4 ms·

This is great news. Of course, it remains to be seen if the law is implemented in a sensible manner, and given recent tech laws from the EU I'd give that about

This is great news. Of course, it remains to be seen if the law is implemented in a sensible manner, and given recent tech laws from the EU I'd give that about 50/50 odds. However, as someone who likes to repair electronics, so often when I open something up it's clear that it was designed to be unrepairable. Impossible to open without breaking something, unnecessary glue everywhere, and so on. It's time this was recognized as the ecological disaster that it is and made illegal. Even a poorly implemented law is a step in the right direction here. And before someone chimes in - it is possible to create small, thin, lightweight electronics and still have them be repairable. However, this law will also apply to bigger machinery like farming equipment, fridges, cars, and so on.

alexf95 6y ago
Your last point is very important, as it covers the biggest offenders of being replaced way too often in regard to how often they should have been replaced. Smaller machines make smaller waste (even tho they might sometimes create more dangerous waste e.g. phone batteries.)
- esperent 6y ago
  > e.g. phone batteries In another few years most vehicles will be battery powered too, with much bigger batteries.
Symbiote 6y ago
France is now requiring repairability scores on electronics. This was posted a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26279350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26279350
- southerntofu 6y ago
  That is true but the scoring system is not user-friendly. Linear progress makes sense for actual evaluation, but for user recommendation only an exponential progress makes sense. For instance, iPhones are terrible to repair yet come up with 6/10 score. A user would think it's not that bad. But it is that bad, 6/10 in evaluation should be 0/10 for end-users information (only >9/10 should be considered any good). Also, in my view it should be a criminal offense and a crime against nature/humanity to build a product that's explicitly designed not to be repairable. But well, we're not quite there yet.
  - sam_lowry_ 6y ago
    Only after bitcoin mining becomes criminal offense.
    - southerntofu 6y ago
      Well that's another topic. I'm strongly opposed to Bitcoin for many reasons (buyer's privacy is not one of those), but i don't place it on the same level: Bitcoin did not undergo any planned obsolescence (which was my initial point), it just did not take ecological matters into consideration at all. Negligence is in my view not the same as hostility. Also, Bitcoin is only a problem because our worldwide economic system is so fucked up noone can trust a government/bank with their money. We need to fix the actual problem (not the symptom), either by getting rid of money entirely, or by building a fair economic system.
      - 411111111111111 6y ago
        I do trust my bank way more then I'd trust any crypto exchange. I hope something like gnu taler becomes a standard that all banks use and shops are required to accept. I doubt it's gonna happen anytime soon though. Though that e-euro does sound promising, I guess we will see.
- esperent 6y ago
  I recently noticed that theguardian.com has factored sustainability into their product reviews and drops a star or two if the product is not repairable. That's great, and I hope more publications start to do this.
  - CaptainZapp 6y ago
    Here's a great example from yesterday: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/03/fitbit-sense-review-smartwatch-health-fitness-tracking-screen-battery https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/03/fitbit-se...
Shivetya 6y ago
tl;dr I am saying the right to repair is good. however, I guarantee we over estimate how many have been impacted and in which categories it most occurs and more than a few here are aiming for right to upgrade. right to repair laws need to exist to ensure going forward we don't go backward and that authorized individuals can secure the parts that could be replaced. we live in a world where anything from a phone to big screen tv can be made anywhere in the world and sold anywhere else. a lot of that comes from reducing manufacturing to as few components as possible leaving only large assemblies as being replaceable. Now these laws need to leave open the ability to use 3rd party replacement parts and re manufactured parts Let us look at our phones. Even if the case could be opened easily you have at most four to five truly discreet components that could fail and be replaced. Front glass, rear panel, circuit board, battery, and ?. I would love to see failure rates of each component, just want are companies fixing under warranty? Having that published would be very valuable. Now I took our phones as an example but even laptops are not that far off. Being able to repair is not the same as being able to upgrade and many want the later. However that could put you straight outside of any warranty in the first place. So playing with a modern day no moving parts except at most a fan you have the system case, display panel, battery, and logic board. Even if a manufacturer made it so you could replace memory and drive it could all be limited to only the capacities they sell for that sku. hell they could use non standard connectors internally to thwart it and ease manufacturing. as for appliances and big ticket house hold items from stoves, refrigerators, to TVs what do we get? what breaks in appliances? burners, circuit boards, compressors, pumps, and such. note : I work in the automotive parts industry and the right to repair vehicles is very important to us and others. I truly believe the laws are needed but I think people's expectations of what can be repaired in the realm of small electronics is unrealistic as many items are outside of the case four or five discreet assemblies
- esperent 6y ago
  > hell they could use non standard connectors The EU also has a law to require standard charging cables in the works. They could expand that to include other components. > Front glass, rear panel, circuit board, battery, and ?. In my experience, the part that breaks first through normal wear and tear is the charging port. The part that breaks the most overall is the screen, but that's by being dropped.

