[uwuemu]

This is a problem that needs to be addressed. Needless suffering is always bad. But. Is this really a BIG problem or are the politics (of Elon being who he is) leaking again?

This is not about some social networking platform or a car company. If this thing works and eventually has the ability to vastly improve QOL of disabled people, won't the testing be justified? I mean... how many desd animals outweigh one functioning quadriplegic? Only extremists would say "zero" or "any number", but regular people will probably say a number in the hundreds. We're team people after all. Not to mention that we already kill millions of animals for food (most of which live in terrible conditions all their lives and some of which die in brutal ways). And it's not like Elon goes around killing endangered species, these are mostly sheep, pigs and rodents we're talking about here.

[Imnimo]

Before you get to that question, you'd want to first answer the question of whether the deaths of the animals were actually necessary to make progress in the first place. Just because Neuralink has killed 1500 animals doesn't automatically mean that those deaths were productive. They just as well could have been the result of negligence or recklessness without real scientific value. That seems like a question that's worth investigating.