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

Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 478 posts

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#271

Post by lostlogin »

haimez wrote: post #233
tasty_freeze wrote: post #52

About 8(?) years ago my wife tasked me to get a whole-house audio system that was simple to use. After reading a lot, sonos was the clear choice, though pricey. We started with two play:3's, then added a play:5 and two more play:3's. And things were good. But for the past year the system has been a mess. Music stutters, some units can't be found, some units fail to upgrade through multiple retries/reboots. I've waste…

Honestly, sounds like you need a better wireless router or need to add a (few) repeater(s).

And if you do this, be aware of the Unifi V Sonos thing. I just ran Ethernet to avoid such problems.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#272

Post by danShumway »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #264
MegaDeKay wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the thread in that tweet: "To add insult to injury, there are complaints on Sonos' support forums from people who've managed to accidentally put their devices into recycling mode, and been told by Sonos support that there's no way to stop the countdown, forcing them to buy new devices after 21 days." and "From what our eBay guy can tell, the bricking isn't even in hardware; you can't recover it if you're good wi…

> been told by Sonos support that there's no way to stop the countdown, forcing them to buy new devices after 21 days > you can't recover it if you're good with JTAG, because it's blacklisted as "recycled" on their servers. There's nothing stopping these things from working except Sonos says they can't. These two points are not compatible with each other. If the only effect of recycle mode is that the device gets bla…

They're perfectly compatible with each other. Sonos can stop the countdown, but won't.

You should of course be cautious about assuming a cursory look from a 3rd party is enough to know for certain how the device is bricked, but it's not abnormal or weird for a business like Sonos to use a half-baked technical strategy to brick their devices, and then to just stonewall anyone who calls into support.

Half of the time that a company says, "there's no way for us to do X", what they really mean is, "please go away now."

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#273

Post by zeta0134 »

hanniabu wrote: post #249
nialv7 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they really want to encourage reuse of their devices, why would they incentivize the users to turn their devices into unusable trash by giving them credits for doing that? > but I also think that's where good recycling programs matter. However good your recycling program is, it is still going to be _strictly more_ wasteful than simply reusing the device.

> If they really want to encourage reuse of their devices, why would they incentivize the users to turn their devices into unusable trash by giving them credits for doing that? It's another alternative. Some people just won't bother trying to resell it.

This is covered in the Twitter thread. Individual consumers might not go through the hassle, but a recycling center totally will: they tend to have market connections to refurbish used equipment, and prefer that option because they know it's more sustainable than scrapping perfectly good hardware for raw materials.

If the device works, and someone else wants it, then it has been recycled very efficiently. Sonos policy here is backwards.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#275

Post by Aeolun »

hnuser123456 wrote: post #229
Aeolun wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The end result of all this is to say Sonos doesn’t give a whit about the environment though. If that was the case they would allow someone at the recycle center to buy their old equipment, and the original owner to buy a new one with a discount (for being a loyal customer, and presumably still making a profit).

Why would a recycling center want to buy anything? It's a recycling center, not a pawn/thrift shop. How does Sonos not care about the environment unless they do something completely and utterly nonsense?

No, I meant one person drops their working stuff off at the recycling center to get rid of it, and if the recycling center finds that it’s still functional and worth something, they can sell it to cover their costs.

This was what was described in the grandparent comment.

In the case of Sonos the only thing the recycling center receives are bricks.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#276

Post by beering »

blackflame wrote: post #226
scoot wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do to surround sound what 3D glasses did for the TV reply So, nothing, at the end of the day?

Perhaps not the best analogy, but the ability to make an explosion happen over your head instead of from the front left and center is a marked improvement

You could just put speakers in your ceiling. But given how people have trouble telling whether sounds are coming from above or below them anyways, I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#277

Post by danShumway »

crazygringo wrote: post #203

It seems like a lot of commenters here (as well as the tweets) are totally missing the purpose of the recycle mode. If you want to sell, give away, or otherwise let someone else reuse your Sonos, then DON'T PUT IT IN RECYCLE MODE . Easy peasy. Recycle mode exists for when you intentionally want to get a Sonos trade-in credit for recycling your speakers for materials . But because you don't send the speakers directly…

> But because you don't send the speakers directly to Sonos (instead to a local recycler), they have to trust you're actually recycling it instead of keeping it or selling it.

