5 ms·

The author touched on right of repair. I’d love to see a law requiring all devices to either be supported, or if being sunset, being required by law to provide

The author touched on right of repair. I’d love to see a law requiring all devices to either be supported, or if being sunset, being required by law to provide tools/source/schematics to take over the device and extend its utility beyond the manufacturer’s willingness. Particularly a last firmware that disables anything requiring phoning home to continue to function. We saw that with OnHub recently, when after only 6 years Google decided to render a lot of devices e-waste. The least they could do is recycle them for you at their own cost.

msla 5y ago
"Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Yes, you can fix the antenna when it breaks, and focus on how hard the fight was to get the right to fix the hardware you own... which you don't own as long as the company uses software to control what the hardware can and cannot do. But you sure physically own those mostly-useless atoms real good!
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  I had no idea it was focused on hardware. It applies to software too.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > "Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Is it a trick, or just limited imagination? My impression is that "right of repair" came from mechanically-minded people seeking to maintain their traditional ability to repair physical devices in the face of corporate hostility (e.g. farmers vs. John Deere). > Yes, you can fix the antenna when it breaks, and focus on how hard the fight was to get the right to fix the hardware you own... which you don't own as long as the company uses software to control what the hardware can and cannot do. But you sure physically own those mostly-useless atoms real good! This seems more of software-centric Free Software attitude, which is not a place someone with mechanical skills but not very strong software skills is likely to arrive at themselves.
  - salawat 5y ago
    Hate to break it to ya, but anyone with any mechanical aptitude has what it takes to do whatever may need doing with software. Heck, Before I received any formal instruction in programming I was tracing things via symbols and strings just like I did hardware connections.
  - scblock 5y ago
    The tractor right to repair issues include software. You might even say that software is the prime issue preventing repair of the newer from equipment. Parts with drm, unsupported software, etc.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      > The tractor right to repair issues include software. You might even say that software is the prime issue preventing repair of the newer from equipment. Parts with drm, unsupported software, etc. My understanding is the farmers just want to be able to repair their tractors without dealer approval (e.g. replace broken parts). They're not looking to hack new features into the firmware and stuff like that.
      - webmaven 5y ago
        > My understanding is the farmers just want to be able to repair their tractors without dealer approval (e.g. replace broken parts). For which they need to circumvent or disable DRM, and be able to run the manufacturers diagnostic software (or be able to use 3rd party diagnostic software). > They're not looking to hack new features into the firmware and stuff like that. I think you may be reasoning from a set of assumptions about farm equipment that is out of date. Modern farm equipment is very sophisticated and ties into all sorts of external services (GPS, mapping and terrain, high resolution soil data, weather forecasts, etc.), and can do things like adjust the direction and spacing of rows, depth seeds are sown, selective harvesting, selective pest control, selective fertilization, and more. The software that controls all that isn't just 'firmware'. Not to mention that the equipment sends every bit of data back to the manufacturer to power add on services they can sell to the farmer by subscription. Farmers certainly like all these features. In fact they like them so much they pay for after-market upgrades for older (repairable) equipment to add features and 3rd party services. They don't like being stuck inside the manufacturers' walled gardens. These things have passed the point of just being equipment or tools, and are now platforms in their own right, and farmers are in many ways no longer their owners, but just captive users. While right to repair starts with re-enabling a local mechanic to replace a part, it doesn't end there. Not by a long shot.
rhizome 5y ago
Imagine not being able to use a lawn mower engine to make a go-kart.
rocqua 5y ago
There is a specific problem with routers and certification for radio usage. This makes right to repair harder. It's not just a legal issue. The ether is quite full and it mostly works because there are clear rules that devices must meet. With user serviceable routers, bumping up power, or moving to locally forbidden (quieter) frequencies could become lifehacks. There was already an airport whose radio saw interference from extra powerful 5ghz wifi routers. Locking down devices as a business model is bad. But Locking them down as a regulatory precaution to keep radio working is different. How to keep every manufacturer from seeking excemption from right to repair under these rules would be challenging tho.
- haneefmubarak 5y ago
  If we didn't allow for an exemption but still required full compliance, perhaps manufacturers could physically limit the output from the power amplifiers and/or use blowable fuses in the chips to set a non-modifiable power limit. I imagine that the same could be done for frequency management either on board (bandstop filtering) or on chip (once again, blowable fuses to set disallowed frequencies). I know that there will still be enterprising folks who modify their hardware itself to try to get around these limitations, but such enterprising people are already more than capable of physically modifying their existing hardware.
  - somerandomqaguy 5y ago
    Not in manufacturing so I'm just speculating here. But I'd imagine that would create a new set of logistical issues, specifically instead of one bill of material that can be applied everywhere with controlled applied via software, now you need N BOM's, when N is the market region that has a slightly different set of RF transmission rules. Not infeasible but certainly a significant increase in cost.
- howdydoo 5y ago
  My PC has a 5ghz wifi antenna, and I can install any OS I want. Why should a router be any more locked down than my PC? The FCC takes illegal broadcasting VERY seriously and I think that should deter people from becoming criminals.

msla 5y ago

"Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Yes, you can fix the antenna when it breaks, and focus on how hard the fight was to get the right to fix the hardware you own... which you don't own as long as the company uses software to control what the hardware can and cannot do. But you sure physically own those mostly-useless atoms real good!

