Their bionic eyes are now obsolete and unsupported (2022) | Hacker News Reader

Their bionic eyes are now obsolete and unsupported (2022)

spectrum.ieee.org

69 pointsColinWright29 comments

Update: https://spectrum.ieee.org/bionic-eye

Companies going bust should have their IP (code, design, patents etc) transferred to FOSS licenses automatically; at least here going bust is a strain on the tax payer, so give it back to the tax payer. Then someone else can pick this up and potentially fix these devices. Or at the least it’s good for the world to have the tech open to be studied.

But who would that "someone" be, and to what conditions? Or do you expect the people in the article to just write the drivers for their own implants themselves?

> Or do you expect the people in the article to just write the drivers for their own implants themselves?

No, but a community of volunteers might. ThreadX [0] is proof enough that an OSS community can keep a piece of software certified under strict security standards. I don't see why the same couldn't be achieved with software for medical devices.

[0] https://threadx.io/faq/#what-happens-with-the-existing-safet...

A couple reasons come to mind. (1) you can't separate the software from the rest of the device: it has to be Approved as a whole. (2) certification isn't enough. e.g., you could submit the software to a quality agency who would certify that it meets IEC62304, but then the entire device and its clinical test data still has to be submitted to the FDA, along with its Quality Record and all that (submission process, maintaining the Design History File, etc.) costs Real Money.

And if you manage to get it approved for sale, then there are regulatory requirements around support and maintenance of the device that aren't going to happen for free.

It's a nice idea, but unless you get funding from a philanthropic billionaire, I don't see it happening

Sounds like a good reason for these theoretical grassroots programmers to circumvent the regulatory agencies that are more of a hindrance than a help. ‘We cant do that because bureaucracy’ is such a non-starter.

If you think that the FDA is more of a hindrance than an help, then I guess I have nothing else to say.

Maybe another company? It seems this company was badly ran with nice tech. But at least if open, we have a chance. If closed, nothing happens and things get lost.

Public trustee. That’s how it works with other assets, like apartment buildings with people living in them. Often public trustees will outsource the management & disposal of these assets. Hopefully for the people depending on the assets, “disposal” means “sale to a new owner.”

I wouldn't necessarily have any expectations - the point of FOSS is to have those options at all.

What do you think might be done to avoid this sort of thing?

Anyone under whichever conditions they choose.

We, society, grant temporary monopolies in the form of copyright/patents "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". They do not intend to further use that monopoly, so they lose it.

You’re missing the point. The chance of someone investing in the development of drivers for niche failed outdated niche product is nil.

Still strictly better than the current situation.

You're perhaps underestimating vision scientists. If the problem is a driver (or something else that doesn't require a surgeon), I'm not the only person who might volunteer to develop the driver, given the alternative of people returning to blindness.

Untrue. Even small communities have shown to be able to do maintenance on whatever piques their interest. 250 customers with a high stakes product is large enough for them (or their insurer) to collectively hire say one programmer and one mechanic. That would be more capacity than 50% of FOSS.

Presumably James Weiland [0]. He's the (excellent) USC engineer that moved to Michigan in the fallout of the dean Puliafito scandal [1]. Puliafito was great at raising funds by conning rich people, but uninterested in supporting legitimate scientific research. His antics would make Hunter Biden blush.

[0] https://weilandresearch.bme.umich.edu/ [1] https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-usc-doctor-20...

Why would they give it away for free when they could just sell their IP to some holding company to recoup some losses? /s

If they could open it, send pictures and send dumps of its firmware, I'm sure there would be people around the world curious enough to reverse engineer it, and with that knowledge available, they could (at least potentially) get some support.

Only if the user base is large enough to gather enough interest. I expect someone reverse-engineering popular devices like nintendo switch but not bionic eyes used by a few hundred people.

Never underestimate the motivation of empathetic nerds.

Reading this has me horrified and wanting to help with the effort.

you mean, something like a new FOSS project called "OpenEye"? :-)

Corporations exist solely to create shareholder value on a quarterly basis.

If it's more profitable to go bankrupt and screw their test subjects, they will not hesitate - it is legally required they do so.

Probably time for you to change the gif on your website…

Naw.

Legally, that’s incorrect.

Corporations exist to do whatever purpose is spelled out in the articles of incorporation. That purpose can be eleemosynary or profit or whatever the founders want.

Fair enough. But most corps pick profit, and for those that don't, it's nearly impossible for a lay person to get/understand them.

For example, it's extremely unlikely that the victims in this story knew to check the articles of incorporation.

This is really sad. Ripe for the hackers of hacker news to get their teeth into helping with, if there are any wizards or mages reading this post.

The bleakest cyberpunk future event to date.

Discussed at the time:

Second Sight left users of its retinal implants in the dark - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30349871 - Feb 2022 (85 comments)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com