Greenberg spent many years developing the technology while working at the Alfred Mann Foundation, a nonprofit organization that develops biomedical devices
EDIT: For those challenging what I am saying, I was speaking towards his motives, when I responded to this comment …
They exist to make money not help humanity.
I was challenging the notion that he did not care about humanity, and just wanted the money.
Its ok to want to help others AND make money doing it. (Unfortunately) We live in a society where money is needed to exist.
Non-profits, just like for-profits, need to keep revenue at or above expenditures. Just like for-profits they end up run by executives who prioritize bringing money in to sustain the bureaucracy over doing good.
Just like for-profits they end up run by executives who prioritize bringing money in to sustain the bureaucracy over doing good.
I’m going to push back against this part of your comment. You are making an assumption. You can do both, help Humanity AND make money (since we live in a society that requires money to exist).
Open Source can and very often is profitable, though. Large companies like to trade technologies as assets, but a lot of people don’t realize that as individuals they can claim full rights and ownership over their product while also making it free to use and modify.
You’re giving a roundabout justification for regulation.
It should not be their choice when are discussing items/services that impact health this directly. Buy the ticket (release product and profit) take the ride (support for the life of installed user base at least).
IDK, I probably wouldn’t want every anon having access to the source code for my cybereyes, let alone something like a pacemaker. Companies should be legally mandated to maintain devices like these for the average human life expectancy.
Missing the fact Open Source software is generally more secure because more people are looking at the code. You don’t need to see the source to find a vulnerability, you do need it to patch one properly though.
👏 OPEN 👏 SOURCE 👏 AFTER 👏 OBSOLETION 👏
They exist to make money not help humanity. Open source don’t make them money so they will never bother
From the article…
EDIT: For those challenging what I am saying, I was speaking towards his motives, when I responded to this comment …
I was challenging the notion that he did not care about humanity, and just wanted the money.
Its ok to want to help others AND make money doing it. (Unfortunately) We live in a society where money is needed to exist.
EDIT2: I’m all for open source.
“he spun off the company Second Sight with three cofounders in 1998”
The rest of the sentence from your quote. The company that put these implants into people was, from what I understand, indeed for profit.
Kind of hard to operate a company without also making money doing so. The two are not mutually exclusive to each other.
Non-profits, just like for-profits, need to keep revenue at or above expenditures. Just like for-profits they end up run by executives who prioritize bringing money in to sustain the bureaucracy over doing good.
I’m going to push back against this part of your comment. You are making an assumption. You can do both, help Humanity AND make money (since we live in a society that requires money to exist).
Feel free to enlighten them on how to run a beneficial company with no income.
Government grants… A là Lockmart.
deleted by creator
He should have made it open sauce
Open Source can and very often is profitable, though. Large companies like to trade technologies as assets, but a lot of people don’t realize that as individuals they can claim full rights and ownership over their product while also making it free to use and modify.
You’re giving a roundabout justification for regulation.
It should not be their choice when are discussing items/services that impact health this directly. Buy the ticket (release product and profit) take the ride (support for the life of installed user base at least).
I vote for parties that are pro-opensource and promote opensource among friends and family. It’s all I can do.
Fuck that. Free & Open Source Software ONLY for ANY bioimplant tech.
IDK, I probably wouldn’t want every anon having access to the source code for my cybereyes, let alone something like a pacemaker. Companies should be legally mandated to maintain devices like these for the average human life expectancy.
Missing the fact Open Source software is generally more secure because more people are looking at the code. You don’t need to see the source to find a vulnerability, you do need it to patch one properly though.
Ignorance. You don’t understand any of the philosophy or the conduct of FOSS let alone close source.
But…here…sign right here where the CIA/NSA/FBI/ETC. get any and all right to fuck you over any time the want to for any fucking reason.
Removed by mod
The same as a closed source one? What does charging something have to do with an app? I’m not even sure what you’re saying.
Removed by mod