9 ms·

The cameras worked fine, but their maker said they had reached their end of life

84 points by Aloha 4y ago

Aloha 4y ago
https://archive.ph/QeoIO https://archive.ph/QeoIO
voisin 4y ago
This problem will only be solved by legislation. If countries seek to reduce e-waste they need to force electronics makers to ensure a minimum length of support on the same conditions as existed on the date of sale - say 10 years.
- gedy 4y ago
  Or vote with our dollars and reject "cloud" connected devices
  - alkonaut 4y ago
    It’s really hard for the average user to even tell what’s local and what’s not. Perhaps some labeling similar to energy efficiency labeling could be regulated where anything that doesn’t allow for use without the remote service gets a big red “D”sticker, while things that are completely local gets a big green “A”? Some of the best gear I have uses different cloud services but I won’t buy something that would be a paperweight should the cloud service disappear. The cloud service merely improves the product (e.g keeps video from surveillance cameras) but the cameras work without it, and you can set up your own recording if you want.
    - eropple 4y ago
      Transparency in terms and branding is a really good idea, but it's probably insufficient. In this scheme, devices marked "A" will effectively be restricted to people with the time to manage local infrastructure--recording cameras, for example, will eventually have disks fail, and at that point the repairs are likely beyond more than a subset of people. Probably a small one, at that. Cloud stuff is here to stay. We deserve clarity in what does use cloud stuff, but we also need legislation that puts a proper fear into bad actors who make expansive promises (and, likely, stronger liability applied to shipping software that needs patching).
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        > at that point the repairs are likely beyond more than a subset of people. Replacing a hard drive trivial, though. But in any case, if someone doesn't want to do such maintenance every decade or so, there are repair shops that will do it for them.
        eropple 4y ago
        A hard drive under constant write load is unlikely to last a decade. And replacing them in some of these devices isn't trivial (even if the physical connector is straightforward, how many of them understand receiving a new drive that needs formatting, how do you get to the panel to do it, etcetera etcetera). In isolation, the smartest thing a hardware vendor could do is make this process difficult so you give up and buy a new one. You could say "well, filter on reviews", but the review space has been drastically compromised with the rise of "influencer" types, too.
        JohnFen 4y ago
        Interesting. The video system that I use is a cheap one (and doesn't require internet access, but optionally supports it -- I don't even have it on a network of any sort at all). Replacing the hard drive in it couldn't be easier. You do have to remove four screws to get into the box, but once there, you just unplug the old one and plug in the new one. When you power it up, the box notices that the hard drive is new and asks you if you want it to be prepared for use (with requisite warnings about losing any data that may be on it). If you click "Yes," it does what it needs to do and starts using it. Aside from opening the case, my grandmother could handle this without any problem at all. I simply assumed that better systems than mine would be as easy, but perhaps I assumed too much.
      - alkonaut 4y ago
        > In this scheme, devices marked "A" will effectively be restricted to people with the time to manage local infrastructure--recording cameras, for example I think in terms of waste, the key is that devices are still functioning and valuable, even if they aren't as good to the original buyer as they once were. A different cloud service might pop up to replace the one that the smart doorbell maker canceled. Or the initial buyer can sell the smart doorbell to a customer that does have the patience to deal with local recording. It'll always be hard to use tech for non-technical people, but at least avoiding the situation where thousands of functioning gadgets are bricked and thrown away should be possible to achive through regulation.
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      > It’s really hard for the average user to even tell what’s local and what’s not. Especially when there's no legal consequences for manufacturers publicly and unambiguously lying about it. Remember how Anker said that their Eufy product line stored all of your data locally, and then they didn't get punished when the truth came out?
      - pixl97 4y ago
        Exactly. You could buy a local device and then run a manufacturers update and suddenly you have a non downgradable online device.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    Most people are quite stupid otherwise this would work for other situations and in the past
  - adrianN 4y ago
    Shifting responsibility to consumers has only ever worked to further enrich corporations.
  - tarotuser 4y ago
    That's exactly what I do, and advocate. I've been suckered to buy cloud-shit that I wasn't aware it was. When helping some family with a failed wifi/router, I got some newer Linksys router. Brought it over to them, and demands an online account with some app on the phone. Looked online with my phone, and verified they went cloud only and no reasonable (non-ddwrt, etc) way to bypass it. I wrote "DEFECTIVE" in sharpie on the bottom of the router, packaged it right back up and took it back to the retailer for a refund. I bought a non-Linksys/Cisco brand that didn't play stupid games. Changed the SSID, BSSID, and WPA2 config to be the old one, and finished the install in just a few minutes. It does its job and just works. Has been for like 4+ years.
