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

New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 206 posts

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#101

Post by hutzlibu »

hughrr wrote: post #93
hutzlibu wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So ... the DIY is subjective. You don't want to screw up and later have your laptop (and house) on fire.

That’s the risk you take on with promoting right to repair. It’s be better if we had stronger consumer legislation globally that forces manufacturer responsibility rather than demand we can do the job ourselves. Imagine if you bought a laptop and the battery died after 2 years and the state mandated option was for the manufacturer to buy it back at 60% of the original value because it didn’t last the prescribed 6 yea…

I like the idea of mature, self-responsible people.

Who can be trusted to make decisions by themself.

And the right to repair aims not, that everyone should fix their devices by themself, but that everyone who is capable, has the possibility to do so. Like repair shops. Or skilled individuals. And those who think they are more competent, than they actually are ... find always ways of shooting themself in the foot. I would not want to punish everyone else because of it.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#102

Post by Wowfunhappy »

joshspankit wrote: post #78
fitchjo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I being a bit naive to think that this has more to do with public safety? In theory, there is some increased level of regulation/review of the car and medical device manufacturers that limits the risk these repairs aren’t done to an appropriate standard? You can make a trade-off between standard of repair and price for your iPhone that only impacts the device, but cars and medical devices not properly repaired cou…

You’ve used a grey argument. Apple themselves have argued that one of the reasons they have to limit repair is for public safety (someone could have a battery explode if they pierce it, for example), whereas we could also argue the other side: that if someone modifies their own medical device and gets hurt because of it that they legally only hurt themselves because they had the right to make that choice. IMO it come…

> IMO it comes down to this: do we advocate for laws that give companies the ability to decide what is right/safe for the public, or do we advocate for laws that reflect trust in the individual?

This is a really great way to put it, and it applies broadly to so many fundamental disagreements in the tech world.

I firmly believe it’s better to trust the individual—so I think users should be able to sideload iOS apps (only if they want to) and install their own root certificates. Others think individuals can’t be trusted, and so we should let tech companies dictate what is safe for everyone else.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#103

Post by hughrr »

hutzlibu wrote: post #101
hughrr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the risk you take on with promoting right to repair. It’s be better if we had stronger consumer legislation globally that forces manufacturer responsibility rather than demand we can do the job ourselves. Imagine if you bought a laptop and the battery died after 2 years and the state mandated option was for the manufacturer to buy it back at 60% of the original value because it didn’t last the prescribed 6 yea…

I like the idea of mature, self-responsible people. Who can be trusted to make decisions by themself. And the right to repair aims not, that everyone should fix their devices by themself, but that everyone who is capable, has the possibility to do so. Like repair shops. Or skilled individuals. And those who think they are more competent, than they actually are ... find always ways of shooting themself in the foot. I…

I think if you look at the actual current state of the repair industry it’d scare you off the idea fairly quickly. There are very few competent people and even fewer business where competence is promoted.

I’m going to slap Rossman here as well who does some pretty scary hack jobbery and passes it off as a fit for purpose repair rather than a data recovery last resort.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#104

Post by TaylorAlexander »

JAlexoid wrote: post #77
fitchjo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I being a bit naive to think that this has more to do with public safety? In theory, there is some increased level of regulation/review of the car and medical device manufacturers that limits the risk these repairs aren’t done to an appropriate standard? You can make a trade-off between standard of repair and price for your iPhone that only impacts the device, but cars and medical devices not properly repaired cou…

These laws obligate the manufacturer to release maintenance and repair manuals, like the ones they provide to the authorized service centers; and ban all litigation related to someone providing unauthorized services, etc... Depending on the law, it may also require more documentation, ban on total lockdown of devices and obligation to sell spare parts(but you often can buy genuine spare parts through service centers)…

> Right to fix also doesn't cover warranties, as you will loose your warranty when doing it yourself.

The Magnussen-Moss warranty act of 1975 states (IANAL) that a repair cannot void the warranty unless the manufacturer can prove that your repair caused the damage in question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty...

