These early adopters found out what happened when a cutting-edge marvel became an obsolete gadget… inside their bodies.

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Considering the already existing issues with inactive implants, maybe electronics shouldn’t be allowed in implants until they can demonstrate reliability.

    if someone is willing to pay $150k to see blurry grey dots I don’t see how it’s anyone’s business but there’s to ban that.

    This is a pretty wild take you’re making here. You’re essentially telling anyone who has received a deep-brain implant for Parkinson’s to go kick rocks.

    • ringwraithfish@startrek.website
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Just a thought, but with deep brain implants aren’t the electronics separate from the electrodes that actually go in the brain? That would make them a little more accessible without needing to do brain surgery every time.

      Maybe that’s the middle ground for this situation at this moment in time: make the sensors/electrodes/static components needed for the health issue follow the same life+20 years and separate the processing pieces into a container that could still be surgically stored under the skin, but more easily accessed for maintenance, repair, replacement.

      Theoretically, this could allow 3rd parties to come in and leverage existing installations by leaving the lifetime components in place and replacing the processing unit.

      This could be the beginning of human device engineering standards similar to what IEEE does for computers and technology.