    - GirlFriday 4y ago
      Got burned with a Linksys/Cisco router, in, i wanna say 2011 or so, when they changed my username & password security setup back to factory default (no security) without my knowledge or permission. Tried to get their overseas tech support to help me, spent HOURS on this via phone & ridiculous chats that I archived, only to have them try to extort money from me to “extend” this needed feature on their junk that I owned — that’s when I knew it was intentional. 2nd example: Discovered during setup that my HP printer/scanner/fax/photocopier/photo printer came with expired ink cartridges; no instruction book, of course, so hours of research revealed these have chips on them that only let you do initial setup w/ original non-expired cartridges — not with new replacements. Overseas HP tech sed on phone: just throw this printer away & go buy a new printer — to them this sophisticated machine/potential e-waste is just a disposable thing, like paper towels et. al., or a 20-lb paper weight. I persisted & did get it to work on my own, entirely self-taught, but have found each time I replace the expensive HP cartridges they “expire” much more quickly than did the previous batch. Plus this fancy machine only exists to extort you for ink with all its apps & crappy refills. 3rd example: My Dell laptop’s “lifetime PC support” as touted on QVC was denied to me, then when I threw a fit they grudgingly referred me to their new tech service provider (no more helpful than the first) BUT WAIT not actual lifetime of the PC itself but of Microsoft’s SUPPORT (updates & bug-fixes expiration time determines its death, to them) of this PC laptop. 4th example: My Dell laptop’s entire Wi-Fi capability/setting/existence seemingly being erased entirely several times by Windows 10 updates. The Wi-Fi setting completely vanished on all the main settings pages — chicken-or-egg dilemma where, I no longer had wired, Ethernet connection at home anymore after Cisco router fiasco to go online to download/fix it (I’d gone totally “cutting edge” all-wireless at home!) & libraries/coffee shops no longer had Ethernet either. I spent 2 hours working with one “lifetime support tech” who couldn’t hack my PC — since I had no Internet at all — & tried to walk me thru it via phone while offline, but to no avail; also spent many hours in a museum’s library using their Ethernet contacting Microsoft & others. I finally found a hotel in an adjacent county with a wired portal in their “Business Center” — so I crashed it posing as a hotel guest, where it took a lifetime tech with the 2nd tech support provider 4 HOURS to figure out how to restore the device driver W10 update had ham-handedly obliterated. But it was erased again next W10 update, I You-Tubed it from there on out, & learned the updates weren’t literally erasing the Wi-Fi — just turning off its device driver, or putting it to Default state, which would then remove Wi-Fi from the settings page (where it’s usually there next to Ethernet, VPN, etc.) I’m not a natural computer tech person, but in all I figured out at least 3 distinct ways to restore Wi-Fi in the bowels of my computer’s two different Settings fiefdoms as W10 kept erasing it — along with monkeying around with my preferences, my colors, my attempts to “schedule” the updates themselves so they wouldn’t just start updating & interrupt my work deadlines & lots of other needless meddling with my stuff that should have nothing to do with MS’ updates. But see, that’s Microsoft saying: This is not YOUR computer, Dear Stupid Customer. Remember the opening credits of that old TV show “The Outer Limits” ? Where it says: “We control the transmission.” (and other stuff) ? So I became The Accidental Computer Tech. But I only ever wanted to be a clueless, joyful user like I was in the early days with Macs & now with my iPhone. 4th example: I was so naive when I got my first home computer many years ago. It was several years in when I learned the updates support was ending on Tiger? And I now had to buy - Snow Leopard? Or was it Leopard? And eventually learned even those updates would end, as Apple considered that my beautiful $1,000 MacBook —,which I had planned to use forever! — was ready to be put out to pasture, ready for Hospice care, to be put on a raft & floated out to sea. OMG, many companies had put cookies on it that don’t expire till the year 9999 (4-digit limit, I guess, but will the Earth even be around that long?) Yet its “creator” disagreed, said do-not-resuscitate, pull that there plug! Eventually it lost its Internet-surfing power — because of Them — but I still use it as an external hard drive (it has its own monitor, unlike other hard drives & thumb drives), as a way to access my original iTunes library (I like the user interface better than the version I copied over to the much-hated Dell PC) & as a CD player & disc burner. So it’s now like a disabled, much-loved favorite child. But Mac really makes it hard, as a replacement battery & repair to the mousepad are not in any way cost-effective. So I don’t really OWN that device nor do I own any of the tablets, phones or Chromebook devices I’ve gotten since. 5th example: All those iPods I got, from the shuffles to the iPod Touch with color screen, are disposables, despite all the paraphernalia (WARDROBES of various colorful cases, screen protectors, designer earbuds etcetera). When the batteries all die, they’re gone. The first shuffle to go, I realized: This thing is no more than a souped-up thumb drive. 2 pods still work — but now we know they were just a fad, outpaced by their own Cousin iPhone. All this is the reason I have never gotten home security tech & never gotten my animals microchipped. Don’t trust the technology will last, don’t want a subscription, don’t want no more disposable tech, don’t believe no Lifetime Anything.
  - fallinghawks 4y ago
    I prefer local storage as well, but the downside is the potential for data loss to theft. Non technical consumers may not realize that if the SIM is physically on the camera, and the camera gets stolen, they lose everything. Camera systems that store the video on a hub indoors are the best IMO.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    I never buy equipment that requires connecting to a server somewhere to work. A couple of years ago, I bought a some surveillance cameras and a recorder unit to manage them. Finding one that didn't require an internet connection was exceedingly difficult. It can be hard to even tell if they require an internet connection or now -- and it seems most of them do. I did eventually find one, but if I need to do something like this again, I'll build it myself. It would be much faster and easier.
- themitigating 4y ago
  More government regulations?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - anotherboffin 4y ago
    If the manufacturers can’t figure this out on their own, then yes, by all means.
  - JustSomeNobody 4y ago
    Why not?
- fsflover 4y ago
  Minimum length of support is not necessary. It's sufficient to force the companies to release the software as FLOSS after the support is ended.
  - kragen 4y ago
    while this would be an effective defense, it isn't an effective legal policy at the point that the support is ended, the company isn't making any more money on the product, so legal remedies like forbidding its importation or halting its manufacturing would be ineffective; even remedies like fines and injunctions to specific performance might be ineffective if the company no longer exists or no longer exports to your country, or if they've laid off the people who knew how to compile the firmware so to have an enforceable law you need to require the release (or at least deposit) of the complete corresponding source code up front, not at some future time
    - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
      Legally mandated code+key escrow?
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    That's not quite sufficient, since the hardware could be tivoized. Releasing all of the company's private signing keys for it should be required too.
  - tengwar2 4y ago
    Length of suppport is necessary. It is not sufficient to just hand the source over. As an example, I paid for TiVo lifetime programme guides. This was quite explicitly a lifetime service. They cut it off when they introduced an HD service. Making the sw open source would in no way mitigate that termination.
- _fat_santa 4y ago
  The FCC could have a rule when you are releasing "Cloud Connected" hardware that would specify that you must provide an "EOL plan" for when you no longer wish to support the hardware. A good example would be Sonos, they would be within their right to end official support for a speaker, but they must provide some EOL support that will let these devices function in perpetuity (or at least until the hardware breaks down).
  - ilyt 4y ago
    Cue vendors putting non-replaceable batteries that just happen to run out after 10 years, bricking device, and making effort to fix enough of a hassle most don't bother... But yeah, would be nice. "No updates - give source code on OSS license + reasonably easy way to flash".
    - shortcake27 4y ago
      The battery issue will probably be legislated first. There are already talks of banning non-user-replaceable batteries in consumer electronics.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    Yes, and there should only be two choices for what the EOL plan can be: 1. Give everyone who ever bought the product a full refund 2. Publicly release all of the source code plus any and all private signing keys necessary to overcome tivoization
- rolph 4y ago
  how about software, or firmware, or any other digital component of a device must provide function as existed at time of sale for the physical lifetime of the product
- RobotToaster 4y ago
  Just require them to have a local only mode with feature parity and publicly documented interface.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  Perhaps. But the hardware isn't the issue here. The hardware works, but the company is no longer offering free software / storage. The customes need to switch to a paid plan. While it makes a case for self-hosting your software that doesn't come for free either. Ideally, you get to control your own destiny, but not for free. The lesson? Nothing is free. There's always cost / risk; hidden or otherwise.
  - pixl97 4y ago
    Then we need to ensure that manufacturers are not allowed to say 'free' when they mean something else.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      This is the real issue, yes. Manufacturers lie and get away with it.
tarotuser 4y ago
To put bluntly, anybody who buys hardware that is inexorably linked to some cloud-crap should be ashamed of themselves and deserve the loss of money as a learning experience. I *only* buy hardware that can be controlled and/or managed locally. Sure, it means some 'cool' gadgets aren't available in my world. But it does mean that what I buy will be supported and will just work. If that means you buy PoE cameras and get a video storage solution? Well, so be it. That's the cost of doing it yourself, BUT it also means you have your own destiny in your control. Whereas if you buy cloudcrap, *when* the company decides to alter the deal, you're at their behest. Dont like that? Too fucking bad.
- kbuck 4y ago
  Just because a device isn't cloud-connected doesn't mean it isn't designed for planned obsolescence. For example, the ongoing cheapening of major appliances, or the DRM applied to printer cartridges and coffee pods. This is a legislation problem IMO: companies need to be held to reasonable expectations when they sell a product. My ink cartridge shouldn't say it's "empty" when the page counter reaches 100 [and it's still actually full]. Neither should cloud devices go to the landfill because the company selling them decided that they don't want to support them anymore. Companies foisting negative externalities on us (like more e-waste) in exchange for more profit are a blight and should be treated (and prevented) as such.
  - DyslexicAtheist 4y ago
    fully with you except > because the company selling them decided that they don't want to support them anymore. in IoT for consumer devices companies must ensure that a software is free of security issues. in some cases the support period of 3rd party dependencies is out of control of the vendor. and vendors usually don't control the upstream silicon and firmware. so if an SDK ships an outdated mbedtls and upstream refuses to patch their SDK also downstream will not be able to release a patch. and in that case the law says connectivity needs to be disabled for that appliance. the situation today is that vendors are only starting to realize that this is the future in which they operate. so while the appliance is still operable in a dumb-mode any smart-features will have to be reduced to the max time you can ensure support. while this sounds like pretty normal and sane to most it absolutely isn't how IoT vendors in the past have operated. And i hope the minute RED directive kicks into gear by Aug 2024 consumers will start to sue them into oblivion if a vendor is for some reason unable to ship a security update.
bell-cot 4y ago
Idea: Prosecute such companies for obtaining money under false pretenses. If you only get the thingie which you "bought" for a limited time - that is clearly a rental, not a sale.
- themitigating 4y ago
  So if ford stops making spare parts 30 years after a car was discontinued is the car rented?
  - belorn 4y ago
    If the car has drm in it that refuses alternative third-party parts, then yes, the car was rented. This is why right to repair laws are needed. It fixes this missrepresentation.
  - shkkmo 4y ago
    If they take steps to prohibit other people from making their own parts, then yes.
  - Forge36 4y ago
    This is more like if BMW stops supporting their servers so they disable your heated seats.
  - LocalH 4y ago
    Bad analogy. There's a difference between that, where the hypothetical car in question has malfunctioned, and a company being able to just decide that a feature that they offered across the board for free is suddenly being discontinued. Imagine that you have a Ford that comes with seat heaters. You've been able to use those seat heaters, at no additional charge, for several years. All of a sudden, Ford decides they want to make existing customers pay for something they've been using for years. The next time you go to the dealer for an unrelated reason, they silently install Ford's new update that restricts you from turning on the seat heaters without paying a monthly subscription to Ford. Even this analogy breaks down, as with the Arlo situation they have to provide server-side storage for the feature, whereas such a seat heater conundrum would not. However, this analogy is closer to the real situation than "manufacturer stops making parts three decades after discontinuation".
cs702 4y ago
In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. Specifically, the owners of these cameras may own the hardware, but cannot use it because they do not own nor control the software that runs it. Richard Stallman predicted this decades ago. Regardless of what you think of him, he was the first person to come up with the idea of free open-source software expressly to give users the ability to (quoting) "control the program and what it does for them. When users don't control the program, we call it a 'nonfree' or 'proprietary' program. The nonfree program controls the users, and the developer controls the program."[a] He was, and is, right about this. [a] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ilyt 4y ago
  Not that I disagree but in this case it seems to be mostly about "free" cloud storage ending: > Starting April 1, the company would no longer support models that included no-fee seven-day rolling storage of video clips—a well-advertised selling point. And cameras were still being able to be used with external storage > Instead, Arlo device owners could upgrade to one of the company’s paid plans, starting at $13 a month or buy an add-on device to store videos. Which is... exactly what you'd have to do with fully open source system anyway, buy a box to store it or pay someone for storage.
