Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates? • Hacker News Board

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#31

Post by bluGill » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 7:38 PM UTC

ailideex wrote: post #13

alkaline9 wrote: post #3

Perishable software is a huge problem - things keep operating only in dynamic equilibrium, such that they would fall apart as soon as we stop putting energy into fixing flaws. I have been thinking for years that as a society, we need 100-year products. It would be a global good to counteract the local incentives for producing perishable software. However, over time I have realized that there are legitimately unforese…

> It would be a global good to counteract the local incentives for producing perishable software. What are we talking about here? Asking people to not write bugs?

No, I'm asking you fix your bugs: when you sell software you should set aside money to fix your bugs.

Note I said bugs, not add new features, you can charge for features, but if I don't want the feature you should still fix the bug.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#32

Post by winternett » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 7:42 PM UTC

LeftHandPath wrote: post #27

winternett wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some instances of software truly need the Internet to run, E.G. Facebook or GTA Online. Many software tools don't need that connection to run, but are heavily embedded with connection dependencies like a calculator app (stable technology). Many of these apps and devices become totally useless if an active connection is not available. This is a bad move companies make all the time to encourage our dependence. The same…

I’ve been harassing my dad for ages over his purchase of a WiFi-enabled LG fridge. Neither of us know why it’s connected - but it is, and it proudly displays a WiFi icon with a backlit LED right above the water dispenser. The only thing you can possibly gain from a WiFi-enabled fridge (it has no voice commands, no screen, etc) is just being monitored and/or hacked. There is literally no benefit to the consumer from h…

Probably take some time to remove the network password, and/or block the IP at your router level?

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#33

Post by blowski » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 7:47 PM UTC

LeftHandPath wrote: post #27

winternett wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some instances of software truly need the Internet to run, E.G. Facebook or GTA Online. Many software tools don't need that connection to run, but are heavily embedded with connection dependencies like a calculator app (stable technology). Many of these apps and devices become totally useless if an active connection is not available. This is a bad move companies make all the time to encourage our dependence. The same…

I’ve been harassing my dad for ages over his purchase of a WiFi-enabled LG fridge. Neither of us know why it’s connected - but it is, and it proudly displays a WiFi icon with a backlit LED right above the water dispenser. The only thing you can possibly gain from a WiFi-enabled fridge (it has no voice commands, no screen, etc) is just being monitored and/or hacked. There is literally no benefit to the consumer from h…

I agree that I can’t imagine what genuine benefit an internet-enabled fridge could have, but out of curiosity, what benefits do they list in the manual?

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#34

Post by winternett » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 7:50 PM UTC

LeftHandPath wrote: post #29

alkaline9 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is asking people to design and test systems for the long-term. It would require establishing strong interfaces between components that will hold up when subcomponents are swapped out. I think of it like a car where parts can be replaced if those parts have an issue, but the designs of the connectors stays the same, and replacements are available. A 100-year car isn't one that requires no maintenance for 100 ye…

There are a lot of cars that were maintainable, and built to be maintained, that can’t be maintained anymore simply because the manufacturer went defunct and there are no more parts (e.g. Saab, Datsun) or because the cost of manufacturing more parts for a car with a dwindling owner-base began to outweigh the profit, and thus, there are no more parts (e.g. older Ford models). Unless the car is built primarily with 3rd…

In the past aftermarket parts makers came in to support popular cars after OEMs retired replacement part making for older model cars. Now if you so much as breathe on an aftermarket mod for your brand new software driven EV ( I won't name names here of course but you know who), the manufacturer may brick your car, or worse yet declare your warranty and/or any future support null & void.

My 2017 Volvo XC 90 somehow begins to casually malfunction whenever I drive it beyond a few service warnings. The car is HEAVILY software dependent. It can technically drive itself and park itself too. This behavior somehow disappears once the dealer performs software updates. It's pretty strange, and I worry it's a ticking time bomb for when I reach the end of my warranty on the car.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#35

Post by rasz » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

mfer wrote: post #20

The software doesn't "expire" or "perish". The software isn't gone. The software may go into a state of not getting updates. A lot of the problems outlined in the post have to do with device and solution design decisions rather than in software expiring. This also touches on open source software lifecycle choices. PHP may be updating quicker than it used to but the backwards compatibility is amazing. Angular 9 moving…

It sure does expire its usefulness. Try running old phpBB forum, Android 4 phone, or browser from 2011. Software degrades into a point of uselessness.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#36

Post by anyonecancode » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:33 PM UTC

leoedin wrote: post #15

anyonecancode wrote: post #7

Maybe a better analogy isn't milk, but car seats? I was surprised to learn about car seat expiration when I became a parent, but it makes sense -- the materials themselves break down over time, and safety standards and research evolve. I don't think it's too big of a leap to see software in a similar way. Even if the code itself still runs just fine in ten years, likely the context it runs in has long changed.

