Even then, I wouldn’t want it to have any functionality to update the code it runs once it’s implanted. And I’d want that code to be incredibly well tested and verified alongside the hardware. No bugs beforehand means no reason to update it later.
Not sure that counts? This was unfortunately due to a completely untested system, designed by one guy way over his head (ethically should have reported this to some governing body), and a company who lied about the non existent testing. This wasn’t just a singular bug but an entire failure throughout.
Yet, afterwards, the code running medical devices has been subject to the same standards that we set for tools themselves. The code embedded in a life support machine can’t fail.
I think you also proved my point anyway, the problem was a system set up such that testing wasn’t done. Not that the testing itself wasn’t possible. It’s just expensive. So companies won’t do it unless they’re forced too by regulation.
Ohhh, yeah. I have no idea why back then code wasn’t seen for what it is. I’ve been told by older people that back then the idea that if it compiles it’s fine, was ok… or something along those lines. I think today we even still of a ton of those issues due to every framework and language being so different, lacking standardization.
Throughout every thing I’ve ever learned, the biggest realization I’ve had was that without forcing policies, companies will do whatever is necessary to line their pockets.
I was actually discussing this with my girlfriend and we were thinking of a system where it can be give you a two-factor authentication code via thought. That way you can use that to unlock it for updating the firmware.
I’m hearing impaired and would love if some brain implant could fix me. I already almost have this, with a cochlear implant (it’s not technically in the brain, but it is an implant in my head). It’s not enough for me, though, cause my hearing still sucks.
They can and I had hoped they were gonna for me. But my problem must be heavily neurological. The cochlear implant did help some, I’m a far cry from normal hearing (I especially struggle with accents, low tones, and when sounds overlap).
My vision’s been going since my forties, and since the notion of cyber-eyes in the 80s I’ve imagined one day getting some nice Canons or Nikons and being able to read at a KM.
But we don’t have the kind of tech support now we did then, and instead get connected to some chatbot with a small troubleshooting tree. Also current brain interfaces might kill me or worse leave me alive and impaired.
Outside of having some debilitating problem that can only be fixed with a microchip in my brain; I’m opting out.
But if I was blind and it allowed me to see, sign me up.
Even then, I wouldn’t want it to have any functionality to update the code it runs once it’s implanted. And I’d want that code to be incredibly well tested and verified alongside the hardware. No bugs beforehand means no reason to update it later.
No bugs is a hard thing to accomplish, especially for an immerging technology (eg 0-day vulnerability)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
https://youtu.be/nU5HbUOtyqk
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/nU5HbUOtyqk?si=axTXLPa-cxLYzWkO
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Not sure that counts? This was unfortunately due to a completely untested system, designed by one guy way over his head (ethically should have reported this to some governing body), and a company who lied about the non existent testing. This wasn’t just a singular bug but an entire failure throughout.
Yet, afterwards, the code running medical devices has been subject to the same standards that we set for tools themselves. The code embedded in a life support machine can’t fail.
I think you also proved my point anyway, the problem was a system set up such that testing wasn’t done. Not that the testing itself wasn’t possible. It’s just expensive. So companies won’t do it unless they’re forced too by regulation.
Ohhh, yeah. I have no idea why back then code wasn’t seen for what it is. I’ve been told by older people that back then the idea that if it compiles it’s fine, was ok… or something along those lines. I think today we even still of a ton of those issues due to every framework and language being so different, lacking standardization.
Throughout every thing I’ve ever learned, the biggest realization I’ve had was that without forcing policies, companies will do whatever is necessary to line their pockets.
I’d want the ability to upload code once it’s implanted but I’d want it to be inconvenient to do so
I was actually discussing this with my girlfriend and we were thinking of a system where it can be give you a two-factor authentication code via thought. That way you can use that to unlock it for updating the firmware.
I’m hearing impaired and would love if some brain implant could fix me. I already almost have this, with a cochlear implant (it’s not technically in the brain, but it is an implant in my head). It’s not enough for me, though, cause my hearing still sucks.
Oh, I i thought the cochlear implants made it like being able to hear normally, is that not the case?
They can and I had hoped they were gonna for me. But my problem must be heavily neurological. The cochlear implant did help some, I’m a far cry from normal hearing (I especially struggle with accents, low tones, and when sounds overlap).
My vision’s been going since my forties, and since the notion of cyber-eyes in the 80s I’ve imagined one day getting some nice Canons or Nikons and being able to read at a KM.
But we don’t have the kind of tech support now we did then, and instead get connected to some chatbot with a small troubleshooting tree. Also current brain interfaces might kill me or worse leave me alive and impaired.