As much as I like regaining autonomy, we should hold back those tears until a patient's implant outlasts a product cycle. I can't find the article to link to, but there's an ongoing issue with tech companies producing assistive devices or prosthetics and obsoleting them when the company pivots, gets bought or goes under.
Corporate cyborg parts are an already-predicted nightmare, already taking place, unfolding in slow motion, and soon it will breach the sanctity of human thought.
The simple solution is that all such devices must be submitted to a central government database and all blue prints, source code etc. will be released into the public domain is the company no longer supports the device or closes down.
This is indeed the solution for every industry. The main issue is that really often companies get bought with assets by another company that just let them rot. So you would need a provision that in case of non maintenance it should be released. But then they would fight you in court because they use specific code or design in a newer device and that would release it to the public... So while it would be the perfect solution for the patients I doubt our society is really organized to represent their rights and needs (and we see that with insurance as well)
I'm pretty confident that anything involving a central government database won't really fly under the current political climate. Definitely not in the US, but many other countries are bowing to US pressure to limit regulation.
The same disabled people whose hard earned rights are on the chopping block right now in the name of anti wokeness? I’ll say, taking away their ability to participate in society first, then selling it back to the richest of them is an ingenious business approach.
> These tools need to be paid for. By people whose welfare is currently being taken away by the same man who owns NeuraLink.
I'm struggling to understand your point. You seem to be saying that Musk is trying sell a product to people but at the same time taking away their ability to pay for it. Logically, that means nobody would be buying the product, which leads me to conclude the thinking you express above is flawed.
For one, they enable, yes. So there's a market to create here.
But. It also doesn't take a lot of imagination to see what other beneficial uses they promise to bear, as a general device. Imagine having a computer plugged-in permanently in your brain. Both in reading (and reacting by providing a stimulus, whatever it is, however you may do so directly or indirectly), and perhaps even, some day, in writing.
When you see what you can achieve with an individual, customised touch-screen computer in the pocket, something that didn't even exist a quarter of a century ago. The potential. The horizon. How would you not invest in that vision if you had the money for it?
What a striking coincidence that the man behind this project has now access to the resources of a huge country, which administration happens to deport "illegal" immigrants here and there, without due judiciary process (that is, publicly documented), in territories outside of judiciary overview (like Guantanamo).
The same guy who felt brazen enough to make twice a nazi salute in front of televisions.
Far fetched scenario? Yes, obviously. Improbable? Also yes. Impossible? No.
> But it won’t help get them a job because DEI is bad.
That's an uncharitable take that focuses on the wrong issue, in my opinion.
Noland's life was pretty dire: "Since dislocating his C4-5 vertebrae in a 2016 swimming accident, Arbaugh had dropped out of Texas A&M and returned to live with his family in Yuma, Arizona. Due to the combination of Yuma’s scorching heat — from May to September the average high temperature is 99 degrees or more — and the intense spasms he experienced when sitting in his power chair, Arbaugh spent most of his time in bed, watching TV. With no sensation or function below his shoulders and having limited caregiving hours provided by the state, he relied heavily on his parents and brother and often felt like a burden." [1]
After Neuralink, the abilities that Noland gained is best represented by his own words: “Before, I would wake up and just [watch] my TV,” he says. “Now, I wake up and [work] on my computer. It’s very similar, but at the same time, my daily routine has changed from just watching stuff to being more active and interactive with the world.”
So yes. Throwing out the vulnerable onto the streets, to promise a future where those who can afford it can be made to function as good as healthy people, to earn their human rights and dignity with cold hard cash, like everyone else. The rest, who cares... they don't have a voice even while they live, so nobody will ask about them when they no longer do.
At this point it would be much less effort to make a short list of the unquestionably good things he has done or is well known for, rather than attempting to list all of the despicable things he is recently associated with.
I'm quite curious if someone has gone to the effort of making a full list of all the things fommonly thought of as pros and cons and made it available somewhere... would be interesting.
