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

Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 249 posts

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#141

Post by TeMPOraL »

minipci1321 wrote: post #127
lostmyoldone wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, one wouldn't have to use the "close on paper" if spare parts, or real specs, were actually available. Secondly, as analog electronics, where the non-compliance argument might matter, are generally built of devices with 5-20% tolerances. Close enough is usually close enough, if you can get the right specs to start with. Thirdly, the parts of modern communication networks that can actually be affected by compo…

> I can go on. I'll skip that too. I have a counter argument literally for every your affirmation. Big part of modern CE devices do not fit into your description (or at least, we clearly have in mind very different ones). The more expensive a device, the more complex it generally is, and the higher is the motivation to repair it. I don't think we need the law only to repair car fobs and wireless door keys. > I have y…

>> I have yet to see an industry certification which has not clearly put in place for a business reason.

> Since when business reasons became intrinsically bad?

The way I read it, it's a shorthand for "has nothing to do with a fair trade of value in exchange for money".

> Aren't we on HN?

HN is not a place frequented by wolves of Wall Street.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#142

Post by lotsofpulp »

Zak wrote: post #68

> John Deere argues that access to the company’s proprietary software could be used to bypass emissions controls or safety measures. On an analog car, I can physically remove emissions control devices. I can short circuit the seat belt warning. I can pull a fuse and disable the (not quite analog) antilock brakes. I can fail to change the tires when they have an unsafe amount of tread. I'm less familiar with farm equi…

It’s coming for cars too.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#143

Post by TeMPOraL »

noelsusman wrote: post #137
TeMPOraL wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You got a dirt cheap printer because you're paying with supplies. Give me one good reason why this particular business model - base subsidized by consumables - shouldn't be straight up banned. I can't think of any.

It's cheaper for most people.

Not in the long run, and not if you account for externalities dumped on society in form of trash, which follow naturally when price-sensitive customers try to game this business model.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#144

Post by minipci1321 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #141
minipci1321 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can go on. I'll skip that too. I have a counter argument literally for every your affirmation. Big part of modern CE devices do not fit into your description (or at least, we clearly have in mind very different ones). The more expensive a device, the more complex it generally is, and the higher is the motivation to repair it. I don't think we need the law only to repair car fobs and wireless door keys. > I have y…

>> I have yet to see an industry certification which has not clearly put in place for a business reason. > Since when business reasons became intrinsically bad? The way I read it, it's a shorthand for "has nothing to do with a fair trade of value in exchange for money". > Aren't we on HN? HN is not a place frequented by wolves of Wall Street.

> HN is not a place frequented by wolves of Wall Street.

Errr... I hope they manifest themselves right away ;-)

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#145

Post by quanticle »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #134
quanticle wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it causes massive unsustainable externalities when that business model is applied by many firms across the economy as a whole? The only reason that manufacturers can get away with planned obsolescence is because they don't have to pay any disposal fees to recycle/remanufacture their equipment. If they took a hit to their bottom line every time a consumer threw out their product, I'm willing to be they'd desig…

... how much do you think device disposal actually costs?

Depends on what you mean by "disposal". I'm talking about a system where no part of the device ends up in a landfill, much like what we have with car batteries today.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#146

Post by organsnyder »

busterarm wrote: post #97
bonestamp2 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would Google give up all that ad revenue to help Apple?

Because Google sells phones too. That nearly everyone in this thread has missed this fact so far is baffling.

Their ad revenue must be several orders of magnitude higher than their phone sales revenue, though.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#147

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

ericabiz wrote: post #31
komali2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welp, there it is. As clear cut a case of the dangers of Google basically holding the keys to the internet for the masses as I've ever seen. How's the ads on Facebook and Instagram doing?

Awful, honestly. The last set we ran on Facebook cost us $40 per booked appointment...not even break-even for us. We are working on video ads for pre-roll YouTube, etc., but it takes $ for tools (like cameras) and production. On Google, we learned how to optimize our ads and we were doing really well.

Yeah, that sucks. For very occasional purchases like repair FB ads stink because so few of your potential targeted customers need a repair at any moment - you really need search ads to hit on the moment of intent. Could definitely see YT ads doing well if you target repair videos.

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#148

Post by amelius »

ericabiz wrote: post #18

Here's another way Apple may be killing "right to repair": I own a chain of independent cell phone and computer repair shops. Last year, Google unilaterally took away AdWords in our industry. The day after Thanksgiving, we woke up to find none of our ads were running. Google claimed this was because "third-party tech support providers" were scamming customers--i.e. people were buying AdWords for virus removal and tec…

> Google unilaterally took away AdWords in our industry.

It's one thing when a government regulates a market, yet another when a company does it ...

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#149

Post by ddalex »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #41
toomuchtodo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to contact the Justice Department to contribute to their anti trust investigation against Google.

"Have you considered just phoning up the government?" has got to be the pinnacle of armchair activism.

Or perhaps he's European, where phoning the govt actually works

Re: Support for right-to-repair laws slowly grows

#150

Post by cr0sh »

thefiregecko wrote: post #131
feocco wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forcing a company to have a diagnostic tool or team to identify a problem you might not have them fix is silly IMO. So is forcing their hand on creating a repairable product. I don't expect Microsoft to be able to easily identify obscure hardware issues with a design like my Surface Book 2. I do expect them to create a hardware product that doesn't break easily. Supplying the specs is a big benefit in my purchase dec…

> Forcing a company to have a diagnostic tool or team to identify a problem you might not have them fix is silly IMO. As a counter point, OBD-2 works and everyone can use it.

As a counter to that point - unless you're willing to spend mega-$$$ on a high-end scan tool, you won't be able to read all of the OBD-2 codes.

Even with such a scan tool - there may still be certain codes that are "manufacturer only" readable.

Post reply on HN