• retrospectology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Again, the person’s desperation is a key here, this technology is targeted at people who are potentially willing to try anything even if it comes with risk.

    That isn’t the same sort of consent I have as someone who isn’t paralyzed and just think it’d be cool to control my garage door with my brain or something. I’m not under the same pressure.

    If I mix a bunch of laundry chemicals and bill it as a miracle cure for cancer, and then target vulnerable people willing to try anything because they are stage 4, that doesn’t excuse me of my reckless disregard for safety or to use those people as experiments.

    Musk’s company wants to get this tech into human beings as quickly as possible even if it’s underdeveloped and potentially unsafe because Musk’s priority is not really about helping people.

    • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Are you suggesting that the FDA gave Neuralink special treatment in the approval process? Or are you suggesting that the government should specifically shut down anything Musk tries to do, like SpaceX?

      • retrospectology@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        That or Musk’s org lied, misrepresented their progress or found loop holes in the regulation process, yes.

        It’s pretty obvious from its immediate failure that it was not ready.