EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products • Hacker News Board

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#181

Post by simion314 » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:50 PM UTC

guimarin wrote: post #84

simion314 wrote: post #14

Is there also a term that describes this phenomena ? "Each year we get an update for product X with a few minor changes that makes the new version parts incompatible with the previous year version (maybe not all parts are incompatible). I noticed this with washing machines, I wanted to buy a similar model with something that I own and they made a different model, redesigned the outside, maybe small changes inside. I…

Textbooks? Seriously though I think there is a movement among the rich in America/world to buy products that are simple to use, high quality, and durable. The problem in my view is not that these products don't exist but that it's very hard to find them and verify quality in production over time.

I am not impressed by the "expensive" products, as an example I own a Nexus 7 tablet, touch input stopped working reliably, I searched and found many similar issue, the solution is to open it and plug back a connector that got lose and maybe add some paper to have the thing pressed on it's place, so this is not a cheap, no name product, the problem could have been avoided maybe with a few more cents investment per product. I have similar experience with brand name keyboard and mioce that were not cheap and did not perform.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#182

Post by simion314 » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:50 PM UTC

guimarin wrote: post #84

simion314 wrote: post #14

Is there also a term that describes this phenomena ? "Each year we get an update for product X with a few minor changes that makes the new version parts incompatible with the previous year version (maybe not all parts are incompatible). I noticed this with washing machines, I wanted to buy a similar model with something that I own and they made a different model, redesigned the outside, maybe small changes inside. I…

Textbooks? Seriously though I think there is a movement among the rich in America/world to buy products that are simple to use, high quality, and durable. The problem in my view is not that these products don't exist but that it's very hard to find them and verify quality in production over time.

I am not impressed by the "expensive" products, as an example I own a Nexus 7 tablet, touch input stopped working reliably, I searched and found many similar issue, the solution is to open it and plug back a connector that got lose and maybe add some paper to have the thing pressed on it's place, so this is not a cheap, no name product, the problem could have been avoided maybe with a few more cents investment per product. I have similar experience with brand name keyboard and mioce that were not cheap and did not perform.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#183

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:56 PM UTC

NicoJuicy wrote: post #29

This made me think about the lamp that shines for 100 years in a fire department somewhere. It even has a cam http://www.centennialbulb.org/ Now lamps have a limited lifespan because of the manufacturers, so they have more sales. I think this was the article: http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/history/the-great-lightbu...

> Now lamps have a limited lifespan because of the manufacturers, so they have more sales.

No, because it is (well, was, before CFLs and LEDs for lighting) actually more economical for the customer. At least in recent times, the largest chunk of the costs of owning and using a light bulb was the energy used over its lifetime, not the price to buy one. A typical 60 Watt ligh bulb cost 0.50 to maybe 1 dollar, the electricity to make it produce light for 1000 hours about 7 to 15 dollars.

The tradeoff was simply between making it more efficient at converting electricity into light, which requires running it at higher temperatures, which reduces the lifespan, or making it last longer, at the cost of making it less efficient and thus more expensive to use.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#184

Post by politician » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:57 PM UTC

Brakenshire wrote: post #77

FTA wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what's the incentive for the manufacturers? Possibly reducing the companies' environmental footprint on the world. Instead of cheap devices being scrapped every two years and sent to the landfill, consumers could instead hold on to the companies' products for much much longer. If products have comparatively more time and quality parts, the cost will indeed go up--both for manufacturing and retail price. My gran…

This isn't really an incentive though, unless this is driven by very knowledgeable consumers the companies that don't do this will make more money and eventually drive out the moral companies. One way of doing it would be to charge companies up-front for the cost of handling the waste for the eventual disposal of the product. That directly disincetivizes companies from make it poorly, pile it high, sell it cheap busi…

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that manufacturers should be responsible for the full cost of disposal, and that this obligation should be non-transferable to consumers.

After all, they built the widget! The vast logistical network of freight, retailers, consumers, and waste disposal services merely transported the widget to a landfill.

But there are difficulties with this viewpoint. How does the disposal obligation work in horizontally-integrated industries (e.g. car manufacturing)? How does it work with globalization (import taxes?)? Is there any viable way to account for the waste (core samples into landfills?) or will the cost be a guess subject to lobbyists?

One approach might be to require the manufacturer or importer to rent space in a network of landfills by tonnage. Call it "waste disposal insurance".

EDIT: A random idea would incorporate a blockchain containing transactions identifying the serial numbers of the products or components. That way, assemblages could be formally shown to be composed of properly insured components, even requiring the final serial number to be the hash of its components. The tokens could be traded between manufacturers and landfills directly, closing the loop on the product lifecycle. Compliance audits would simply compare sales records to the public chain.

