[Twirrim]

Do this around people with type 1 diabetes, and there's a chance you're wiping out their glucose monitor (a sizeable number of the continuous glucose monitor systems rely on a cellphone app, smartphones are becoming ubiquitous hardware/software.)

It might be a funny stunt, but there could be some serious consequences.

[Arch-TK]

>a sizeable number of the continuous glucose monitor systems rely on a cellphone app

I thought medical hardware had to go through stringent approval processes with health authorities?

This is just an awful design in general. An auxiliary control system for your body should be much more resistant against electronic interference and self contained to prevent this kind of vulnerability.

Yeah, interfering with people's medical equipment is bad but whoever put such trash on the market should also get a prison sentence if it lead to harm.

[F2hP18Foam]

>I thought medical hardware had to go through stringent approval processes with health authorities?

Yeah this is the case. You have to have a phone from a list of approved devices which is not very long.

In fairness, diabetics should be carrying standalone blood glucose monitors as a backup. You never know what could happen to your phone.

[lozenge]

As far as I know there is no general method of resisting electronic interference?

[Arch-TK]

Not using a wireless communication method reduces the chances that electronic interference will cause a problem. Obviously there's no way to completepy prevent issues but it's not so hard to implement things such that a misbehaving Bluetooth (or whatever) radio doesn't lead to a dangerous situation.

[adaml_623]

People already die of diabetes due to not having enough money.

Your proposed law would increase the price of treatment and lead to more deaths.

[closewith]

> People already die of diabetes due to not having enough money.

Not in civilised countries.

[wkat4242]

This hack doesn't wipe the phone. It just hangs it. It can be restarted.

[127361]

This is ridiculous. Critical safety functions should not be dependent on a unreliable medium that can be easily disrupted. There must always be a fallback mechanism.

[Freak_NL]

People who use such a feature would surely have a backup strategy in case their phone dies, the battery dies, is stolen, is lost, or is unavailable for any number of reasons (fucked up OTA update? hacked? some dumb app crashing their device?), right? If they don't and just rely on that single consumer-grade device working all the time, I feel sorry for them.

This glucose monitor excuse gets trotted out for these topics every time, but someone wielding a Flipper is probably the least of your concerns if device and connectivity reliability is so critical.

[closewith]

> People who use such a feature would surely have a backup strategy in case their phone dies, the battery dies, is stolen, is lost, or is unavailable for any number of reasons (fucked up OTA update? hacked?

People become inured to extreme risks. It's common to come across people with history of anaphylaxis who only carry one or zero epipens, despite the extreme risk of death.

[127361]

And it is their negligence there. It should not be the fault of the prankster who used the Flipper Zero to temporarily crash consumer information devices (people's iPhones).

Some schools ban phones completely. And the school is not responsible if the children can't call 911 if there's some emergency for example.

And some buildings are constructed of materials which will obstruct the mobile signal as well. Nobody is held responsible for that when they can't call 911.

And I believe it's perfectly legal for me to use radio-blocking paint on the walls of my own house, that might obstruct the signals for the neighbours as well, if I'm hypothetically in a weak signal area. In that case the mobile operator has no right to force their signals through my home, it's within my right to block it as long as I don't use any form of illegal jamming.

[closewith]

Nah, if you effect other people's property, you are morally responsible for the foreseeable outcomes. You don't get to absolve yourself of responsibility because you've decided that their preparedness didn't meet your expectations.

[127361]

Some examples, e.g. court judgements?