• SSUPII
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t think this is going to happen on a scale where this technology will be unusable. But they need to be backed by a company that will not go bankrupt after 15 years.

    I cannot currently see how it can be done with open standards reliably.

    • cryball
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Going bankrupt is not the only potential issue. There can also be situations, where a company makes several generations of a product, and abandons support for the old ones.

      This is already a serious concern with eg. older gen chip fabrication. The machinery required for each generation was built when that gen was new, and when that machinery breaks down, it might not be economical to rebuild that capability.

      • SSUPII
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The bankruptcy situation was mentioning the article.

        Of course, when it comes to commercial products they will eventually be discontinued. But as long as a good replacement plan is done, like you could get the newer model much cheaper by turning in your older generation one, it will not be too much of an issue for the ones who need it.

        When its actually fair to discontinue such essential products for some its debatable.

        • cryball
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The situation in the article is for sure unique, as replacing implants with a newer version is probably not feasible. Many other simpler medical devices are different, as they could be replaced as needed.

    • Big P@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cars generally have it figured out. Generally you can make a car drive without too much proprietary stuff. Even electric cars are generally quite simple when you strip away all the bells and whistles