[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

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.

[StableAlkyne]

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.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Programmers implemented it though. And they knew exactly what they were doing, too.

[graphe]

I don't think he had a choice.

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.

[alexvoda]

I would argue that the discoveries would have happened anyway sooner or later even without unethical assholes. And for every example of a step of progress accelerated by them there is an example of a step of progress held back by them.

We do not need the monsters to make progress. Don't try to justify their inexcusable actions in some myopic utilitarian way.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Did you seriously just use the holocaust as an example of successful R&D?

[eimrine]

It was successful at least in R part of R&D by any definition of "successful" and "research".