I will never not post this. This is what anyone who gets one of these is destined for :
Comment on First human brain implant malfunctioned, Neuralink says
ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This was to be expected and they handled it well imo. I’m not gonna get one though.
CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
JustAnotherRando@lemmy.world 6 months ago
When a company stops supporting devices like this, the devices and their documentation and code should be required to enter the public domain. It should not be allowed for assistive devices to become e-waste stuck in a patient’s body.
roguetrick@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Of course it is. The what neuralink is touting is the exact same situation that company was in. What happened there was they were creating an application for types of retinal blindness with the hopes that some other research would magically come along that makes it apply to other types of blindness and give them a market. Surprise Surprise, no such deus ex machina occurred and the company could not see a path to profitability.
Neuralink is the exact same, cervical vertebra paralysis has less invasive adaptive mechanisms that are cheaper to implement, so there’s no way this will ever be a profitable approach with that alone. They’re hoping that this will magic into some brain machine interface without any actual hope that is going to happen.
The basic research just isn’t there to be doing this shit, but the investor dollars need to be put somewhere.
Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yep
rudyharrelson@kbin.social 6 months ago
Agreed. I was flippant after reading the headline, since I don't like Musk, but once I read the story I was like "oh yeah this tech does have big potential for the differently abled. "
A quadriplegic being able to control a cursor on a screen with the implant for 100 days seems like a legit first attempt.
Could be great for the accessibility movement in the long run. But I could be naive or too optimistic.
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
Why, when we already have non-surgical solutions that allow the same thing but don’t come with the risk of killing you?
blunderworld@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
I agree with not liking ‘differently-abled’ as a term. To me it reads along the same lines as "disabled people are built different. Pretty awkward.
Not that I have a horse in this race. Or a wheelchair, as the case may be.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yeah I feel like it’s an attempt to resolve the Deaf stance that deafness isn’t a disability. The general stance of the Deaf community is closer to that of the queer community than that of say the paraplegic community. It sees deafness as a disability constructed by a society unwilling to communicate visually and to teach signed languages to all people able to use them.
Mind you we’re the contentious portion of the disabled world. The Deaf are as bad as lesbians I tell ya.
But on point, “differently abled” feels like it washes away the struggle. I am disabled. I’m disabled by a society that taught my great grandparents, my grandparents, and my parents not to teach their hard of hearing children sign language because otherwise we won’t use English. I’m disabled by a society that doesn’t include visual signals in emergency sounds even when it’s easy to do. I’m disabled by a society where people, including cops, will speak to the back of my head and not even consider that I didn’t respond because I didn’t hear. And I’m disabled by the assumption my life has to be worse for having less sound as though I’m not extremely literate and completely capable of using a signed language. I’m not “differently abled” I’m completely able in most ways everyone else is.
Spedwell@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I get that there are better choices now, but let’s not pretend like a straw you blow into is the technological stopping point for limb-free computer control (sorry if that’s not actually the best option, it’s just the one I’m familiar with). There are plenty of things to trash talk Neuralink about without pretending this technology (or it’s future form) is meritless.
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
I feel like I’m going nuts, is eye controlled adaptive tech really that obscure? We’re not talking about maybe letting people walk again or giving them otherwise unattainable control over a computer, we’re talking about a different mouse input. The risks should be proportional to the gains.
moriquende@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Seems to be a much faster interface with bigger bandwidth.
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
Is it worth risking dying to be able to move a mouse slightly faster than you can move your eyes and blink? If your answer to that is yes that’s your body, but I think it’s important to contextualize that the options here aren’t brain implant or nothing.
rudyharrelson@kbin.social 6 months ago
Why not? Nothing wrong with research and development as long as everyone participating in the test is a consenting adult IMO. The advancements could make current accessibility tech even better. For one reason or another, a quadriplegic person decided they were willing to take the risk, so maybe they consider current accessibility tech for quadriplegics to be insufficient and wanted to try for something better?
Well damn, I didn't know.
Sneptaur@pawb.social 6 months ago
There are some politically correct terms that are not well liked by the people they describe:
Robotunicorn@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I cannot speak to any of these, however, I learned that that you should just ask. If you can’t ask, put the “human” first such as people with disabilities or people who are deaf, blind, etc. Latine is another term I’ve heard, but in the community, there are those that like it and those that don’t.
Sneptaur@pawb.social 6 months ago
This is correct
cam_i_am@lemmy.world 5 months ago
What you said is often true but not always. Some communities prefer person-first language, some prefer identity first language.
For example, generally speaking, “autistic people” is preferred over “people with autism”. The reasoning being “this is just part of who I am, it’s not an affliction that I have.”
I’m not autistic but I have lots of friends who are, and they all prefer to say “I’m autistic” rather than “I have autism”.