R0b0t1 5y ago
I had no idea it was focused on hardware. It applies to software too.
tablespoon 5y ago
> "Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Is it a trick, or just limited imagination? My impression is that "right of repair" came from mechanically-minded people seeking to maintain their traditional ability to repair physical devices in the face of corporate hostility (e.g. farmers vs. John Deere). > Yes, you can fix the antenna when it breaks, and focus on how hard the fight was to get the right to fix the hardware you own... which you don't own as long as the company uses software to control what the hardware can and cannot do. But you sure physically own those mostly-useless atoms real good! This seems more of software-centric Free Software attitude, which is not a place someone with mechanical skills but not very strong software skills is likely to arrive at themselves.
- salawat 5y ago
  Hate to break it to ya, but anyone with any mechanical aptitude has what it takes to do whatever may need doing with software. Heck, Before I received any formal instruction in programming I was tracing things via symbols and strings just like I did hardware connections.
- scblock 5y ago
  The tractor right to repair issues include software. You might even say that software is the prime issue preventing repair of the newer from equipment. Parts with drm, unsupported software, etc.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > The tractor right to repair issues include software. You might even say that software is the prime issue preventing repair of the newer from equipment. Parts with drm, unsupported software, etc. My understanding is the farmers just want to be able to repair their tractors without dealer approval (e.g. replace broken parts). They're not looking to hack new features into the firmware and stuff like that.
    - webmaven 5y ago
      > My understanding is the farmers just want to be able to repair their tractors without dealer approval (e.g. replace broken parts). For which they need to circumvent or disable DRM, and be able to run the manufacturers diagnostic software (or be able to use 3rd party diagnostic software). > They're not looking to hack new features into the firmware and stuff like that. I think you may be reasoning from a set of assumptions about farm equipment that is out of date. Modern farm equipment is very sophisticated and ties into all sorts of external services (GPS, mapping and terrain, high resolution soil data, weather forecasts, etc.), and can do things like adjust the direction and spacing of rows, depth seeds are sown, selective harvesting, selective pest control, selective fertilization, and more. The software that controls all that isn't just 'firmware'. Not to mention that the equipment sends every bit of data back to the manufacturer to power add on services they can sell to the farmer by subscription. Farmers certainly like all these features. In fact they like them so much they pay for after-market upgrades for older (repairable) equipment to add features and 3rd party services. They don't like being stuck inside the manufacturers' walled gardens. These things have passed the point of just being equipment or tools, and are now platforms in their own right, and farmers are in many ways no longer their owners, but just captive users. While right to repair starts with re-enabling a local mechanic to replace a part, it doesn't end there. Not by a long shot.

rhizome 5y ago

Imagine not being able to use a lawn mower engine to make a go-kart.

rocqua 5y ago

There is a specific problem with routers and certification for radio usage. This makes right to repair harder. It's not just a legal issue. The ether is quite full and it mostly works because there are clear rules that devices must meet. With user serviceable routers, bumping up power, or moving to locally forbidden (quieter) frequencies could become lifehacks. There was already an airport whose radio saw interference from extra powerful 5ghz wifi routers. Locking down devices as a business model is bad. But Locking them down as a regulatory precaution to keep radio working is different. How to keep every manufacturer from seeking excemption from right to repair under these rules would be challenging tho.

haneefmubarak 5y ago
If we didn't allow for an exemption but still required full compliance, perhaps manufacturers could physically limit the output from the power amplifiers and/or use blowable fuses in the chips to set a non-modifiable power limit. I imagine that the same could be done for frequency management either on board (bandstop filtering) or on chip (once again, blowable fuses to set disallowed frequencies). I know that there will still be enterprising folks who modify their hardware itself to try to get around these limitations, but such enterprising people are already more than capable of physically modifying their existing hardware.
- somerandomqaguy 5y ago
  Not in manufacturing so I'm just speculating here. But I'd imagine that would create a new set of logistical issues, specifically instead of one bill of material that can be applied everywhere with controlled applied via software, now you need N BOM's, when N is the market region that has a slightly different set of RF transmission rules. Not infeasible but certainly a significant increase in cost.
howdydoo 5y ago
My PC has a 5ghz wifi antenna, and I can install any OS I want. Why should a router be any more locked down than my PC? The FCC takes illegal broadcasting VERY seriously and I think that should deter people from becoming criminals.