← Back to context

Comment by jacquesm

5 hours ago

I'd like some proof that the embedded programmers working for 'the man' at medical device companies are better and more motivated than those that are hacking on loop devices.

You're comparing people with a death wish in disguise with people that are extremely motivated to improve the QOL and they're very careful about how they do this, in fact if you read up on this you'd notice the insane attention to detail and the very rigorous process, on par with what I've seen in industry and in fact probably better than most.

All of this talk in this thread makes me think back to a time when people were laughing at that Finnish kid that was making his own OS with his buddies. Surely nobody would ever trust their business, their property or the lives to open source.

I checked and this is actually hacker news, not the BSA.

I'm arguing that "it's their life, so they'll be more careful than 'the man'" is tenuous.

There have been many people who "made informed decisions" about their medical treatments over the advice of professionals and ended up being wrong. They don't count as thrill seekers.

Even in other threads on HN, you'll find takes on this topic ranging from "I don't trust my device, so I do finger tests every day" to "I trust my vibes and my device and don't do finger tests anymore" which tells me there's a pretty wide spectrum along which hackers might fall.

I'm not at all arguing that it's impossible that someone would do a good job of hacking their device, let alone do better than pharma/med companies.

I just don't buy that everyone who hacks away at it will inherently do a better than said companies because their life is at stake. There are way too many examples of people taking their lives in their own hands and getting it wrong.

  • Well, in this case the proof is there for your perusal: it works. They have ironed out most if not all of the kinks and manufacturers are pissed that they got shown up by a bunch of people who they consider to be subjects, not having agency. Because after all, if a bunch of ordinary but skilled people can do this their justification for obscene pricing all but evaporates.

    I look at these companies for a living. Every two weeks on average another one. I see their codebases. I interview their engineers. There is no magic sauce. It is rare that you come across a company that really gets engineering and that doesn't see the product as a minor obstacle on the way to profits. Medical device companies in general are not exceptional in this sense (though I am aware of one that is).

    But fine, you think that the people that work for these companies are somehow better than that ones whose lives are at stake. I beg to differ.

    • > But fine, you think that the people that work for these companies are somehow better than that ones whose lives are at stake.

      That is not the point I'm making.

      The point I'm making is that someone's life being at stake does not inherently make then better.