2 ms·

> Designs should not, by the use of adhesives... This is the problem I have with "right to repair" legislation. It turns into "right for bureaucrats to tell en

> Designs should not, by the use of adhesives... This is the problem I have with "right to repair" legislation. It turns into "right for bureaucrats to tell engineers how to do their jobs". My phone uses LOCA glue to secure the glass to the display. Does this violate "right to repair"? My phone is held together, not with screws, but adhesives. How about this? Or, GOOD GRIEF! The story in this thread about the ECU in a truck that cripples it for environmental reasons, and requires expensive repairs. Is that covered by "right to repair"? Or does that not apply here?

dangus 4y ago
Is that what the legislation says? Or are you just guessing that the legislation will be poorly written? I don't see the consensus by activists in this field as people that are saying "don't use adhesives," "all hardware must be modular," or "compromise design for repairability." I see right to repair activists asking for things like: - Making spare parts available to purchase - Making internal service manuals available with reasonable terms - Forbidding certain types of digital protection on spare parts and firmware that are in place to enforce a market power imbalance (e.g., to force you to buy OEM spare parts without a defensible safety or security reason) - Forbidding anti-competitive parts inventory practices that disadvantage independent third party repair providers (e.g., Apple, who makes third-party repair shops wait until a customer brings in a phone before they can order a common part like a screen...imagine if your car mechanic had to wait until you brought your car in before they could buy brakes, you'd always take the car to the official dealer to get it done faster.) Experienced and even amateur repair technicians have no problems with things like adhesives. Instead, they have problems with companies actively fighting against self-repair.

dangus 4y ago

Is that what the legislation says? Or are you just guessing that the legislation will be poorly written? I don't see the consensus by activists in this field as people that are saying "don't use adhesives," "all hardware must be modular," or "compromise design for repairability." I see right to repair activists asking for things like: - Making spare parts available to purchase - Making internal service manuals available with reasonable terms - Forbidding certain types of digital protection on spare parts and firmware that are in place to enforce a market power imbalance (e.g., to force you to buy OEM spare parts without a defensible safety or security reason) - Forbidding anti-competitive parts inventory practices that disadvantage independent third party repair providers (e.g., Apple, who makes third-party repair shops wait until a customer brings in a phone before they can order a common part like a screen...imagine if your car mechanic had to wait until you brought your car in before they could buy brakes, you'd always take the car to the official dealer to get it done faster.) Experienced and even amateur repair technicians have no problems with things like adhesives. Instead, they have problems with companies actively fighting against self-repair.