It should be mandatory for company to provide support for the lifetime of the implanted device. If they kick the bucket (the company, not the patient), mandatory open source. It's not like the patent matters anymore once the company's dead, right?

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

I would add that everything that goes in the body should be open source and open hardware.

[–] RoboGroMo@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i really think that it's going to be one of those things people look back on in history class and are just totally baffled by, like trying to explain the patent and copyright rules will just be a whole lesson of kids saying 'but that's so dumb...' and things like 'but why did they let one company ruin everything just to keep their mouse to themselves, were they stupid?'

[–] 0U714W@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

"Yes, children. Incredibly so. But greed let them melt the caps, extinguish entire species, and create a limit to the amount of potable water. With stupidity that extraordinary to debate over, what's a little copyright issue to the voters of that century?"

[–] Sharpiemarker@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where's that dude who commented saying they were excited by the prospect of implantable Apple technology. Lol. One of the companies that perfected planned obsolescence.

[–] nzodd 1 points 1 year ago

Dunno who that is but from the sound of I have a suggestion on where he can implant his apple.

[–] Anonymousclimber@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Is this a google company? It’s like hangouts for your eyes.

[–] greengnu@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

tragic that people so desperate to see gave up the control they needed to ensure that their new vision can be preserved. Respect your freedom hardware and Free as Freedom software for the blind!!!