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

Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 175 posts

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#121

Post by passivate »

zsmi wrote: post #113
passivate wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't pollute the rivers, then you can avoid the "regulatory burden". If you don't serve food that contains poison, then you can avoid the "regulatory burden". If you don't sell cars whose brakes fail then you can completely avoid this "regulatory burden". If you're not a predatory lender then you can avoid this "regulatory burden".

This is not correct. For example, I designed my circuit so it meets EMC regulations and standards, like I should. I still have to file my paperwork with the FCC which definitely counts as a "regulatory burden".

I was merely responding to the parent comment that strongly implied all regulations were burdens. There are many of them that do make sense! Would you not agree? I mean, without that common ground, it would be hard to have a discussion from two extreme positions (X is all good, X is all bad)

I am not intimately familiar with the example you gave so I shall just take your word for it that it is a flaw in the system.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#122

Post by chrisseaton »

vbezhenar wrote: post #116
chrisseaton wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making components user replaceable rather than soldered in requires more connectors so more waste.

This is absurd. That is absolutely tiny connector which produces negligible amount of waste and could easily save the entire device from being dumped in trash.

Why would you dump the device in the trash? That's a bizarre thing to do with valuable components.

Take it to Apple or an authorised repairer, or have it recycled.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#123

Post by squarefoot »

a1371 wrote: post #76
underseacables wrote: post #70

I love Woz, but does he still retain any sway in the community? He has often spoke out in favor of things or against things but it doesn’t seem to really matter to the industry.

Yes it will matter a lot. Apple is one of the giants standing in the way of right to repair. Being able to say "Apple cofounder is with us" will be a huge convincing point for the general public. The plan is to put the right to repair on the ballot, so public support levels do matter.

"Apple cofounder is with us"

Not just the cofounder but the real genius behind all their early products. Jobs was excellent at selling great products, but it was Wozniak who engineered and built them that great. Unfortunately in this world it's the non technical people who always get more consideration compared to engineers. Bill Gates himself had good hardware/software knowledge having worked with embedded systems for traffic control before MS, yet he is only remembered as former Microsoft chief.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#124

Post by bengale »

larossmann wrote: post #114
bengale wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conflation of right to repair with other things might make the whole enterprise impossible. It's currently very difficult to claim support for something when the goalposts keep moving. I'm very much in support of companies being required to provide schematics, where reasonable. Also I see no reason why they should be able to stop manufacturers selling parts to repair shops. I don't think that forcing design choic…

Here's an interview I did with National Review where I discussed this topic. I'll include the exercpt that applies to your concern below. https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/a-computer-repair-exp... "So one example of what Right to Repair is not: The European Union, I believe, was looking to mandate that Apple use USB-C instead of Lightning, because USB-C is a standard and Lightning is not a standard. I don’t want…

I’m in the EU so that probably skews my view on it. Tbh every time I hear your take on right to repair I find it lines up with where I stand. The more that you can be pushed as the voice of right to repair the better. I think the vast majority could agree on this position.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#125

Post by dpkonofa »

MayeulC wrote: post #12

TL;DW: He's very supportive, and talks about how things used to be fixable and have plans included on paper, "open source". He says Apple II shipped with complete schematics and source code listings.

I hate to be that guy but this sounds very much like "old man recounts tales of how things were 'back in my day' to youngsters". The Apple II was not anywhere near as complex as the computers and devices we're talking about now and it wasn't wrapped up in the patents and chip licenses that nearly every piece of technology today is wrapped up in. You can't even have a DSP (digital signal processor) that would be repairable or that you could include schematics for without vioating any number of patents held by third-parties or patent trolls (and I'm not, in any way, saying that patent trolls aren't the spawn of the devil).

Apple wanted to make FaceTime open sourced and they couldn't because of a patent troll. I don't even think we can get into the complexity of today's hardware systems without running into any number of reasons why that stuff can't be "open-sourced". It's great that super-techy people want to be able to repair their own devices (and there's no reason currently why you can't) so I feel like the current right to repair movement, and especially people like Louis Rossman, are doing a huge disservice to the ideas behind people's actual rights to repair devices they buy when they conflate them with "open-source" and completely ignore the fact that 99% of people don't care.

