• Thorny_InsightEnglish
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago
    edit-2
    5 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    That’s up to the individual, I don’t think there’s universal answer to that. If it eventually makes it possible to restore a person’s sight, hearing or the ability to walk, I’m sure most would take the gamble.

    • extantEnglish
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      5 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Those should be closed systems and don’t need to network with other systems and should be safe enough, its when we start networking that it becomes incredibly risky which is what neuralink is intended to do. I don’t think the average person understands how many automated attacks are flooding interconnected computers as we speak and you’re dropping someone’s brain into that and we don’t understand the scope of what can be done intentionally or unintentionally, it’s not outside the realm of possibility an automated attack trying to rapidly port scan and compromise a neuralink could overwhelm and damage the device and cause brain damage or death.

    • tabularEnglish
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      5 months ago
      edit-2
      5 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      There are people out there with short-range, wireless pacemakers with no security. Most just provide information you’d expect but some of them are also defibrillators (they can kill). As far as I know none have been harmed in an hacked attack but a hacked brain implant brings to mind more than just killing the owner. We may have an interest as a society in making this illegal because it’s not worth the gamble to us for people’s actions to be hijacked remotely.

      • JaxEnglish
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        5 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        I highly doubt that someone disabled enough to need implants like this is capable of doing damage to anyone but themselves. Like if you’re interested in protecting them, sure I’ll accept that. But the idea that society needs to protect itself from this is silly.

        • tabularEnglish
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago
          edit-2
          5 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          I don’t understand how one could think brain implants is a totally safe invention for a society. Did you consider more possibilities than just manipulating people into to physically attacking others?

          • JaxEnglish
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            5 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Did you? Because you haven’t named them.

            • tabularEnglish
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              5 months ago
              edit-2
              5 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              I doubt me giving suggestions is worth the effort here. I worry thoughts and beliefs could be manipulated with enough knowledge of the brain. Technology to interact with the brain directly is a revolution of the manipulation already enacted through our eyes and ears.