While I agree that something needs to be done, stronger regulations will just be in an added requirement for the development of these devices, which will make it more expensive.
You can’t have fast development, cheap things, and longevity. Companies will not invest in making those products because they’ll be out of business by the time their market is saturated.
There has to be some sort of reasonable balance between new developments and longevity.
Asking any engineer for a device that’s near indestructible but will continue to have software updates for 10 years is a hard ask.
For a lot of devices right to repair would work just fine. Being able to swap out battery extends the life of most cell phones. But it’s an unreasonable request for that cell phone, for example, to be able to be supported for 10 years worth of software updates.
It will slow the development cycle for a lot of devices down quite a bit. Which honestly is fine. I feel like a lot of products have reached maturity, and companies are reinventing them just for the sake of reinventing them and selling a “new” product with a new battery. I’m looking at you, Apple.
The problem with determining what is an acceptable lifecycle for a product is that there will be no one left to support the product in 10 years if the company folds in the meantime. It is a significant drag on companies to support legacy products while also innovating and creating new products. It’s just a fact a fact.
And from a consumer perspective, If you want cool, new fancy, shiny shit every year and for it to be reliable and last for 10 years, it’s just not gonna happen. We have been trained To buy new shit every year and desire that new shiny upgrade Without understanding that we’re getting cheap shitty products for a premium.
Your $100” iPhone is now going to become a $3000 iPhone that lasts for five years instead of two. Tell me how that’s a win for anybody?
Right to repair is not about demanding unlimited software support it is saying we want access to the API so we can do our own support if we choose to.
It is about designing products that can be repairable and providing the means to do so. Regulations will be required to do this because a big part relies on standardization of parts.
This is because we can’t expect manufacturers to continuously supply parts. That is unrealistic. On the other hand, if you require standardized parts then it becomes repairable without the burden on the manufacturer.
I see your point. I would like to add that you probably can’t ever have fast or cheap without negative externalities. I think this is the missing part of the equation that perverts these systems and produces the garbage results we have to deal with like ewaste.
Unregulated capitalism seems to thrive by externalizing as many costs as possible. So we end up with a systems that ignores the environmental and social costs.
That doesn’t work. The amount of research people need to do to get enough information which product can currently just be shut down by the manufacturer is crazy…also it doesn’t matter: the corps can just change the contract afterwards and you loose access to the features anyway…it needs regulations to stop this.
Only person that thinks reading the packaging is a mountain of effort, is the kind of lazy person who buys stupid home automation devices to avoid walking five feet to turn off a lightbulb.
No, this requires regulations to prevent massive amounts of Ewaste. Consumers can’t change this behavior.
Like right to repair or privacy. We need real regulations. Corporations are too big and powerful and even something like choice has been turned into choosing which shitty corp you want to buy from.
You know how the US government has 3 branches that are supposed to check and balance each other? We should teach that Corporations, Government, and Individuals/Unions operate similarly.
Corporate terms of service check individuals against abusing others. So do government laws.
Government is supposed to check corporations from abusing their customers. And customer boycotts moderate corporate behavior.
And corporations… Apparently moderate the flow of information to individuals so the companies always manufacture consent. And lobby for their own advantage.
If nothing else, by describing how it is, we can have a real conversation about how fucked/okay all of this is, and examine what parts of this framework are actually functioning.
And in that, we can explore where Unions fit - as 3rd party bosses steeped in corruption, or as genuine representatives of their people. And explore how to rebound in just the one context, because we are good citizens. 😇😅😉
Does the product say requires an internet connection? Does it say on the packaging that it requires an app to use? Do you get home and find out it needs those things despite the packaging not saying it?
Then don’t buy it/Return it.
Its not that hard to avoid falling into this pit. But I guess if you are too lazy to walk the five feet to turn your living room lights off, maybe you’re too lazy to actually read anything… and if you’re that lazy, then I dont give a fuck about how you get screwed.
Worse is those things CAN change. Do it require an Internet connection? No, but this update does so you better hope you have it firewalled right. Does it need an app? No, but this update does. Easy never update right? … Now you have an unpatchable hard coded device on your network. What could go wrong?
