51–60 of 94 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was illegal he might be dead. If he refused, he could be dead. Is that a better world?
No, if it was illegal he'd have access to his data. I'm not saying medical equipment should be illegal. And to be clear, I wasn't saying he should have refused treatment. I was saying I wish more programmers would refuse to help develop exploitative software like this.
If you had a good doctor that liked da Vinci robotic surgery, versus another one that did raven II would that factor more than the reputation of the doctor? Programmers who make life saving software are good in my opinion, even if the company they work for wants to make money.
I think we should strive for the best features, and also be grateful for "fascist trailblazers". Shockley was known to be an awful boss but our transistors started there and we are better off for it. Body warming methods were created by Nazi scientists experimenting unethically. These are the 2nd step, at least the profiteers show it's doable and the drive for profit made it in the first place.
Great article. Real life horror stories of life-critical software gore, with some good news at the end. It should be illegal to sell software that someones life depends upon without giving the user the right to inspect and modify the code.
So you would prefer it not be developed?
Software that your life depends on should be required to respect the four software freedoms (run, study, copy, modify). If the four freedoms don't apply in the context of your own bodily autonomy, where else could they be more important? (Consider the inverse: Parts of your own body are not your property but are merely licensed to you, and the license can be modified or withdrawn at the pleasure of the licensor) Legi…
I’ve got bad news unfortunately. Bodily autonomy has never really been all that free in practice for the last few thousand years at least. We’re making some progress at least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was illegal he might be dead. If he refused, he could be dead. Is that a better world?
No, if it was illegal he'd have access to his data. I'm not saying medical equipment should be illegal. And to be clear, I wasn't saying he should have refused treatment. I was saying I wish more programmers would refuse to help develop exploitative software like this.
Software that your life depends on should be required to respect the four software freedoms (run, study, copy, modify). If the four freedoms don't apply in the context of your own bodily autonomy, where else could they be more important? (Consider the inverse: Parts of your own body are not your property but are merely licensed to you, and the license can be modified or withdrawn at the pleasure of the licensor) Legi…
> If the four freedoms don't apply in the context of your own bodily autonomy, where else could they be more important? I’ve got bad news unfortunately. Bodily autonomy has never really been all that free in practice for the last few thousand years at least. We’re making some progress at least.
In the context of the repeal of Roe V Wade....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Homebrew modifications of that software, even in the name of “freedom”, risks the patient’s life and health and should be illegal if uncertified. The official modifications of that software — in the name of "profit" — are currently risking the patient’s life and health, and therefore should also be illegal by your logic. Surely you must also support effective (ie harsh/deterrent) prosecution and punishment for thes…
This is a huge straw man/whataboutism that contributes nothing to the discussion. Yes, bad software modifications are bad and should be punished wherever they arise. Homebrew modifications make it way easier for bad stuff to happen, and make it harder to punish.
That almost never happens. Software sux.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, if it was illegal he'd have access to his data. I'm not saying medical equipment should be illegal. And to be clear, I wasn't saying he should have refused treatment. I was saying I wish more programmers would refuse to help develop exploitative software like this.
It might not have even been the programmers of the device that chose to do this. It was very likely some manager somewhere who saw the dollar signs when they realized they could collect rent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Society doesn't have to give you the rope to hang yourself.
I disagree or rather yes, it does have the responsibility to provide you a rope. It is up to you whether you hang yourself or not.
That is not obviously true.
I feel I belong to my family and my community.
I don't understand what freedom stands for anymore. I don't trust the FSF after they started grandstanding on topics that made no sense. Apple making an update that breaks apps isn't the fault of the app developers, or the app. The measures they suggested are completely useless if nobody wants to update or make a gpl 3 or even a horrible gpl 2 app. Suppose they do, they're supposed to pay the apple fee every year and…
Or you don't even have to sell the software at all. If I had a piece of software that I needed to live, if it was OSS at least I could pay a dev to maintain it so I don't die...