Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

ifixit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 354 posts

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#291

Post by [deleted] »

quadrangle wrote: post #107
awalton wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It tells me that I really shouldn't buy a Ford car, since apparently billing for repair parts is more important to them than building a robust and repairable car. Adding a tamper resistant circuit to random bits of your car's electronics is adding cost while reducing robustness - who wants that in their car?

Ford is basically stopping production of cars anyway as they found that trucks are more profitable. But yeah, don't buy one of their trucks either. But what manufacturer is an alternative? Tesla set up DRM to artificially limit the driving range of their cars until you pay them a ransom to simply let your car drive longer distances!

[deleted]

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#292

Post by pgt »

mml wrote: post #208
pgt wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software Mechanic is a great brand. I'm stealing it :)

"Software Janitor" is my personal favorite. I should probably carry around a bag of pencil shavings on principle.

Yeah, I used to say CTO = main janitor of tech.

Software mechanic says: I don't mind getting my hands dirty while doing intricate work (computers, who understands 'em?). Janitorial work seems to be regarded as lowly drudge work, even though being a good caretaker/warden means preventing problems from occurring in the first place, like watering the garden and keeping leaks in check.

Everyone is trying to keep a cupboard in order somewhere :).

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#293

Post by collyw »

arcticbull wrote: post #255
cptskippy wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And the person paid for 60 kWh of battery capacity. They didn't pay for 75 kWh of battery capacity. The true capacity of the battery is irrelevant so long as it delivers the capacity the person paid for. Tesla didn't sell the vehicle as having a different curb weight, or a specified number of 18650 cells contained in the battery pack. They sold it based on having a 60 kWh capacity which it does. Why do you feel…

It's not about entitlement, it's about the fact it's there . It's about how it feels. It's different when someone sells you something that does 2 things, then tells you that unless you pay them more it'll only do one, forever. It's a nagging feeling. It's mine now, not theirs. Then they ask for tons of money, don't give you anything new or different, just enable the product to do what it could already do -- what I "a…

Its the opposite of the hacking spirit where you make something do more than it is supposed to. Something many people here take an interest in - its in the name Hacker news.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#294

Post by tastroder »

sjwright wrote: post #283
killaken2000 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my knowledge they had Apple logos because they were Apple products. Maybe there's more to it but that's what I understood so far. Removing the Apple logo from Apple products in order to ship them to the states so they can be used to fix Apple products seems unnecessary.

> "Removing the Apple logo from Apple products in order to ship them to the states so they can be used to fix Apple products seems unnecessary." Putting an Apple logo on something that is not an Apple product seems unnecessary. These parts are not Apple products. In order for a product to be an Apple product, it has to have been sold by, through or under license from Apple at some point in its life. These were not, w…

Wasn't the whole point of the Louis Rossmann imports and similar stories with LCD screens a few months back that these were in fact refurbished Apple products? From what I've read they had the Apple logo on a connector or something because that part of the product was original. In the car analogy, if I repair my car by replacing or refurbishing a broken part and clearly stating that fact when I resell it, would that make it a counterfeit car?

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#295

Post by VBprogrammer »

Teknoman117 wrote: post #149
TomMarius wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of software engineers around me love poking in their cars

I'm a software engineer and I do most of my own car work. Can't do everything though, I don't have a lot of room for tools that I'd rarely use. Paid someone to fix my air conditioning vents though because I'd have to half disassemble the interior of my car to do it and I knew it would take me longer to do than I could have the car out of commission. I really hate the vacuum controlled vents in mid 2000's Ford trucks.…

Motorcycles are great for that. Except for a few really high end modern bikes (mostly BMWs) they are mostly repairable with nothing more than common tools and a little ingenuity.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#296

Post by drb91 »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #277
drb91 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err, you like non-democratic rulings because they AVOID corruption? Worked great for the FCC!

Something being non-democratic does not mean that it is corrupt. (Many companies are not democratic but also aren't subject to corruption). This is very much like a democratic ruling does not protect it from corruption. Both the corruption and lack of it can happen in most systems of creating rulings.

Maybe. It’s easier for me to imagine corruption stopping if it’s tied to an election. Who votes over changing out the patent office? Nobody. What comes out of that office might as well be random in the best case, and openly corrupt in the worst (again, see the FCC).

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#297

Post by tolien »

arcticbull wrote: post #257
cronix wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sort of thing is done all of the time in manufacturing to streamline costs. A good example is Intel and chip manufacturers locking their cpus to a specific frequency when they are capable of higher so they don't have to manufacture the same cpu with different frequencies.

That's a bit different, right? CPUs are binned based on their ability to perform at higher frequencies / not be defective. They're turned into different 'products' so that less-than-ideal parts can still be sold instead of thrown out. 4-core CPUs may be 6-core CPUs where 1 or 2 cores are physically defective pieces of silicon. Sometimes, especially as a process matures, there's too few defective parts, so they take s…

Intel and AMD have sold hardware as lower SKUs than binned in order to meet demand too. Intel’s also sold upgrades [1] that unlocked features that were already in the CPU.

I guess the closer analogy to CPU binning would be if they found a fault in a P100’s batteries and sold it as a P85 instead of replacing the battery. CPUs aren’t a great analogy though, since the unused material in a Xeon-E that failed binning and became an i3 is pretty minimal.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Upgrade_Service

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#298

Post by a_t48 »

devit wrote: post #289
cptskippy wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And the person paid for 60 kWh of battery capacity. They didn't pay for 75 kWh of battery capacity. The true capacity of the battery is irrelevant so long as it delivers the capacity the person paid for. Tesla didn't sell the vehicle as having a different curb weight, or a specified number of 18650 cells contained in the battery pack. They sold it based on having a 60 kWh capacity which it does. Why do you feel…

Because the fact that they can do such a thing at a profit means the market is inefficient. Imagine that instead of having a single Tesla, there were two identical companies each selling half of what the actual Tesla does. Now one of them could offer an unlocked 75kWh version at $1 more than the locked-to-60kWh version (since they cost the same to make and they are profitable) and would capture all the market, so the…

Tesla isn’t really profitable right now, is it?

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#299

Post by 666lumberjack »

komali2 wrote: post #42
eveningcoffee wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is quite horrifying. I am not sure if the elevator ride will be the same again for me.

Other than the space shuttle, by measuring deaths vs distance traveled per person, the elevator is the safest form of transportation. https://www.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/2qbjw2/requ... though I recommend reading more into it and doing your own math.

The post you link actually states the opposite, that Elevators are more dangerous than all the other listed methods of travel except the Space Shuttle.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#300

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #199
quadrangle wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ford is basically stopping production of cars anyway as they found that trucks are more profitable. But yeah, don't buy one of their trucks either. But what manufacturer is an alternative? Tesla set up DRM to artificially limit the driving range of their cars until you pay them a ransom to simply let your car drive longer distances!

> Tesla set up DRM to artificially limit the driving range of their cars until you pay them a ransom to simply let your car drive longer distances! I think the effect of this sort of DRM is underestimated in many conversations about post-scarcity. People don't seem to appreciate that cryptography will create programmatic scarcity where previously we only had scarcity due to physical laws.

The bright side is that it's easier to crack software than it is to find new mineral ore deposits
Post reply on HN