It changed after 90 days? Whomp whomp no returns. You could fight the legal battle with the mutlicolgerate to get it refunded by the manufacturer. That will be painless to do with the thing you have hardwired into your house…
Listen I get you, I look at opensource firm for a given product type first THEN buy off of that, even that requires added research if there is a server componet (smart vaccums create maps of various types).
Easist option is to do nothing, but that does suck. Day to day chores suck a little, when you are disabled its a massive suck. Listen if your full of piss and vinigar, spry and full of energy, go install automation for charity for seniors and the disabled. They can really use the help.
Blaming consumers for the behavior of corporations is a fallacy of capitalism… consumers act in their best interests, not necessary in everyone’s best interests, so we all suffer if everyone does that.
Only people that dont want to blame the consumers for buying the shit… are the idiots that buy the shit, which is why they get so incensed when you argue that landfill shovel shit wont stop being sold until they stop buying it.
Stop buying shit, and companies will stop dumping billions into its R&D and advertising. They’re not doing that shit to waste money, They’re doing that to sell products… and if you stop buying it, they’ll stop making it.
Yes, this is all self-evident to anyone who recognizes overconsumption and premature or planned obsolescence.
My point is that advertising and other misinformation makes it extremely difficult for the average person to make rational decisions about technical issues when making purchases, so blame lies much more with companies, governments, and culture than the teeming hordes you look smugly down on.
There need to be strong regulations to prevent this sort of Ewaste. As long as companies can get away with this they will.
And no, voting with your pocket book isn’t going to change their behavior.
While I agree that something needs to be done, stronger regulations will just be in an added requirement for the development of these devices, which will make it more expensive.
You can’t have fast development, cheap things, and longevity. Companies will not invest in making those products because they’ll be out of business by the time their market is saturated.
That’s the point. If your business has to create a mountain of un-recyclable trash in order to thrive, it should absolutely fail.
There has to be some sort of reasonable balance between new developments and longevity.
Asking any engineer for a device that’s near indestructible but will continue to have software updates for 10 years is a hard ask.
For a lot of devices right to repair would work just fine. Being able to swap out battery extends the life of most cell phones. But it’s an unreasonable request for that cell phone, for example, to be able to be supported for 10 years worth of software updates.
It will slow the development cycle for a lot of devices down quite a bit. Which honestly is fine. I feel like a lot of products have reached maturity, and companies are reinventing them just for the sake of reinventing them and selling a “new” product with a new battery. I’m looking at you, Apple.
The problem with determining what is an acceptable lifecycle for a product is that there will be no one left to support the product in 10 years if the company folds in the meantime. It is a significant drag on companies to support legacy products while also innovating and creating new products. It’s just a fact a fact.
And from a consumer perspective, If you want cool, new fancy, shiny shit every year and for it to be reliable and last for 10 years, it’s just not gonna happen. We have been trained To buy new shit every year and desire that new shiny upgrade Without understanding that we’re getting cheap shitty products for a premium.
Your $100” iPhone is now going to become a $3000 iPhone that lasts for five years instead of two. Tell me how that’s a win for anybody?
Right to repair is not about demanding unlimited software support it is saying we want access to the API so we can do our own support if we choose to.
It is about designing products that can be repairable and providing the means to do so. Regulations will be required to do this because a big part relies on standardization of parts.
This is because we can’t expect manufacturers to continuously supply parts. That is unrealistic. On the other hand, if you require standardized parts then it becomes repairable without the burden on the manufacturer.
I mean it doesn’t have to have updates for 10 years but why are they bricking them?
They’re creating artificial demand And capitalizing on it to sell you a new phone and power, charger and accessories, and all kinds of other crap.
I see your point. I would like to add that you probably can’t ever have fast or cheap without negative externalities. I think this is the missing part of the equation that perverts these systems and produces the garbage results we have to deal with like ewaste.
