[ben_w]

Given the security track record of software in general, not even specifically those of Musk's companies but more broadly zero-days in all the major platforms, I would worry about a scenario half way between the plot of the film Upgrade and the long-standing trope of using hypnosis to turn someone into an unwitting assassin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upgrade_(film)

[tmnvdb]

It seems easy to worry about somewhat far-fetched scenarios like this when one is not paralyzed and thus not making a trade-off between risks and a fully paralyzed life.

[ben_w]

The tech itself is far-fetched; that hackers exploit vulnerabilities in every system is not, rather it is so common you can measure attempts in Herz.

[tmnvdb]

You have again ignored the trade-off in your word-play.

[ben_w]

I disagree.

I see the promise, but I've got too many real life examples of security issues to draw on to trust it would even keep working very long — let alone working appropriately and under my control — to allow one to control my body, which an implant would necessarily need to do.

And that's even with 100% of the biological compatibility issues being solved (I'm told those take several years to show up in all the other research examples from everyone else) and assuming that there was no trust deficit with Musk's companies selling products on the promise of what they aspire to do "this year" and don't/them having misleading demos — this is a fundamental issue of digital security being hard.

If an accident like Christopher Reeve's were to happen, I'd wait for something that repaired or regenerated tissue over a chip.

[tmnvdb]

You seem awfully sure about what you would do but you again do not seem to have considered about what it is like to be fully paralyzed. Let me be clear, I understand the risks of these devices. But my impression is that you're having trouble emphathizing with people with such medical conditions and you're not really considering how it feels to live like that. In fact, you again spend your whole message talking about abstract considerations, but you do not talk about the experience of being unable to do almost anything - how that shapes a persons willingness to take risks and weigh them differently. That is my point about trade-offs, consider the personal and emotional as well as the technical.

[ben_w]

> In fact, you again spend your whole message talking about abstract considerations

No.

Not abstractions.

I have experience of software, I know how bad the entire industry is.

https://xkcd.com/2030/ applies to everything.

Even without malice, my degree used as case studies the failures of the Therac-25 and the digitalisation of the 1992 failure of the London Ambulance Service computerised dispatch system.

Hospitals and devices do get attacked. Bitcoin ransomware does affect hospitals. These are not abstractions, they are things that actually happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_device_hijack

I wasn't being "abstract" when I said the frequency with which attacks are attempted can be measured in Herz, that's an actual anecdote from someone I knew a decade ago.

[computerthings]

If it would make the greed and exploitation that form people like Musk go away without a trace and forever, I'd happily to be paralyzed for the rest of my life. Nobody would even have to know and thank me for it, as long as I knew... I'd watch humanity flourish on TV and cry tears of happiness. Even the best version of my best life is still just 1 life.

[tmnvdb]

It is very brave of you to make this totally hypothetical sacrifce for us - only in your mind of course.

[computerthings]

> If it was that or be paralyzed for the rest of your life, would you at least consider it?

It's all hypothetical anyway, what's your deal? Are you saying the totally hypothetical life changing cure is something to be impressed by so much, that the real suffering caused by those pursuing it is to be ignored? Ignoring the real suffering for some hypothetical deus ex machina is very cowardly, and if my hypothetical sacrifice reminded you of that, that's fine.

"If Elon Musk gave a shit about anything than profit, and knew his ass from his elbow, and this tech was feasible, and you were paralyzed, would you do it?"

He doesn't, he doesn't, it may not be, and I'm not, so the question is moot. But it's very scientific to ask, and a great way to navigate such society impacting questions, thanks!

[mrguyorama]

I know people this paralyzed. The concerns they have are usually more "How will I pay rent next month" and "how do I not get such bad bed sores"

How much do you think Neuralink is going to cost? How will people who can't get around on their own pay that? How are people who can't work going to pay that?

I don't know why supporters of all these things are so unable to view the whole situation. Musk doesn't want to pay taxes to a government that will support these disabled people. Musk doesn't want to support these disabled people. They are literally pawns for PR to him.

Musk doesn't want to advance the HUMAN RACE. Musk wants to advance CERTAIN PEOPLE.

[ben_w]

To add to what you say:

> Musk doesn't want to advance the HUMAN RACE. Musk wants to advance CERTAIN PEOPLE.

I think he can't tell the difference between those certain people and the human race as a whole. Trans people in particular would be the obvious example of his failure here — ironically, given how much inspiration he's taken from a fictional universe where people can change physical gender by thinking about it a bit and waiting a few months.

It's… not intended as a compliment when I say he "seems sincere" about wanting to advance the human race when it comes with this caveat. Quite the opposite.

Likewise given what else he's "seemed sincere" about in the past and hasn't manifested.