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

Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

reasonstobecheerful.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 366 posts

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#291

Post by chrisseaton »

riversflow wrote: post #290
chrisseaton wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best thing a manufacturer could do is create a bomb proof smartphone that will be usable forever. This is illogical. Smartphones become obsolete for technology reasons even if they're bomb proof and usable forever. So they need to recyclable (or components reusable) as the priority. Old Nokias were built to last and still work.. but they're e-waste because they're obsolete for the purposes almost everyone needs…

I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete. If we came anywhere close to most phones lasting until they are outmoded we’d be doing good.

> broken far far more phones

Maybe just be more careful? 'Take reasonable care of your things' should possibly come between reduce, and reuse-recycle.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#292

Post by jojobas »

macinjosh wrote: post #289

Europe is guaranteeing products are more expensive and further out of reach for the poor.

Car repairability standards have been there forever and some say there are more cars than there should be.

Making things repairable impacts their size much more than manufacturing cost (which is typically about 25-40% of retail price for electronics).

Phones etc working for longer means fewer sales in the long run and I'm OK with that.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#293

Post by corty »

ekianjo wrote: post #264
corty wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany has had this for years. Producers have to pay a recycling fee covering the disposal of the packaging they use. The yellow garbage can for recyclables is paid for by that fee. Also, merchants have to take back and dispose of any packaging they sell or use to ship. Hasn't really helped, amount of packaging is still increasing.

> amount of packaging is still increasing. So in practice you pay more for nothing?

Not sure, theoretically the cost should just have shifted from the garbage can fees to the increase in product prices. But of course the garbage can fees are steadily rising...

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#294

Post by google234123 »

riversflow wrote: post #290
chrisseaton wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best thing a manufacturer could do is create a bomb proof smartphone that will be usable forever. This is illogical. Smartphones become obsolete for technology reasons even if they're bomb proof and usable forever. So they need to recyclable (or components reusable) as the priority. Old Nokias were built to last and still work.. but they're e-waste because they're obsolete for the purposes almost everyone needs…

I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete. If we came anywhere close to most phones lasting until they are outmoded we’d be doing good.

How abotu you buy a case and screen protector?

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#295

Post by google234123 »

rlpb wrote: post #44
recursivedoubts wrote: post #14

A proposal: All durable consumer goods may apply for a repair QR code. At landfills, items with repair QR codes are scanned and the company is charged 50% of the cost of processing the item. If one is not applied for, the producer must pay the full cost of processing the item up front. This would encourage companies to make repair & upgrade and longetivity a priority. It's a rough idea.

How about this, along the same lines: Manufacturers must pay 100% of the cost of safe, environmental disposal of all consumer goods they sell. This is collected in the form of a tax, for all manufacturers over some threshold sales value/volume, based on an impact assessment of disposal cost. The assessment is based on the typical practical burden to disposal facilities to process each SKU. There's no need to individu…

Well, that cost will be zero since a landfill in the middle of a desert will hold the trash perfectly fine and safely./

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#296

Post by ogre_codes »

riversflow wrote: post #290
chrisseaton wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best thing a manufacturer could do is create a bomb proof smartphone that will be usable forever. This is illogical. Smartphones become obsolete for technology reasons even if they're bomb proof and usable forever. So they need to recyclable (or components reusable) as the priority. Old Nokias were built to last and still work.. but they're e-waste because they're obsolete for the purposes almost everyone needs…

I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete. If we came anywhere close to most phones lasting until they are outmoded we’d be doing good.

> I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete.

This isn't just about smartphones. Table life cycles are much longer. Many of my phones and all of my tablets have outlasted the Android upgrade cycle.

Personally I don't see why it shouldn't be both (or better all three). A device that lasts long, is upgraded consistently, and the manufacturer recycles the components.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#297

Post by lotsofpulp »

corty wrote: post #266
toper-centage wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not something we can control effectively as consumers. My supermarket sells fruits and vegetables mostly pre-packaged. Fees are not enough, we need to make this kind of barely useful plastic containers illegal. Potatoes don't need to come in plastic containers.

Yes. The "make producers pay" trope is also a fallacy imho. Packaging cost is just passed through the price to the consumer. Packaging and recycling are quite cheap for most products, so unpackaged goods are barely cheaper (often even more expensive, since enviromentally conscious stuff is "premium"). And unpackaged goods are damaged more often than properly packaged ones, so they'll rot on the shelves to be thrown a…

> The "make producers pay" trope is also a fallacy imho. Packaging cost is just passed through the price to the consumer. Packaging and recycling are quite cheap for most products, so unpackaged goods are barely cheaper (often even more expensive, since enviromentally conscious stuff is "premium").

It’s not a fallacy. The tax is just too low. Keep raising the tax on plastic until it curbs behavior, problem solved.

The real problem is this is an unpopular solution, as most people like the convenience of plastic, and therefore politically untenable.

It’s always been a simple solution. Keep increasing tax on fossil fuels until it reduces consumption. But that means people giving up their large spread out homes and vacations and large vehicles and plastic wrapped goods. Therefore it hasn’t happened, and probably won’t until the environment changes enough to force people.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#298

Post by riversflow »

google234123 wrote: post #294
riversflow wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete. If we came anywhere close to most phones lasting until they are outmoded we’d be doing good.

How abotu you buy a case and screen protector?

I always use both. I live an active lifestyle.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#299

Post by stretchcat »

shwestrick wrote: post #284
riversflow wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The first and third should not be on equal footing with the second. What? >> 1) Making their things easy to repair. 2) Creating in house recycling programs. 3) Making equipment more durable and longer lasting I read as 1)Reuse 2)Recycle 3)Reduce. The best thing a manufacturer could do is create a bomb proof smartphone that will be usable forever.

I think you and @stretchcat are saying the same thing. Ease-of-repair and durability are more important than recycling.

Yes exactly. Recycling is better than nothing in cases where reuse or reduction aren't possible (many medical products probably fall under this category.) But reduction and reuse are preferable where possible.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#300

Post by saagarjha »

konha wrote: post #224
tjoff wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a consumer though you could also have bought it in a store or waited until you needed something else as well. I never understood the mindset of buying only a usb-stick or similar online. Yes, the waste is obnoxious, but the consumer isn't always innocent either.

Ordering 2 items from Amazon will almost certainly result in two separate packages being shipped to you. (At least that’s my experience here in Germany - YMMV.)

I have almost always gotten them in the same box. Often the box might be a little big, but when two things come from Amazon at the same time they invariably show up in the same box.
Post reply on HN