this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
753 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59366 readers
5134 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A former jockey who was left paralyzed from the waist down after a horse riding accident was able to walk again thanks to a cutting-edge piece of robotic tech: a $100,000 ReWalk Personal exoskeleton.

When one of its small parts malfunctioned, however, the entire device stopped working. Desperate to gain his mobility back, he reached out to the manufacturer, Lifeward, for repairs. But it turned him away, claiming his exoskeleton was too old, *404 media *reports.

"After 371,091 steps my exoskeleton is being retired after 10 years of unbelievable physical therapy," Michael Straight posted on Facebook earlier this month. "The reasons why it has stopped is a pathetic excuse for a bad company to try and make more money."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 125 points 1 month ago (8 children)

This is why nobody should ever put any tech in their brain. Among 50 billion other reasons.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 79 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Oh that already happened too. A bunch of blind people got implants and the company abandoned them.

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago

That came to mind, too. If this shit isn't open source it is not worth spit.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)