[y-curious]

You are right when it comes to qualia, but wholly incorrect in this case. There are measurable metrics in his life (ie independent use of computers, social engagements etc.)

It's not like he's having to rate his level of happiness here, these are physical benefits

[micromacrofoot]

Who is measuring the physical benefits? because based on this article it's no one... so again, we're taking one person's word for it... and it's very likely this person is contractually obligated to not disparage the company

[y-curious]

He explains his expanded day to day functionality in the article

[terminalshort]

He may be obligated not to say bad things, but he isn't obligated to say good things.

[micromacrofoot]

we don't have enough information to say that either, wouldn't be unusual to get free medical treatment in exchange for good press... and even without an explicit incentive there's a lot of implicit bias to not speak ill of someone that has hardware in your brain

this is why it's worthless without a third party review of conditions

[pear01]

if that's the case why do you care to read about his subjective experience, at all? isn't that the point of the comment inquiring about an independent review?

[yunwal]

Because the subjective experience is the thing we actually care about.

Same reason you ask the users of any product for feedback. Sure, you can objectively see that they were able to click the register button, still doesn’t guarantee they came out of that experience wanting to use the product.

[pear01]

are you under the impression that the sole focus of an independent review as described in the root comment would be to investigate the personal veracity of "Participant 1"'s narration? do you alter course in your product because of single, particular user anecdote? i'm not sure what you think you are arguing against here...

[yunwal]

That seems entirely reasonable to me in this instance, yes