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#105

Post by boomboomsubban »

inops wrote: post #79
TruthSHIFT wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what is actually included? Isn’t everything electronic now?

It's "digital electronic product...found in medical settings", I'd imagine

So how many nurses need an iPhone to exempt Apple? Or would something like a COVID tracking app make it a digital electronic product found in a medical setting?

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#106

Post by TaylorAlexander »

fitchjo wrote: post #59
myfavoritedog wrote: post #52

4. Excludes motor vehicle manufacturers, manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, or motor vehicle dealers and medical devices or a digital electronic product or embedded software found in medical settings. For all the bravado about standing up to powerful interests, this shows you who the most powerful interests are in that space.

Am I being a bit naive to think that this has more to do with public safety? In theory, there is some increased level of regulation/review of the car and medical device manufacturers that limits the risk these repairs aren’t done to an appropriate standard? You can make a trade-off between standard of repair and price for your iPhone that only impacts the device, but cars and medical devices not properly repaired cou…

Louis Rossman gave an example which I believe really happened. A surgery chair that cost tens of thousands of dollars needed a new riser motor. Just an electric motor to move the chair up and down. But the company that makes the electric motor had an agreement with the chair manufacturer not to sell replacement parts. So the only recourse instead of replacing a $500 motor is to replace an entire surgery chair for tens of thousands of dollars.

Given the cost of medical care in this country I think it would be a very good thing if that agreement not to sell parts was against the law. Surely an electric motor to raise a chair up and down could be replaced with the correct part without compromising anyone’s safety.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#107

Post by pembrook »

andrei_says_ wrote: post #70
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #38

What would be the best argument against this sort of legislation?

Focus groups show privacy and safety and both arguments are gleefully weaponized by the lobbyists.

The "safety!" argument against RTR is disingenuous. Just as the "landfills!" argument in favor of RTR is also disingenuous.

Nobody on either side actually believes those things (regardless of how passionately they claim to). They are both fallacious appeals to get disinterested people emotionally wrapped up in the topic.

RE: safety, people getting hurt trying to repair stuff happens already and will still happen post-regulation. Right to repair will not result in more injuries.

RE: landfills, most people don't throw stuff away because it breaks. They throw things away because newer models are more powerful, faster, smaller, more efficient, or aesthetically "cool." Right to repair will not result in less landfills.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#108

Post by brixon »

tiffanyh wrote: post #41

Devils advocate: Why is hardware treated different than software? If I own a perpetual license for some type of software, should I be entitled to “repair” the software I own. (Note: I’m not including SaaS in this since your don’t own that)

You have to first fight the battle that you do not own the software, but that you only have a license to use the software. If you win that, then you can fight for repair.

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#109

Post by xroche »

ourmandave wrote: post #2

Normally the next step would be a vote on an identical bill in the state’s Assembly. But Thursday is the last day of session for the NY legislature, and the bill has not yet escaped committee, making a vote by the full Assembly unlikely. The battle for fair repair in New York will continue into next year’s session, with a strong record of success. So eventually... maybe.

Louis Rossmann is more skeptical:

Right to Repair bill PASSES in NY state senate! What now? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX6BVQe6Tq4

TL;DR: Low probability than anything will happen before next year

Re: New York Senate passes Right to Repair bill

#110

Post by hutzlibu »

hughrr wrote: post #103
hutzlibu wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of mature, self-responsible people. Who can be trusted to make decisions by themself. And the right to repair aims not, that everyone should fix their devices by themself, but that everyone who is capable, has the possibility to do so. Like repair shops. Or skilled individuals. And those who think they are more competent, than they actually are ... find always ways of shooting themself in the foot. I…

I think if you look at the actual current state of the repair industry it’d scare you off the idea fairly quickly. There are very few competent people and even fewer business where competence is promoted. I’m going to slap Rossman here as well who does some pretty scary hack jobbery and passes it off as a fit for purpose repair rather than a data recovery last resort.

Well, I know my part of bad stories, too.

But I think, with removing barriers, the repair industry should improve and rather decline.

Post reply on HN