alexf95 6y ago

Your last point is very important, as it covers the biggest offenders of being replaced way too often in regard to how often they should have been replaced. Smaller machines make smaller waste (even tho they might sometimes create more dangerous waste e.g. phone batteries.)

esperent 6y ago
> e.g. phone batteries In another few years most vehicles will be battery powered too, with much bigger batteries.

Symbiote 6y ago

France is now requiring repairability scores on electronics. This was posted a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26279350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26279350

southerntofu 6y ago
That is true but the scoring system is not user-friendly. Linear progress makes sense for actual evaluation, but for user recommendation only an exponential progress makes sense. For instance, iPhones are terrible to repair yet come up with 6/10 score. A user would think it's not that bad. But it is that bad, 6/10 in evaluation should be 0/10 for end-users information (only >9/10 should be considered any good). Also, in my view it should be a criminal offense and a crime against nature/humanity to build a product that's explicitly designed not to be repairable. But well, we're not quite there yet.
- sam_lowry_ 6y ago
  Only after bitcoin mining becomes criminal offense.
  - southerntofu 6y ago
    Well that's another topic. I'm strongly opposed to Bitcoin for many reasons (buyer's privacy is not one of those), but i don't place it on the same level: Bitcoin did not undergo any planned obsolescence (which was my initial point), it just did not take ecological matters into consideration at all. Negligence is in my view not the same as hostility. Also, Bitcoin is only a problem because our worldwide economic system is so fucked up noone can trust a government/bank with their money. We need to fix the actual problem (not the symptom), either by getting rid of money entirely, or by building a fair economic system.
    - 411111111111111 6y ago
      I do trust my bank way more then I'd trust any crypto exchange. I hope something like gnu taler becomes a standard that all banks use and shops are required to accept. I doubt it's gonna happen anytime soon though. Though that e-euro does sound promising, I guess we will see.
esperent 6y ago
I recently noticed that theguardian.com has factored sustainability into their product reviews and drops a star or two if the product is not repairable. That's great, and I hope more publications start to do this.
- CaptainZapp 6y ago
  Here's a great example from yesterday: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/03/fitbit-sense-review-smartwatch-health-fitness-tracking-screen-battery https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/mar/03/fitbit-se...

Shivetya 6y ago

tl;dr I am saying the right to repair is good. however, I guarantee we over estimate how many have been impacted and in which categories it most occurs and more than a few here are aiming for right to upgrade. right to repair laws need to exist to ensure going forward we don't go backward and that authorized individuals can secure the parts that could be replaced. we live in a world where anything from a phone to big screen tv can be made anywhere in the world and sold anywhere else. a lot of that comes from reducing manufacturing to as few components as possible leaving only large assemblies as being replaceable. Now these laws need to leave open the ability to use 3rd party replacement parts and re manufactured parts Let us look at our phones. Even if the case could be opened easily you have at most four to five truly discreet components that could fail and be replaced. Front glass, rear panel, circuit board, battery, and ?. I would love to see failure rates of each component, just want are companies fixing under warranty? Having that published would be very valuable. Now I took our phones as an example but even laptops are not that far off. Being able to repair is not the same as being able to upgrade and many want the later. However that could put you straight outside of any warranty in the first place. So playing with a modern day no moving parts except at most a fan you have the system case, display panel, battery, and logic board. Even if a manufacturer made it so you could replace memory and drive it could all be limited to only the capacities they sell for that sku. hell they could use non standard connectors internally to thwart it and ease manufacturing. as for appliances and big ticket house hold items from stoves, refrigerators, to TVs what do we get? what breaks in appliances? burners, circuit boards, compressors, pumps, and such. note : I work in the automotive parts industry and the right to repair vehicles is very important to us and others. I truly believe the laws are needed but I think people's expectations of what can be repaired in the realm of small electronics is unrealistic as many items are outside of the case four or five discreet assemblies

esperent 6y ago
> hell they could use non standard connectors The EU also has a law to require standard charging cables in the works. They could expand that to include other components. > Front glass, rear panel, circuit board, battery, and ?. In my experience, the part that breaks first through normal wear and tear is the charging port. The part that breaks the most overall is the screen, but that's by being dropped.