and collaborate with leaders like that.

You’ve worked across everything from chip design and AI at Amazon to brain–computer interfaces and fertility tech. What patterns do you notice in how breakthrough ideas emerge – across such different domains?

NS: There are 2 major types of innovation: incremental innovation – this is what most of the engineers in high tech do day by day, and disruptive innovation – that’s where the next big things emerge. Disruptive innovation is often interdisciplinary. Let's take an example of the AI revolution. The concept of neural networks is not new, it was known already in 1986, when Prof. Geoffrey Hinton - British-Canadian computer scientist and cognitive scientist, known for his work on artificial neural networks, which earned him the title “the Godfather of AI” – got a Nobel prize for this work. What has changed recently is the increase in compute speed and operational memory. The GPU revolution contributed to that. At the first glance what does ChatGPT have to do with the ability of graphic tasks to run on multiple GPUs. But that was the task at hand that fuelled innovation in competition that allowed for the heavy neural networks behind todays conversational AI like ChatGPT.

What’s one “failure” or wrong turn that taught you something essential about creative resilience?

NS: Not sure that this is about failure, but more about coping with rejection and much more it is about human support and mentorship. When I filed my first patent as pro se inventor, communicating with USPTO on my own, I received a rejection written in a language that made me doubt my invention. I talked to my mentor and he was kind enough to assure me that this is just the common way they respond and the invention itself is very viable. This support gave me the strength to respond to USPTO and receive my first solo patent, the rest is history. This is about surrounding yourself with great people you trust that will find kind words to keep you afloat.

 You’ve described yourself as a bit of a “mad inventor.” What keeps invention fun for you after two decades?

NS: Curiosity, sense of purpose and an adrenaline rush of hyperfocus when ideas begin to take shape. We all need to feel alive, some feel this through running, some get their adrenaline rush jumping or climbing, some – like me – when creating something that was not possible before.

What’s one pattern in today’s innovation landscape that excites you – and one that worries you?

NS: I love the changes that occurred in education, mostly the higher education, the shift to collaborative real-life projects, project-based learning, recorded lectures with easy access to materials that accommodate people with learning disabilities and attention deficit. A dysgraphic person that wanted to express themselves just a few years ago needed to spend hours on editing and still experience the embarrassment when submitting or publishing the text, this problem is almost solved now with AI grammar tools and LLMs giving dysgraphics people their voice back.

I am also positively excited by the innovation frontier and what AI can do to diagnostics and medical research.

What worries me are the implications of rapid changes driven by AI in the society. It may be a good thing eventually, but I am worried for potential instability due to rapid changes.

If you could redesign how we teach innovation to young engineers or scientists, what would you change?

NS: I would start much earlier at school with project-based learning where the need for innovation will be built into the requirements, each time pushing the boundaries a little more as students gain experience. I would also add training of raising up after the failure as a must have discipline starting from school to academia.

It is preferable to have interdisciplinary teams where different skills are valued so that students have a chance to figure out what they are good at and improve that. Robotics competitions are pretty good example of such projects.

For that, schools need to dial-down on the pressure, especially during the final years and evaluate students differently during university admission. Those years kill innovative spirit and generate sprinters.

Many talented inventors struggle with bringing their ideas into reality. It’s well-known that ideas themselves are not as valuable as the geniuses who are capable of both ideation and execution – themselves or via team resources. Moreover, the PhD programmes are notoriously difficult for many researchers and students who struggle with procrastination or writer’s block during their PhD studies. What’s your secret recipe for success, be it during your work at tech companies, your contributions as a prolific patent inventor, or your scientific research?

NS: We all struggle with procrastination. First of all, it’s worth admitting it, which makes procrastination easier. Secondly, it’s worth at least trying to do what you feel like doing at the moment from time to time, even if it means doing nothing. But if procrastination takes up the major part of the day, this warrants a little self-study. Typically it’s a sign of a psychological block, maybe the task is too hard, and one needs to ask for help, or to find a scientific community where members support each other and make going forward easier. Sometimes procrastination is a sign that a pivot in direction is long overdue. The point is, do not fight it, try to understand what it is trying to tell you. If this is just a writer's block and nothing serious, try to do one small thing at a time, go for a walk or do whatever makes you recharge and then do the next small thing, and repeat till you push through this block.