Unregulated capitalism seems to thrive by externalizing as many costs as possible. So we end up with a systems that ignores the environmental and social costs.
if idiots stop buying this shit, they wont keep making it.
the problem is the idiots keep buying
That doesn’t work. The amount of research people need to do to get enough information which product can currently just be shut down by the manufacturer is crazy…also it doesn’t matter: the corps can just change the contract afterwards and you loose access to the features anyway…it needs regulations to stop this.
🙄 covered here
Only person that thinks reading the packaging is a mountain of effort, is the kind of lazy person who buys stupid home automation devices to avoid walking five feet to turn off a lightbulb.
No, this requires regulations to prevent massive amounts of Ewaste. Consumers can’t change this behavior.
Like right to repair or privacy. We need real regulations. Corporations are too big and powerful and even something like choice has been turned into choosing which shitty corp you want to buy from.
You know how the US government has 3 branches that are supposed to check and balance each other? We should teach that Corporations, Government, and Individuals/Unions operate similarly.
Corporate terms of service check individuals against abusing others. So do government laws.
Government is supposed to check corporations from abusing their customers. And customer boycotts moderate corporate behavior.
And corporations… Apparently moderate the flow of information to individuals so the companies always manufacture consent. And lobby for their own advantage.
If nothing else, by describing how it is, we can have a real conversation about how fucked/okay all of this is, and examine what parts of this framework are actually functioning.
And in that, we can explore where Unions fit - as 3rd party bosses steeped in corruption, or as genuine representatives of their people. And explore how to rebound in just the one context, because we are good citizens. 😇😅😉
Are you buying these u/a_random_idiot? /Jk
Honestly though how are consumers supposed to know which ones will be a bust and which ones won’t?
Very simple.
Does the product say requires an internet connection? Does it say on the packaging that it requires an app to use? Do you get home and find out it needs those things despite the packaging not saying it?
Then don’t buy it/Return it.
Its not that hard to avoid falling into this pit. But I guess if you are too lazy to walk the five feet to turn your living room lights off, maybe you’re too lazy to actually read anything… and if you’re that lazy, then I dont give a fuck about how you get screwed.
Worse is those things CAN change. Do it require an Internet connection? No, but this update does so you better hope you have it firewalled right. Does it need an app? No, but this update does. Easy never update right? … Now you have an unpatchable hard coded device on your network. What could go wrong?
It changed after 90 days? Whomp whomp no returns. You could fight the legal battle with the mutlicolgerate to get it refunded by the manufacturer. That will be painless to do with the thing you have hardwired into your house…
Listen I get you, I look at opensource firm for a given product type first THEN buy off of that, even that requires added research if there is a server componet (smart vaccums create maps of various types).
Easist option is to do nothing, but that does suck. Day to day chores suck a little, when you are disabled its a massive suck. Listen if your full of piss and vinigar, spry and full of energy, go install automation for charity for seniors and the disabled. They can really use the help.
Blaming consumers for the behavior of corporations is a fallacy of capitalism… consumers act in their best interests, not necessary in everyone’s best interests, so we all suffer if everyone does that.
if consumers acted in their best interest, none of this shit would exist.
Oh yes, advertising doesn’t work, which is why it’s fucking everywhere
Only people that dont want to blame the consumers for buying the shit… are the idiots that buy the shit, which is why they get so incensed when you argue that landfill shovel shit wont stop being sold until they stop buying it.
Stop buying shit, and companies will stop dumping billions into its R&D and advertising. They’re not doing that shit to waste money, They’re doing that to sell products… and if you stop buying it, they’ll stop making it.
Yes, this is all self-evident to anyone who recognizes overconsumption and premature or planned obsolescence.
My point is that advertising and other misinformation makes it extremely difficult for the average person to make rational decisions about technical issues when making purchases, so blame lies much more with companies, governments, and culture than the teeming hordes you look smugly down on.
I know, its just SO HARD to not buy your latest shiny. You just cant resist, so it must be someone elses fault.
Its always someone elses fault.
Dude, now you’re making it personal with totally the wrong person. What a dork.
Well all I got to say is you live up to your user name very well.