Unless they find a way to show people what the upsides and downsides of the current situation are objectively, they're never going to get the support they need. As it stands, they're being misleading at best and downright lying at worst to try and push a narrative that gets to the end goal and, as soon as the lies come out, it'll push the momentum backwards instead of carrying it forward. The number of people with expertise to actually fix most of these issues with these complex devices is incredibly small and dwindling and opening that up to anyone and everyone without some kind of plan in place is just going to spectacularly backfire.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#126

Post by foerbert »

dpkonofa wrote: post #125
MayeulC wrote: post #12

TL;DW: He's very supportive, and talks about how things used to be fixable and have plans included on paper, "open source". He says Apple II shipped with complete schematics and source code listings.

I hate to be that guy but this sounds very much like "old man recounts tales of how things were 'back in my day' to youngsters". The Apple II was not anywhere near as complex as the computers and devices we're talking about now and it wasn't wrapped up in the patents and chip licenses that nearly every piece of technology today is wrapped up in. You can't even have a DSP (digital signal processor) that would be repai…

I'm not sure I understand why a schematic would violate a patent. As far as I'm aware, patents do not exist to make information secret, but to provide a temporary exclusive legal right in exchange for making the information public.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#127

Post by dpkonofa »

larossmann wrote: post #114
bengale wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conflation of right to repair with other things might make the whole enterprise impossible. It's currently very difficult to claim support for something when the goalposts keep moving. I'm very much in support of companies being required to provide schematics, where reasonable. Also I see no reason why they should be able to stop manufacturers selling parts to repair shops. I don't think that forcing design choic…

Here's an interview I did with National Review where I discussed this topic. I'll include the exercpt that applies to your concern below. https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/a-computer-repair-exp... "So one example of what Right to Repair is not: The European Union, I believe, was looking to mandate that Apple use USB-C instead of Lightning, because USB-C is a standard and Lightning is not a standard. I don’t want…

With respect, I think you're being disingenuous here and I think you know it. No one is telling customers "your phone is now a brick" when their charge port breaks and "right to repair", as a whole" does not have a fine handle on what's being advocated for. If it did, there wouldn't be so many different variations of understanding for "right to repair" actually is. The number of variations for it in the various bills being floating around is innumerable and there are very few people, and I'm excluding you in this, who aren't trying to push their desires for it for anything but selfish reasons.

I get that you're kinda the de-facto figurehead of the movement but let's not pretend that your reasons for supporting this are altruistic and that you're not pushing for this because you run a business that needs this to go through. Regardless of what companies we're talking about, your business would eventually go under if the current situation doesn't change so forgive me if I take everything you say with a grain of salt, especially considering that you've made misleading claims in your videos and ignore when people call you out on it. That, to me, is not the way to grow support for people's rights over the products they own. The only way to do that is to be blunt and honest about what the situation is on both sides and what the motivations for the two sides are. They are not irreconcilable.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#128

Post by mensetmanusman »

chrisseaton wrote: post #112
mensetmanusman wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shops in China can replace iPhone components with soldering using the proper equipment.

Great! So what’s the problem?

Apple doesn’t allow or release parts.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#129

Post by swiley »

chrisseaton wrote: post #112
mensetmanusman wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shops in China can replace iPhone components with soldering using the proper equipment.

Great! So what’s the problem?

Apple has made it illegal to obtain parts, people doing this have obtained the parts from other people who are breaking the law/contracts they signed.

Apple also uses software to disable replacing parts.

Re: Steve Wozniak speaks on Right to Repair [video]

#130

Post by dpkonofa »

foerbert wrote: post #126
dpkonofa wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be that guy but this sounds very much like "old man recounts tales of how things were 'back in my day' to youngsters". The Apple II was not anywhere near as complex as the computers and devices we're talking about now and it wasn't wrapped up in the patents and chip licenses that nearly every piece of technology today is wrapped up in. You can't even have a DSP (digital signal processor) that would be repai…

I'm not sure I understand why a schematic would violate a patent. As far as I'm aware, patents do not exist to make information secret, but to provide a temporary exclusive legal right in exchange for making the information public.

A schematic, in and of itself, may not violate a patent but providing a means for someone to create a part that requires software that's patented may open up people and companies to litigation that would kill them. Qualcomm, for example, holds patents for any number of chips that are in mobile devices from any tech company. A phone manufacturer, more than likely, wouldn't be able to provide schematics for their device that would include any details of how to repair that chip without having to defer to Qualcomm as it itself is only licensing that technology for production of their devices. Patents provide that exclusive legal right but, in most cases, don't extend that right to licensees. The whole situation is a mess.
Post reply on HN