4 ms·

> tech companies have attempted to tighten the control over how we use their devices. Our devices.

by MikeUt 6y ago

zepto 6y ago
Right to repair is nothing to do with ownership. It’s about forcing companies to provide services.
- MikeUt 6y ago
  I was commenting on the misleading phrasing, not the right to repair itself.
- Doxin 6y ago
  It's about forcing companies to not intentionally make devices unrepairable. Forcing companies to provide a firmware unlocking service is pretty silly. Forcing companies to stop locking legitimate users out of the firmware is a lot less silly. Forcing companies to provide repair parts is pretty silly. Stopping companies from killing 3rd party repair parts is a whole lot less silly. Forcing companies to sell specialty screwdrivers is pretty silly. Forcing companies to not use more expensive proprietary screws is a whole lot less silly. Most people aren't asking anyone to force companies to provide services. They are asking to force companies to stop annoying shenanigans that prevent repair.
  - zepto 6y ago
    These are false dichotomies: > Forcing companies to stop locking legitimate users out of the firmware is a lot less silly. This is a lot like the argument for giving the FBI a backdoor - the idea that the computer can easily be open for the good guys while being secure against the unauthorized intrusions. Not so. > They are asking to force companies to stop annoying shenanigans that prevent repair. That’s really just dismissive invective. What you call ‘annoying shenanigans’ are highly desirable security features wanted by most consumers.
    - Doxin 6y ago
      It's perfectly possible to have open and secure firmware simultaneously. You could e.g. force a wipe of encryption keys when unlocking the firmware like chromebooks do. That way you can meddle with the firmware to your hearts content and not leak any personal data to the FBI when they nick your phone. Or how about nonsensical "features" like cryptographically checking if a replacement display is signed by apple? How does that do anything but prevent third party repair? I'm not being dismissive. I just want a damn phone where I'm allowed to replace parts without having to ask permission from the manufacturer first.

> tech companies have attempted to tighten the control over how we use their devices. Our devices.

by MikeUt 6y ago

> tech companies have attempted to tighten the control over how we use their devices. Our devices.

zepto 6y ago

Right to repair is nothing to do with ownership. It’s about forcing companies to provide services.

MikeUt 6y ago
I was commenting on the misleading phrasing, not the right to repair itself.
Doxin 6y ago
It's about forcing companies to not intentionally make devices unrepairable. Forcing companies to provide a firmware unlocking service is pretty silly. Forcing companies to stop locking legitimate users out of the firmware is a lot less silly. Forcing companies to provide repair parts is pretty silly. Stopping companies from killing 3rd party repair parts is a whole lot less silly. Forcing companies to sell specialty screwdrivers is pretty silly. Forcing companies to not use more expensive proprietary screws is a whole lot less silly. Most people aren't asking anyone to force companies to provide services. They are asking to force companies to stop annoying shenanigans that prevent repair.
- zepto 6y ago
  These are false dichotomies: > Forcing companies to stop locking legitimate users out of the firmware is a lot less silly. This is a lot like the argument for giving the FBI a backdoor - the idea that the computer can easily be open for the good guys while being secure against the unauthorized intrusions. Not so. > They are asking to force companies to stop annoying shenanigans that prevent repair. That’s really just dismissive invective. What you call ‘annoying shenanigans’ are highly desirable security features wanted by most consumers.
  - Doxin 6y ago
    It's perfectly possible to have open and secure firmware simultaneously. You could e.g. force a wipe of encryption keys when unlocking the firmware like chromebooks do. That way you can meddle with the firmware to your hearts content and not leak any personal data to the FBI when they nick your phone. Or how about nonsensical "features" like cryptographically checking if a replacement display is signed by apple? How does that do anything but prevent third party repair? I'm not being dismissive. I just want a damn phone where I'm allowed to replace parts without having to ask permission from the manufacturer first.