And to be clear, either keeping it or reselling it would be better for the environment than recycling the device. It's completely backwards to design an environmental program around making sure that people don't secretly do the right thing behind your back.

The fact that there are multiple highly-rated comments on HN looking at resellers and saying, "well, obviously they shouldn't get Sonos credits" shows how poor of a job our society is doing educating people about how reduce-reuse-recycle actually works. You don't have to check for people abusing the system. The people abusing the system are the environmental success stories. If a bunch of people participate in the trade-up program and then secretly resell their devices, that is a good thing that should be celebrated.

If anything, Sonos should be offering more credit to those people, not less.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#278

Post by hakfoo »

noodlesUK wrote: post #10

What’s intensely frustrating about this is that audio equipment is one of the few areas where old high end kit is still absolutely fantastic for current users. I have an NAD 3020 from the 1980s which works perfectly with the same pair of speakers that it was bought with. I can’t say the same about other tech, but audio just doesn’t age at the same speed.

I think one of the interesting aspects is that performance plateaued in a lot of ways.

If you look at the S/N and distortion specs on a new affordably priced receiver, they won't be meaningfully better than a mid-range unit from the late 70s/early 80s. All the new HDMI and 20.7 Dolby Surround does nothing for two-channel MP3s or CDs.

Because the performance is equal, it's allowed build quality to shine. 15kg of heatsinks, capacitors the size of Coke cans, and big old TO-3 transistors are probably going to outlast propriatery digital doodads and amp-on-a-module designs built to minimize costs.

I'm more of a JVC fanboy myself, but I've been working on a Kenwood KR-6200 recently. 45 years old and one dead bulb. Unacceptable!

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#279

Post by tech234a »

ficklepickle wrote: post #153
hermitdev wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS is very aggressive with this in their Windows 10 development VM images you can download. Theyre free, but they only last 3 months. There doesnt appear to be anyway to activate - even if you have a legit license key through my.visualstudio.com. The VM prebuilt with VStudio, Visual Studio Code, WSL w/ Ubuntu and other goodies in a prebuilt image is attractive and a time saver. But, it's immediately on a kill switch…

I just take a snapshot then revert after 90 days. Seems to work. I vaguely remember MS docs suggesting this. You can also refresh them with a powershell command a limited number of times IIRC.

I think it was in the instructions for using the Internet Explorer/Edge VMs (see page 3): https://az792536.vo.msecnd.net/vms/release_notes_license_ter...

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#280

Post by danShumway »

Hackbraten wrote: post #251
userbinator wrote: post #106

If there's a demand, someone industrious will likely figure out a hack --- I hope. Server-side blacklisting (unlike whitelisting) doesn't stop someone from simply changing whatever unique ID they have to a different one. I can even see repair shops doing this service for those who accidentally bricked their devices. This reminds me of a related situation I've seen with electric toothbrushes --- they have instructions…

I disagree. Electric toothbrushes need to be 100 % waterproof to be usable safely. If I were a toothbrush manufacturer, I’d at least look into making the brush self-destruct when opened, for safety reasons (and safety reasons alone).

Is this true? My electric toothbrush runs on one double-A battery. That isn't enough power to electrocute me.

Of course, high-end electric toothbrushes have rechargeable batteries inside of them, and maybe they have more capacity. But on that note, I think I've needed to replace my battery exactly once in the past year. These things don't take much power, that's one of the reasons it didn't feel worthwhile for me to upgrade to a higher-end more expensive model. And rechargeable electric toothbrushes get plugged into cradles -- they don't need enough capacity to run for days and days.

I am mildly skeptical that a non-waterproof electric toothbrush would be dangerous to anyone.

Edit: I just checked my toothbrush to make sure, the only waterproofing is a tiny, easily removable rubber ring where the battery case screws on. This doesn't seem to be something my manufacturer is worried about, which might make sense, because I don't put my toothbrush handle under the water when I brush my teeth; I hold it.

Post reply on HN