The car seat thing is actually mostly unfounded. There's a lot of social panic about child safety. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketplace.org/2019/11/14/...

And in a future where software-dependent devices have expiry dates, we can debate if worries about using them past their published expiration are warranted or are examples of social panic. I think a future where those debates happen, as opposed to one where the majority of people are not even aware of it as an issue worth considering, is a better one.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#37

Post by RyJones » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:33 PM UTC

nicolaslem wrote: post #12

As time passes the more I think that Stallman was right: Today there is no way I'm buying a device that a company can turn into a paperweight by flipping a switch. Tomorrow I won't probably buy anything where I'm not controlling the software.

This is exactly why I didn’t buy a Glowforge. I was really excited until I read you have to use the cloud service they run.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#38

Post by tluyben2 » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:42 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #9

anyonecancode wrote: post #7

Maybe a better analogy isn't milk, but car seats? I was surprised to learn about car seat expiration when I became a parent, but it makes sense -- the materials themselves break down over time, and safety standards and research evolve. I don't think it's too big of a leap to see software in a similar way. Even if the code itself still runs just fine in ten years, likely the context it runs in has long changed.

Seatbelts too. And airbags. Afaik you're supposed to replace those every 10 years or so. Most people of course don't. Another good one most people forget: Hard drives last about 5 years. CD-Rs are rated for 10 years. A flash drive can go for 10 years. SSD holds data for about 2 years. The electronics themselves in many modern consumer devices are basically kaput after 4 to 5 years. Point is you are likely overestimat…

Hard drives 5 years; yeah it happens but then usually fast after active use: if they do not fail fast then they usually keep going. I have 100s of HD's here from 25 to a few years ago and most of them work fine. Especially the 90s/00s then-expensive scsi discs do not seem to fail. But cheap internal and external HD's from that time are also still all working. If they get beyond 5 years (and by far most do), they get to 20. Anecdotal ofcourse.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#39

Post by oneplane » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

viklove wrote: post #28

alkaline9 wrote: post #3

Perishable software is a huge problem - things keep operating only in dynamic equilibrium, such that they would fall apart as soon as we stop putting energy into fixing flaws. I have been thinking for years that as a society, we need 100-year products. It would be a global good to counteract the local incentives for producing perishable software. However, over time I have realized that there are legitimately unforese…

> such that they would fall apart as soon as we stop putting energy into fixing flaws This is not true. The only reason software needs constant updates is because new features are constantly being added to stay competitive. If you stop adding features, in theory you will eventually run out of bugs to fix as well. The problem is feature creep. Software doesn't "decay," and thus does not need infinite maintenance.

That is assuming that software is ever written 'correctly', which outside of (semi-) academic exercise is never the case (so far).

You can have a program with 1 purpose and no added features experience a variety of critical flaws over a period of 30 years. While there might not be a 'decay' as such, there definitely is new understanding and as such new attack vectors.

The same goes for the stuff the software runs on top of. Your program might be programmed just fine, but if the CPU it was programmed on no longer exists and the replacement CPU has new features that allow that program to be exploited in new ways, that is still a flaw of the software. It couldn't have been foreseen, but it still happens.

The concept dat the things we build are frozen in time never holds up. The difference with software vs 'other things' is that it doesn't degrade or get 'used up' (as you wrote yourself). But the things around it do and as you cannot write programs against all possible future contexts, it will need maintenance for as long as it is in use (from a software perspective - a business thinks differently about that, especially risk analysts).

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#40

Post by LeftHandPath » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 8:50 PM UTC

winternett wrote: post #34

LeftHandPath wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of cars that were maintainable, and built to be maintained, that can’t be maintained anymore simply because the manufacturer went defunct and there are no more parts (e.g. Saab, Datsun) or because the cost of manufacturing more parts for a car with a dwindling owner-base began to outweigh the profit, and thus, there are no more parts (e.g. older Ford models). Unless the car is built primarily with 3rd…

In the past aftermarket parts makers came in to support popular cars after OEMs retired replacement part making for older model cars. Now if you so much as breathe on an aftermarket mod for your brand new software driven EV ( I won't name names here of course but you know who), the manufacturer may brick your car, or worse yet declare your warranty and/or any future support null & void. My 2017 Volvo XC 90 somehow be…

I am definitely against the newest measures taken by car companies, e.g. Porsche completely covering the engine (and voiding warranty should you access it) save the oil reservoir, on the newest 911s.

There is also something missing from my metaphor which is that even when the parts no longer exist, the car can still continue to run until it breaks down, rather than being remotely killed due to an external signal separated from the car itself (e.g. servers shutting down and triggering some switch in the code).