31–40 of 177 posts
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.
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.
Here is the bill for consumer electronics: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/?BillNumber=1483&Year=202... Text as passed (for pasting into LLM :)): https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Ho... I wondered what it would mean for small manufacturers and they are not exempt however o3 believes "in practice, your duty is limited to providing whatever service manuals, firmware-pairing utilities, and spa…
Why would anyone believe that spare parts would need to be provided at cost? I’m a proponent of right to repair, but that would be an absurd over-step (and be a strong force to ensure that no spare parts are available to anyone).
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.
They do. By making the parts needed for repairs unavailable to you. And by making it really hard for other manufacturers to make compatible parts.
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Ho...
It's only 12 pages and is easy to understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would anyone believe that spare parts would need to be provided at cost? I’m a proponent of right to repair, but that would be an absurd over-step (and be a strong force to ensure that no spare parts are available to anyone).
IDK about "at cost" but shouldn't _some_ price regulation of spare parts be included? With no limits, any manufacturer might say "The price for any spare part is the cost of the original item + a significant additional fee, because our process will be to pull a complete new unit from the warehouse, and have someone disassemble it and send you the one part."
Typically nobody would actually go through with placing any orders beyond that point, unless they’re the pentagon.
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.
> a soldier struggling with a broken generator Are there generators you can't fix right now? I assumed most of them are pretty basic designs, an ICE with either an inverter or non-inverter generator. You can look up how to tear them down and repair them step by step on YouTube (including commercial units)
> a soldier struggling with a broken generator Are there generators you can't fix right now? I assumed most of them are pretty basic designs, an ICE with either an inverter or non-inverter generator. You can look up how to tear them down and repair them step by step on YouTube (including commercial units)
I just had a new 48kw generator installed on my property and it was a nightmare with Generac. It's apparently a new model and it took them 4 tries to get the right controller sent to the tech to get it up and running.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would anyone believe that spare parts would need to be provided at cost? I’m a proponent of right to repair, but that would be an absurd over-step (and be a strong force to ensure that no spare parts are available to anyone).
Actually this is probably the best way to ensure that price gouging does not happen. The fixed and NRE costs are already included in the price of the original device. Charging those again for replacements would be double-dipping. And the law still leaves it up to OEMs to decide how to cost the replacement, so there's some wiggle room there. This is an intelligently crafted bill.
The main point I made is the upthread summary (which appears to be unreviewed ChatGPT spew, adding noise rather than signal to the discussion) of the law is incorrect in an obvious way that the actual bill is not.