3 ms·

How would you legislate the desired result?

• xoa 8y ago
  For the "price should include lifespan" legislation in particular that would need to come out of extensive expert and general discussion. I certainly don't claim to know off the top of my head what would be the best solution. But I definitely think a reasonable approximation can be come up with, even if it's something as simple as "X months for every Y dollars capping at Z". Maybe a log formula or some categories would be worth it, or maybe not, but we can definitely do better then "1 year, and a few more for a bunch of extra money." If a $1k+ computer fails after 13 months it shouldn't cost someone a penny, whether its a 3rd party repair or not. How companies meet that obligation should be up to them, but it should be an obligation. Some no doubt will just work to make things easier and cheaper to repair, that's a totally valid way to cut their costs. Another approach is simply to invest more in chasing more 9s in QA. Maybe they just raise the price if they think the tradeoffs in more expensive repairs result in enough value. There won't be any one right solution, what matters is that the price paid ensures a reasonable lifespan. For the "owners can choose what level of control they" I think it's more straight forward, and involves a small group of players too. Manufacturers of devices that have hardware and/or software crypto stacks should simply be required to offer a model that will let the owner load their own root keys as well and have those be equally valid for authorizing either hardware, software, or both.