141–150 of 177 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Low earth orbit broadband gear" is incredibly specific lol, I believe there's exactly 2 companies with large offices in Washington that would apply to.
Doesn't that include all home Starlink devices?
you have to incentivize the market to build repairable products. the proper solution is the complete removal of software and hardware patents or copyright. our age is control of production, everythings been engineered already.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very interesting, there's a carveout for video game consoles: > Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require any original manufacturer or authorized repair provider to make available any parts, tools, or documentation required for the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of a video game console and its components and peripherals. Wonder if Valve/Xbox/Nintendo asked for that, this being Washington State.
This is a result of there being a general consensus that video game consoles are "a thing" that we are all used to, and that the loosely-coupled movements of right-to-repair and antitrust are not seeking to disrupt the video game industry for fear of distracting from their larger goals. It's an uneasy balance and it will be interesting to see where it goes once the dust settles on the current antitrust actions agains…
I might need an ELI5 here. "Right to repair" as in "right to choose someone who repairs"? Don't think anyone stops you from repairing your own stuff yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Consumers have no choice, so they better prefer it. 2. These anti-repair practices are anti-consumer, because they're specifically designed to make the process more difficult and expensive for consumers. 3. This is sort of along the lines of planned obsolescence. The reality is that making your product shittier on purpose is actually a viable business strategy when you have decent market share. It shouldn't be.
1. They do have a choice. No one is forcing them to buy a specific product. 2. A product who is more complicated and expensive to repair is not necessarily a worse product. This could be a trade off in favor of something consumers value more. 3. It's normal to target a lifespan for a product. For mature products ignoring it is a sign of amateurs. This is not the same thing as making a product bad on purpose.
2. Sure, but this is not why it's being done. It can be a trade-off, but we have to be honest and acknowledge that a lot of products are specifically made worse because you can make more money that way. Anti-repair is a racketeering scheme first, any other "benefits" are secondary. That doesn't mean they aren't real benefits, but it does mean that they were never the intention.
3. Planned obsolesce is the same as making a product worse on purpose to make more money. That doesn't mean that targeting a lifespan is bad. But when you shift from making washing machines that last 20 years to ones that last 5, that's an intentional choice to get more money from consumers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phone part sounds great, the wheel chair portion sounds like it will just make wheel chairs more expensive. Wheelchairs are generally already highly repairable, and this will just reduce the options to consumers
High end wheelchairs are the opposite of repairable. A friend of mine has to use one because of his disability. It was the only model that met his particular needs for his disability, and was around 14k when he bought it. He can't even change the battery pack without sending it back to the company. The horn shorted out, and if we had disabled it (he can't even use it), it would've voided the entire warranty. Fuck, on…
The Magnuson-Moss Act pretty surely falsifies that claim by the manufacturer.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warran...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is interest, but thanks to DMCA 1201 they put a thin veneer of encryption on it and suddenly it's a felony to make/use that third party tool.
We could, of course, repeal DMCA section 1201, but no one in government wants to do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very interesting, there's a carveout for video game consoles: > Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require any original manufacturer or authorized repair provider to make available any parts, tools, or documentation required for the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of a video game console and its components and peripherals. Wonder if Valve/Xbox/Nintendo asked for that, this being Washington State.
Given the support valve provides for the steam deck I'd be surprised if it was them. They seem much more interested in having a viable alternative to keep Microsoft from walling windows in such a way to kill steam than caring that they make the actual devices. I would 100% percent expect both Microsoft & Nintendo to have had a hand in that though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no such restriction in the law. The relevant section reads like this, section 3: > an original manufacturer may not use parts pairing to: ... Cause a digital electronic product to display misleading alerts or warnings about unidentified parts, which the owner cannot immediately dismiss. So of course there can still be a notice, it just has to be dismissable. But Apple (the main company using part pairing aga…
Sorry, I can't parse the multiple negatives of "hopefully this doesn't mean they can't.." followed by "there's no such restriction". I legitimately share the parent's concern. In a related matter, insurance companies are allowed to force me to accept non-OEM parts when my car is repaired. It sucks that someone can crash into me, and force me into taking sub-standard parts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be needlessly pedantic, fuel injection does require a micro. I only say this because I deal with classic Bosch K-Jet systems often.
I assume you meant to say does not require a microcontroller, given that Bosch K is a mechanical FI system.
The early electronic components were not reliable in an underhood environment and were not easily modified as engine control requirements advanced. Most of the 35 vehicles originally equipped with Electrojector were retrofitted with 4-barrel carburetors.