You say "wrong political party" as if he's involved in some mild political spat. The Financial Times just ran an article about how trump might defy the supreme court on his way to burning down the republic.
Musk supported AFD while tweeting about the great replacement and throwing a nazi salute. He's supporting the wrong political party in much the same way Goebbels supported the wrong party.
> The Financial Times just ran an article about how trump might defy the supreme court on his way to burning down the republic.
But that is arguably a mixture between conjecture and hyperbole which would not be surprising from a newspaper that is clearly quite left-wing and often aims to make right-wing people look bad. It's like a right-wing newspaper writing an alarmist piece about Kamala Harris. Would you expect a fair appraisal?
> Musk supported AFD while tweeting about the great replacement and throwing a nazi salute. He's supporting the wrong political party in much the same way Goebbels supported the wrong party.
So what he actually does is he supports two parties which are against low-skilled immigration. A position which is completely mainstream in countries like Japan, Norway or Switzerland. Comparing that to literal Goebbels is trivializing the actual Nazi crimes.
I have to admit I had a good laugh at that, "oh yes, very good point, well known extreme left wing marxist-leninists, The Financial Times...". Not to be confused with well known leftists The Wall Street Journal.
Well for one we can look to Diaz v. Tesla [1] where Tesla was found guilty of pervasive racism at the Tesla Fremont Factory in California:
Pervasive usage of racial slurs by management: "Robert Hurtado, a supervisor at Tesla, called Diaz the N-word over 30 times, including by saying "[N-word], hurry up," "[N-words] are lazy," and "I wish I can get all you [N-words] fired." Tr. 3:604:23-606:8. Ramon Martinez, another Tesla supervisor, called Diaz the N-word over thirty times, said "I hate you, [N-word]," and told him "to go back to Africa." Tr. 3-603:11-604:20. Diaz's supervisor, Tamotsu "Tom" Kawasaki, testified that Martinez often used the words "mayate" and "chongo," both racial slurs in Spanish. Tr. 2-281:9-12."
Burying complaints of proven racism and reprimanding the person bringing the complaint of racism: "Diaz testified that at one point, Martinez threatened to physically attack him at work and yelled at him, "You [N-words] aren't S-H-I-T." Tr. 3-610:2-612:7. Diaz complained to a supervisor, Ed Romero, and asked him to check the surveillance cameras, though Diaz's subsequent email complaint did not specifically mention racial insults. Tr. 3-612:8-614:23; see also Tr. 3-546:25-548:2 (Romero confirming this was recounted in an email). Tesla did not follow up, show Diaz the video, or interview witnesses after that event. Tr. 3-546:25-548:2, 612:8-614:23. Jackson testified that he interviewed Diaz and Martinez after the incident but did not interview the eyewitness, Rothaj Foster, because he was told by his boss to stop the investigation before it was complete. Tr. 2-387:10-390:18, 2-394:24-395:11. Jackson said he had "[v]ery little" control over how he investigated complaints. Tr. 2-396:8-397:12. Jackie Delgado Smith, a Human Resources representative, testified that Tesla HR was never told of the incident. Tr. 5-954:15-955:6. Subsequently, Diaz and Martinez were both given verbal warnings. Tr. 2-395:21-396:7. Martinez still works at Tesla. Tr. 3-571:11."
Regular presence of objectively racist symbols in workplace facilities: "In addition to verbal harassment, Diaz encountered physical symbols of racism and hostility throughout his time at Tesla. On his second day at work, he saw racist graffiti in the bathroom, and continued to see the N-word and swastikas in bathrooms throughout the rest of his employment. Tr. 3-623:1-8. Another Black employee and later supervisor, Michael Wheeler, testified that he regularly saw racist graffiti, including the N-word and swastikas, and that Diaz reported the racist graffiti he saw to Wheeler. Tr. 2-346:17-347:17."
