|Subject:||Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Golden Rule Angle for Libre Software Advocacy|
|Date:||Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:49:37 -0400|
If an open source device is modified by the end consumer and this consumer does not know what they are doing, in the medical field this can have life threatening consequences. People who do not understand what it means for something to be open source could take a press release about such a scenario and run with it; saying that this is a reason for keeping code a secret. Such a program needs for the devices themselves to be very secure and un-hackable, but for the method by which the devices are made and the source code to be open. There is tremendous potential for a bridge to be formed between the users of the technologies and their development.
I was working on a project to develop an open source electrical muscle stimulation device with the initial use going towards the development of a gait retraining system. This is currently on hold, but I would be interested in working with other people in starting an open source medical device organization geared towards developing new devices and advocating for a more libre healthcare system.
You can read more details about the device I was developing on my website: otherrealm.org
Let me know if you are interested in such an organization or if you know of existing organizations with this focus.
Aaron E-J http://otherrealm.org http://theotherrealm.org (Blog)
On 2016-08-13 2:24 PM, Marcos Marado wrote:
> > I won't go as far as to talk about robotic bodies, but the issue is pertinent today, with current technology. > > I recently read about a woman who has a pacemaker. It had a software bug, which frightened her. She knows /of/ it but she doesn't know it, since she doesn't have access to the software running on her own body. Furthermore, she found out that there is a functionality in it to accept OTA updates, which she cannot control. Scary. And this is not science fiction, this is a real case, current technology. > > Unfortunately I don't recall where I read about this, but it was in the last couple of weeks. On FSFE's newsletter, maybe? > > Anyway, the question can be rephrased to "how ethical it is to implant non-free software on someone's body?". > > Best regards, > -- > Marcos Marado > ANSOL.org > > > On Aug 12, 2016 16:42, "Logan Streondj" <email@example.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote: >
Hi,> > ____ > > Freeform discussion: irc.gnu.org <http://irc.gnu.org> #fsf > Sharing news and links: #fsfct https://microca.st/fsf & https://status.fsf.org/fsf > How to use this list: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/
I recently gave a presentation on my libreware project, and someone
said they really liked the Golden Rule angle of reincarnating as a robot
The typical example I've often read advocating for libreware is the
car analogy, where you have access to your cars internals. This was a
great analogy when cars didn't have loads of proprietary software
installed -- unfortunately it is only increasing because of
However now as we get closer to the twenty twenties, when the
processing of a human brain should be affordable for a $1000.
The analogy I use now is:
"When you reincarnate as a robot, do you want to be enslaved by
proprietary software and hardware, or be liberated by libre software
Anyways wondering what you guys think of this angle,
and if you might use it also.
I have more detailed slides in my presentation.
 my presentation SPEL and GI-OS overview (CC-BY-SA): PDF
virtual-machine/manual/<http://wyn.bot.nu/spel/src/ presentation.pdf virtual-machine/manual/ presentation.pdf>
machine/manual/presentation.<http://wyn.bot.nu/spel/src/ tex virtual-machine/manual/ presentation.tex>
Group:LibrePlanet_Rapid_<https://libreplanet.org/wiki/ Responders/Workflow Group:LibrePlanet_Rapid_> Responders/Workflow>
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|