On the landfill side, tokens operate as space reservations by tonnage, and can be efficiently traded to balance loads without requiring products to be taken to specific landfills.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#185

Post by simion314 » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:58 PM UTC

runeks wrote: post #116

simion314 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that most people change their phones often but there are products that are expensive like washing machine, gas heaters that should be designed from the start to last 5 years or more. If 2 companies build washing machines and they need to increase the warranty time, the one that can do that with less price increase would sell more, the one that planned them to break down faster would lose and have to make a new…

Why don't you just pay for the 5 year warranty if you want it, instead of wanting to make it mandatory that everyone pay?

Would you buy a car if the seller gives 1 month warranty? My opinion is that expensive products should have longer warranty by default. For cheaper products current 2 years is fine.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#186

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 8:58 PM UTC

Latty wrote: post #33

NicoJuicy wrote: post #29

This made me think about the lamp that shines for 100 years in a fire department somewhere. It even has a cam http://www.centennialbulb.org/ Now lamps have a limited lifespan because of the manufacturers, so they have more sales. I think this was the article: http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/history/the-great-lightbu...

I mean, LED bulbs have made traditional ones redundant and have incredibly long lifespans, so this isn't really true any more. The article makes some good points that lifespan was controlled, but not as drastically as you imply. They were talking about losing a third of the lifespan. While yes, they were clearly aiming to reduce the lifespan of bulbs, they did so by making the bulbs better (brighter) in a way that ma…

> If you could do both brighter and longer lifespan, I'm sure someone would have

No, they did, that's what is called a halogen lamp, quite a bit more efficient, lasts about twice as long.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#187

Post by mark-r » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 9:02 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #150

mattlondon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unconvinced that more expensive = better quality for a lot of things these days. There are some anecdotal examples of people with Miele washing machines that have lasted for decades etc (... as an aside I guess we wont know about today's Miele washing machines for several more years at least ...), but in my experience paying a premium for a product more often than not just gives you an as-cheaply-made product bu…

I just bought a washing machine. I spent a long, long time looking for the simplest one I could find, in the hopes that I could replace any mechanical part. From other HN threads it seems the control panels tend to go out a lot. Since I live in an apartment and wanted a small one anyway, I ended up with a portable one (oneConcept DB004 - odd name) that uses mechanical timers for the stages (you can hear them ticking!…

I wonder if energy regulations make it hard for mechanical products since they don't have the flexibility of electronic components.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#188

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 9:07 PM UTC

twii wrote: post #118

Finally.. Although I am not optimistic about seeing results soon. Companies will go to extremes to circumvent such rules. But it's shocking to see their lack of insight: > software should be easier to repair and update ROFL!

Why ROFL? Fixing bugs is essentially repairing software, isn't it? And it seems perfectly reasonable to me that if I buy some software, I should be able to "repair" any defects in it.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#189

Post by frgtpsswrdlame » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 9:13 PM UTC

freehunter wrote: post #161

thinkfurther wrote: post #135

Why can't we have economies that can be stable without the sky falling, can grow when wanted, and shrink when needed without a cascade of catastrophies? Can't we? It's a honest question, I have no clue. Because I also think this is a great idea too, but everything else being the same, the general insanity being the same, something else will probably give. On the other hand, if we did have this hypothetical more flexi…

That would take central planning. The government in capitalist societies can't force someone to open a business when unemployment gets too high, and can't force businesses to close or merge when there are inefficiencies in the market. A capitalist economic system is inherently reactionary: someone notices a demand and creates supply for it. Someone tries their hardest to keep their business open even with low demand,…

Important to note that "central planning" is not a black and white thing, there are degrees. The United States is light grey, China would be a darker grey for example. It's totally possible to allow certain markets to be centrally planned and others not to be.

Re: EU Parliament calls for longer lifetime for products

#190

Post by cwyers » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 9:14 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #178

cwyers wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinner and lighter are not purely cosmetic (although I think Apple overvalues them) -- laptops are meant to be carried and therefore being smaller/lighter are actual benefits. Even if they were purely cosmetic, however, there is actual engineering required to do them. The laws of the universe don't go, oh, you only want to make a cosmetic change, therefore you can get X into this space/thermal profile without any ot…

I think at some point you're going to have to present an argument that user-serviceable RAM makes a perceptible difference in making the laptop thin/light going forward. Several assumptions - The RAM itself can't shrink or be made to be more energy efficient, or socket design is static, can be challenged. However a manufacturer without a mandate/incentive will probably never invest their efforts to making that happen…

You want me to present an argument that stuff that doesn't exist isn't better than stuff that exists?

And "acceptable compromise" -- acceptable to who? Because the current compromise is acceptable to people who buy these laptops with soldered-on RAM. And it's not acceptable to those who buy other laptops that don't have soldered RAM. The compromise has been accepted by the market. "Well, the market got it wrong and should do it better," you might think. Sure, okay, but history is rife with examples of people telling markets to do things better and things not getting better, and it's helpful to think about why markets haven't gotten to better on their own.