As for making something useful out of ideas, it is a much harder question. People need people to ramp up big projects, so the short answer is collaboration. The longer answer is it depends where you come from. To be able to think, invent, experiment, one needs to be able not to worry about the reality of the next day. So I would invest in whatever makes you calm and stable, and it is different for everyone - at some point for many people it would be financial stability.

The next advice you have probably already heard, especially from entrepreneurs. Build/invent/create staff that you have an urge, a strong intrinsic motivation to build. Do whatever brings you pride and joy in itself – not all the time, obviously there will always be moments of frustration – but just enough to keep you going.

Natural inventors tend to have lots of ideas, and we need to deliberately stop ourselves from pursuing those ideas by asking the questions above and making sure we’ll still have motivation to push it forward when things become hard (not if but when, as they inevitably will).

Have you noticed any particular valuable or merely curious qualities that young people of today – like the Zoomer generation or any other cohort you’ve identified – bring to the industry as innovators, researchers, or entrepreneurs?

NS: From what I have noticed both in academia and in industry while managing teams, young people tend to be good in communication and collaboration. I really love that about this generation of engineers. Among inventors and innovators there has always been a spirit of mutual help and collaboration. But now as the young generation (generation Z) is entering academia and workforce, I see it more and more there. It looks like the today’s generation is adopting what was natural for the most free spirited inventors. They (not all of them, of course, people are different, but it’s much more noticeable) are also more alive, not hiding behind some expected behaviour mask.

What is your moto? What do you think is a good predictor of success?

NS: First, we need to realize that we cannot control our future and the very idea of planning our path ahead is an illusion, one of many. What is important is knowing who you are and what you stand for, then take opportunities that move forward projects and Ideas that align with your goals and beliefs. And stay alive, stay curious about life.

The other important thing is not to let circumstances define what you believe you can do.

You are saying that what really matters is personality. What does a person need to build this type of personality?

NS: Most of it is in the hands of the individual, save for one incredibly important detail – there being a person in their lives that truly believes in them (sees something they are truly good at), allowing for a sound base from which a person can make the world's next great leap. For me it was my grandmother in my childhood and my brilliant mentors later on. I would like to be that person for as many talented people as I can - let that be my legacy as a mentor.

 Your vision of technology that truly serves people also runs through your latest research. Your current research focuses on a fully remote, contactless brain–computer interface. What potential do you see for this technology in the near future?

NS: The long-term vision is to make brain monitoring and communication tools not only non-invasive but also truly remote, contactless, portable, and affordable. Looking at the current market for non-invasive portable monitoring of the brain cortex – technologies such as EEG and fNIRS – its value already sits in the low billions and continues to grow rapidly. This shows both a clear demand and an opportunity for innovation that goes beyond existing sensors and helmets.

Imagine a small device placed near a hospital bed – one that allows a paralysed patient to communicate, that every clinic could afford to deploy, and that calibrates within minutes for new users. And when we look further ahead, imagine this technology embedded in wearables, helping people with progressive neurological conditions such as Parkinson’s disease.

Ultimately, it’s about bringing neuroscience out of specialised labs and into everyday life – making it accessible, affordable, and truly human-centric. It’s about restoring people's ability to connect and express themselves, using light instead of electrodes and deep learning instead of invasive surgery. If we succeed, it could open an entirely new market for startups at the intersection of healthtech, AI, and photonics – transforming light and algorithms into a new form of understanding.

What do you hope your legacy will be as an inventor?

NS: Ask me about my legacy again in 50 years, it’s too early to define it while still on the go in a fast changing technological and social scene. What I do know, I hope to continue to focus on technology that matters, that makes people lives a little bit better.