view the rest of the comments
Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
Because "brain chip that reads your mind to help with depression/bipolar disorder" is barely a hop, skip and a jump from all sorts of fun dystopian nightmares. On the tame end, something that already happens, is the makers of implantable devices going out of business; and then you have unsupported, degrading medical hardware implanted inside you that, if it malfunctions or breaks, you're just stuck with and can't get it fixed. Bad enough when that malfunction is with a vision- or hearing-related implant, but a brain chip could fuck up all sorts of things if it goes wrong.
On the more fanciful, yet-to-be-realized end of possible terrifying outcomes, the sky's the limit -- mind-reading, malware, rudimentary mind-control, the list goes on. I realize that sounds very sci-fi and like I'm a paranoid crackpot, but this is actually far more viable than you might believe at first. If they're actively already trying to make them effective at treating mental disorders, if they are indeed effective, then that doesn't require much further tweaking to go from treating them to causing them.
Truthfully, BCIs have the potential to be so dangerous that they either should not be developed or should only be developed with open standards and user control in mind. And absolutely not developed by for-profit entertainment companies.