Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–268 of 268 posts

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#261

Post by jacquesm »

UomoNeroNero wrote: post #260
croemer wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not attributed to. The FDA wording says "associated with" which is much weaker causally.

I can guarantee you, from my personal experience of being diabetic for 30 years, that every day—and in the most incredible ways—I have managed to “almost kill myself.” Whether when I used finger-prick testing, sensors, injecting insulin with pens, or managing insulin with a pump. Our life is always a delicate balancing act between too little, too much, and way too much—the kind where this time I really kick the bucke…

Thank you.

And strength to you. I had a business partner for some time that was much like you and every time he'd be 10 minutes late for an appointment I'd get nervous and if it was more than an hour I'd be on the phone to his family to check up on him.

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#262

Post by jacquesm »

rkomorn wrote: post #230
jacquesm wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in this case the proof is there for your perusal: it works. They have ironed out most if not all of the kinks and manufacturers are pissed that they got shown up by a bunch of people who they consider to be subjects, not having agency. Because after all, if a bunch of ordinary but skilled people can do this their justification for obscene pricing all but evaporates. I look at these companies for a living. Every…

> But fine, you think that the people that work for these companies are somehow better than that ones whose lives are at stake. That is not the point I'm making. The point I'm making is that someone's life being at stake does not inherently make then better.

True, but the suggestions made here are that they are worse and shouldn't be trusted. I disagree with that. They are at least as good, and they could well be better.

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#263

Post by tstrimple »

f1shy wrote: post #189
tstrimple wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought I explained it, but I'll break it down into smaller words. Medical software doesn't just have to solve one particular users's problems. It has to be generalized to the majority of folk seeking treatment for a particular problem. If one particular CPAP user is able to tweak their settings to work better for their particular lifestyle, it is not generalizeable to every CPAP user. A corporation offering a gene…

I have explained it already in other comments, but let me break it down for you again: The “liability”, “scrutiny”, “regulation” only generate “cover your ass” measures, bureaucracy, red tape, costs, and hardly any real measure to increase quality or safety. My work is in such a critical mission systems company, and they don’t give a shit about safety, just are interested in coming out clean or not waste too much mon…

This is fucking retarded. Liability isn't just CYA. It's real fucking consequences when someone dies. From your own fucking source:

> Philips Respironics agreed to a $1.1 billion settlement on April 29, 2024, to compensate people for financial damages related to the recall.

Which open source individual contributor will agree to a $1.1 billion dollar settlement because of wrongdoing? Not a single fucking one because those numbers don't make sense when random internet users are promising salvation if you just download their firmware. What a complete crock of shit you're suggesting here and you're just reinforcing my point. Did you even do the barest amount of critical thinking here?

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#264

Post by indymike »

teddyh wrote: post #191
indymike wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you did not receive such a written offer, the GPL, in itself, makes no guarantee that you have the right to the source code Wrong. The requirement to provide source code under the GPL is primarily governed by Section 3 of the GNU General Public License v2 and Section 1 of the GNU General Public License v3. The whole point of the the GPL is to make it so users of software could get source code to the software.

Section 3 of GPL 2 states that the company must either give the source to the user alongside the product (in which case the user has the source already), or the company must give to the user a written offer of source code. Note that if the second option is taken, the company is not obligated by the GPL itself to give the source code to the user. It is then only the written offer which obligates the company to give th…

The GPL forces the offer and provides the remedy if you don't provide source, so I'm not sure why this is so important to you?

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#265

Post by Group_B »

duban wrote: post #254
Group_B wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyway to follow the progress? I attended the Nightscout conference and asked around regarding this but no one really knew of any group to follow. Or really knew of the latest developments on this effort.

I am not aware of any public groups to follow the progress, I have just met a few people on the Loop Zulip and have talked with them every few months whenever people have time to look into it.

I'm thinking we probably need to get more organized and start picking up the pace with this. There are rumors, which of course I am not sure how credible, but word is that the Dash will be discontinued soon. Maybe we can add another channel to the Zulip to try to get things moving.

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#266

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

fsckboy wrote: post #251
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would point towards Oracle v. Rimini, where the Ninth Circuit has specifically ruled (inside a complex and yet-unresolved case) that a system built to interoperate with a copyrighted program does not constitute a derivative work of that program. ( https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/12/16/2... ) They reference a less on point but better known case ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_…

i don't see how either of those cases applies to the FSF and GNU's attitude on library linking; in neither case were they creating a combined derivative work. if I make an ai driven viewscreen that you can stick your paperback book into and it gives you a better reading experience of the book, your paperback book is still in there and you can take it out. My viewscreen may not work without the book, but it hasn't mer…

I guess I would say that you've illustrated the problem precisely. Dynamically linking to a GPL library in your program clearly does not combine your program with the library: the library's still there, you can see the .so/.ddl file sitting separately on your computer, it hasn't been merged with your program and your program didn't modify it. Yet the FSF still claims it's a combined derivative work.

Am I misunderstanding something about the analogy?

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#267

Post by just6979 »

tstrimple wrote: post #263
f1shy wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have explained it already in other comments, but let me break it down for you again: The “liability”, “scrutiny”, “regulation” only generate “cover your ass” measures, bureaucracy, red tape, costs, and hardly any real measure to increase quality or safety. My work is in such a critical mission systems company, and they don’t give a shit about safety, just are interested in coming out clean or not waste too much mon…

This is fucking retarded. Liability isn't just CYA. It's real fucking consequences when someone dies. From your own fucking source: > Philips Respironics agreed to a $1.1 billion settlement on April 29, 2024, to compensate people for financial damages related to the recall. Which open source individual contributor will agree to a $1.1 billion dollar settlement because of wrongdoing? Not a single fucking one because t…

random internet users are not promising salvation, nor or they taking profit.

they are saying: i made this and it worked for me in my specific case. you can look at it (or have a trusted knowledgable friend look at it), and use it, for zero payment; if you want to, if the paid solutions offered on the market are insufficient for your specific case.

they would never need to come up with 1.1 billion dollars because they're not making 10x that from selling things that still harm people despite the resources that that profit makes available.

Re: My insulin pump controller uses the Linux kernel. It also violates the GPL

#268

Post by qmr »

schmuckonwheels wrote: post #74
JoshTriplett wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an open legal question, which the Conservancy v Vizio case will hopefully change; in that case, Conservancy is arguing that consumers have the right to enforce the GPL in order to receive source code.

This got buried on HN a few days ago which is a shame: https://social.kernel.org/notice/B1aR6QFuzksLVSyBZQ Linus rants that the SFC is wrong and argues that the GPLv2 which the kernel is licensed under does NOT force you to open your hardware. The spirit of the GPLv2 was about contributing software improvements back to the community. Which brings us to the question: what is this guy going to do with (presumably) the…

> This is about as ridiculous as buying a ticket on an airplane and thinking you are entitled to the source code of the Linux in-seat entertainment system.

Broken take. You are entitled to the source code.

Post reply on HN