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

371–380 of 478 posts

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

#371

Post by tripzilch »

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…

This is the dumbest thing ever. Sonos never receives the materials so you don't get credit "for recycling your speakers for materials", they somehow give you credits for destroying a piece of hardware so that it cannot be reused.

They literally get nothing, except to make their devices more rare by having old ones bricked. Which is WRONG, in this world of increasing waste.

Your idea that this somehow overall is a good set of incentives seems to be based on two things: One, that people would otherwise just throw them in the trash, which isn't true. Two, that it's somehow a good thing to give customers the choice to brick it for no other reason than Sonos credit.

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

#372

Post by tripzilch »

whoisjuan wrote: post #219
song wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People understand the purpose of it quite well. They just completely disagree with your analysis. First, the most environmental form of recycling is for an object to be reused as is. So, if any item is given to a recycling center, if the recycling center can just sell it directly to someone else, then it's much more environmentally friendly. Second, the credit doesn't encourage people to recycle them at all instead o…

> So, if any item is given to a recycling center, if the recycling center can just sell it directly to someone else, then it's much more environmentally friendly. I think OP's analysis did cover that. You don't have to put it in the recycle mode. You can sell it yourself or choose not to get the credit so someone else can "Recycle" it by reusing it. I do agree with you that people could still put in the trash, but I…

There's a very nice graphic in the Twitter thread showing "reduce > re-use > recycle > trash". They are different things, so let's not make things extra confusing by saying "recycle by reusing".

Anyway, what Sonos is incentivizing through their credit is to make people choose the option "recycle or trash". They have no incentive to make people choose one over the other. And as already mentioned elsewhere in the thread, many recycling centres won't take a completely bricked device, so I think it's pretty fair to say that in practice what Sonos is incentivizing is for people to first brick, then TRASH the device in exchange for these credits.

Either way, Sonos is actively dis-incentivizing the "re-use" option, which is the most environmentally friendly one.

And the only reason they do this is their profit.

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

#373

Post by acomjean »

davidjhall wrote: post #181
throwaway100773 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im in the market for sound equipment. I just crossed these guys off my list.

I'm curious what you would recommend instead. Everyone is listing speakers they bought decades ago but what are the latest non-sonos speakers that people like?

I usually use a mini jack and and old stereo.

but “powered stereo speakers” are speakers with a built in amp. Most have analog inputs and Bluetooth (some even have turntable input). They can range in price up to almost 1000$.

I feel those analog inputs are important in making the device future proof.

Crutchfeild is a catalog seller but has good examples of this class of speaker:

Eg: https://www.crutchfield.com/S-wbA54LW1kow/g_463050/Powered-S...

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

#374

Post by tripzilch »

danShumway wrote: post #272
thaumasiotes wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

"told by Sonos support that there's no way to stop the countdown" really means "can't", though.

It's purely our own cynicism on the respectability of companies that we assume it probably really means "won't".

We can accept that when customer support says "can't", it means "won't". But we can also hold them to some, any kind of standard.

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

#375

Post by jessaustin »

michaelmrose wrote: post #55
jjtheblunt wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When expensive devices have to "phone home" to first be enabled, that kills the aftermarket for stolen expensive devices?

I feel bad about it but I rather wish it worked this way for expensive power tools. I don't want permanent drm for tools I just want a one time lock that is forever disabled upon purchase. Perhaps electronically while being purchased.

I can't imagine any of the contractors I've hired successfully navigating the setup for DRM-enabled power tools, let alone the inevitable hiccups when working in unnetworked areas etc. I'm not talking about Harbor Freight scumbags like myself. I'm talking about the valuable trend followers who have a new cordless from Dewalt or Ryobi or Milwaukee every six months and buy more expensive items regularly as well. Those guys cannot handle DRM shenanigans, and will forever despise with a burning passion any firm that inflicts such upon them.

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

#376

Post by tripzilch »

rmtech wrote: post #365
echelon wrote: post #144

This could go very bad for Sonos. Imagine a virus that looks for Sonos devices on a network and bricks them all via "recycle mode"! The API probably isn't even locked down. I think it's unauthenticated SOAP/UPnP. An even dumber attack: guests with your wifi credentials can download the Sonos app and break your gear. It's entirely unauthenticated.

> Imagine a virus that looks for Sonos devices on a network and bricks them all via "recycle mode"! This would be an incredible public service. Unfortunately I don't have the skills to do it so I won't.

I mean it really wouldn't, because the virus would be dooming the devices to go into "recycle or trash" option, instead of the "reuse" option.

And otherwise it would just piss off Sonos owners?

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

#377

Post by tripzilch »

baybal2 wrote: post #7

Well, this is where the industry is going. The latest buzzword we hear in the industry is called "product as a service" — you buy a product, but still don't own it. You have to keep paying them for using your own property or else they remotely brick the device. First gen Ipods were a prime example, but now everybody seem to want to do the same. We recently had a prospective client who had an idea of very cheap intern…

> The latest buzzword we hear in the industry is called "product as a service" — you buy a product, but still don't own it.

That's so 2019 :-P

Today it's "consumer as a product" -- you buy a product, they own YOU.

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

#378

Post by ivanhoe »

I'm very much DIY guy and hate it when companies block users from doing whatever they want with their equipment, but this is a special case. User gets the discount from Sonos for recycling the old equipment, and thus user doesn't own it anymore. It belongs to Sonos now as they bought it back, and of course they don't want it resold half-price by 3rd party, it's a competition to their new products. To me it seems perfectly legit, as long as you get a discount for that. And the equipment can still be recycled and resold for parts, they don't block that.

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

#379

Post by Wowfunhappy »

ivanhoe wrote: post #378

I'm very much DIY guy and hate it when companies block users from doing whatever they want with their equipment, but this is a special case. User gets the discount from Sonos for recycling the old equipment, and thus user doesn't own it anymore. It belongs to Sonos now as they bought it back, and of course they don't want it resold half-price by 3rd party, it's a competition to their new products. To me it seems perf…

It makes sense for Sonos. It’s also environmentally terrible.

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

#380

Post by [deleted] »

kristianc wrote: post #67
baybal2 wrote: post #7

Well, this is where the industry is going. The latest buzzword we hear in the industry is called "product as a service" — you buy a product, but still don't own it. You have to keep paying them for using your own property or else they remotely brick the device. First gen Ipods were a prime example, but now everybody seem to want to do the same. We recently had a prospective client who had an idea of very cheap intern…

> You buy a product, but still don't own it, and have to keep your subscription going so the seller don't remotely brick your device. That’s absolutely not what’s happening here. I paid £169 for my Play:1 five years ago, and it’s still working as well as the day I bought it. I haven’t paid them a penny since. This eco trade in may be a bit sketchy but absolutely no one’s device is being bricked without their consent.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN