Technology

34432 readers

123 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

147

Software that supports your body should always respect your freedom (www.fsf.org)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Software that controls your body should always respect your freedom. This article is a recap of scandals of medical devices, like hearing aids, insulin pumps, bionic eyes, and pacemakers, and what we can learn from them. It's astonishing: you wouldn't expect these devices to be run by software in such a way that they can leave you completely helpless.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Keeping a life critical device up to date sounds necessary, to the contrary.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not if the existing software functions properly. If there's a fix in it you need then sure, once the vendor has tested and approved it you should migrate.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Depends if it is internet enabled (which most are now a days). If that patch is for a 0fay exploit I don't want ransomeware for pacemakers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I think you're making a good case against an Internet enabled pacemaker ;-)