Musk lies frequently, and trolls just as frequently. Even if you take him at his word it is still pretty damning that a person in his position couldn't conceptualize how the gesture would be received, and then just not do it. I get the same vibes from people who defend it, they are frequently commenting in bad faith on many forums, and maybe even here where the discourse level is a bit higher.
Highly selective stills from low angles don't negate the full video dynamics of Musk's edgelord nazi salute. Nor the one that followed less than a minute later.
Musk visited Auschwitz-Birkenau to try and regain PR points after boosting and reposting actual Nazi and alt-right content. It didn't work and it fooled no one. Except, apparrently, yourself.
I think people who (still) support him don't think it was a sieg heil, and just chalk it up as an awkward gesture.
Personally, I can't imagine why he would throw one, so a priori it seems like an unlikely gesture, though I admit it's strange what he does in the video I saw.
The most awkward part of it is the beginning of the gesture where he clutches his chest like he's having a heart attack. I've tried searching for what a sieg heil actually looks like and had a hard time finding videos on YouTube, but I don't think grabbing the chest is part of it, right? Can someone clarify what the gesture really is? The couple I saw from Hitler were just a swift raising of the hand from the waist.
An "awkward gesture" that has no other meaning in western culture. Which he made twice. It's not something you can do by accident.
> I can't imagine why he would throw one
That's pretty naive. He's a white south african who recently said that Germany's furthest-right party should "get over" being guilty about what the nazis did.
There are countless memes online showing pictures of other famous people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortwz doing similar things.
Anyway, even if it was a nazi salute, what would that even imply about him other than the childish edgelord aspect which is already well publicized? That he wants to gas the jews?
Still pictures though, right? Not actual videos of someone making the full gesture twice in a row.
What would it imply about him? He’s now a quasi-governmental figure aligning himself to the far right. He’s messaging to others on the far right that the federal government will tolerate them. Doing so will embolden them to take action.
> He’s messaging to others on the far right that the federal government will tolerate them. Doing so will embolden them to take action.
Well that's definitely more plausible than the antisemitism...
That said? Musk is exceptionally bad at understanding how his words and actions will be perceived and seems to make no effort to send correct signals. While also being a frequent troll who likes raising his middle finger to the "woke".
It being a big "fuck you" seems far more in keeping with his character than it being a subtle Machiavellian communication.
It appears it is something one can do by accident; Musk did. We seem to have here an accusation by insinuation that Musk is adhering to an ideology which he clearly does not hold. It isn't obvious what the anti-Muskians want done about this. It puts me in mind of when people were calling Trump a liar while he was on campaign - apparently unaware that he was running for political office! I suppose in the end when Mexico didn't pay for the wall they felt a sense of vindication.
I can understand partisan politics, but this is just sillyness. Can there at least be actionable accusations made?
Faulty logic that presupposes Musk made a nazi salute by accident to then evidence that as proof that one can do so by accident.
As for his ideology; Musk boosts many far right comments and addressed a rally of the German far-right AfD party, just before Holocaust Remembrance Day, telling them that Germany should get over "past guilt."
Both his grandfathers were proudly outspoken pro-apartheid, antisemitic public figures. It's how he was raised.
Are you suggesting the Germans shouldn't get over their past guilt? Everyone reasonable moved past that more than 50 years ago. I know some Germans; if they don't want to feel guilt over the Nazis that is healthy. Germany should not be defined by the Nazis. It wasn't this century, it wasn't these Germans and the circumstances today are unrecognisable compared to 1930s from an ideological perspective.
> Both his grandfathers were proudly outspoken pro-apartheid, antisemitic public figures. It's how he was raised.
Oh well then. Extending his arm straight didn't reach me, but racist grandparents? Nazi confirmed, my bad, I'll go invest in Jew ovens. Now everyone can move on; no point anyone bringing it up again.
True. I'll get downvoted to oblivion, I guess, but anyone who says that's a nazi salute is either unironically retarded or extremely dishonest. I want nothing to do with either one of those kinds of people.