  - cs702 4y ago
    > Not that I disagree but... :-) Keep in mind: Customers thought they were purchasing cameras with seven days of storage.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - ilyt 4y ago
      I mean if you thought you will pay flat fee and get online hosting till the end of time (and most likely didn't read the fine print that said it isn't infinite in time), that's on you
travisporter 4y ago
I’m just waiting for this to happen to newfangled connected cars. Hopefully then people will start to vote about the issue
- jimhuntpl 4y ago
  Already happened. Cars can and are being remotely shut down, irrespective of their purchaser's wishes.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  Indeed. I cannot imagine a circumstance where I'd be willing to buy a car that requires a connection to someone else's server.
formerly_proven 4y ago
> internet-connected security cameras These stopping to work is actually one of the best outcomes you can have As opposed to e.g. internet-connected security cameras being hacked so that anyone can watch your home or footage from internet-connected security cameras being shared by the service provider with just about anyone or footage from internet-connected security cameras being completely useless because of the cheap hardware used for them, creating a feeling of surveillance without any of the benefits
1-6 4y ago
When companies advertise free for life, take it with a grain of salt. If they can't force people into a paid subscription, then they'll simply stop making the device work. Remember, if Google can cut off support, what makes you think others wouldn't? Remember Stadia? Customers should agree to nothing less other than getting refunded for their camera setup.
- pepperidgeFarm 4y ago
  Perhaps Stadia is a bad example, because Pepperidge Farms remembers when Google refunded every purchase when Stadia shut down. It was, however, surprising they chose to do so.
- lokar 4y ago
  I do remember stadia. I got a full refund for the hardware and all games purchased.
vouaobrasil 4y ago
A lot of people advocate for traditional cameras gaining some sort of smart interface to facilitate sharing or some other such features. What they don't understand is that traditional cameras work extremely well with their dedicated but seemingly outdated interfaces, and moreover, they prevent things like this from happening. Replaceable batteries, replaceable storage, and "primitive" but exceptionally functional firmware makes it so that you can still pick up an 8-year old camera like the Nikon D7200 and produce shots that have the same quality as today's cameras without worrying about it not being supported (because it's essentially a complete product).
- switchbak 4y ago
  Not sure how better usability wrt to sharing from the camera would ensure that this kind of thing never happens. I think cameras tend to work well over time because that's the expectation of the manufacturers and the purchasers, and photographers would rebel en masse otherwise. If most consumers would be a little more prickly about these things and strongly punish these greedy companies, I don't think we'd see nearly as much of this. This kind of thing simply wouldn't fly in the 60s, but we've been conditioned to just accept it. Well that and consumer protection is basically non-existent. I still want to share photos easily from my camera though!
- m463 4y ago
  "smart" televisions just means long boot times and... intrusion. Why would smart cameras end up any different? I will say the DSLRs understand the necessity of immediacy - turn it on and take a shot. (well, there is the "turn it on" part) Honestly I don't know why phone cameras haven't understood the immediacy thing. why not dedicate one button to ALWAYS take a picture, getting the shot even at the expense of accidental shots.
  - dzikimarian 4y ago
    Maybe not one, but double-press power and then volume button and you have photo pretty fast.
    - 4y ago
jhonovich 4y ago
This can get even worse, e.g. Verkada, Meraki, what we named "Hostage as a Service" https://youtu.be/_vhIdsHeI0M https://youtu.be/_vhIdsHeI0M
- voakbasda 4y ago
  This is a brilliant term that perfectly summarizes the status quo of most IoT vendors and products. I will be using it henceforth and forever more.
ecpottinger 4y ago
I never understood why I need MY hardware to use their servers. If I buy something it should be mine alone.
- compiler-guy 4y ago
  You don’t. The timing getting cancelled here is the free storage tier. But if you want to use your own local storage you can.
- ilyt 4y ago
  The people that bought it and complained it stopped being free don't want to put their own storage servers up
mr_tristan 4y ago
The cloud era seems to exacerbate these kinds of issues. The only way to truly have "long term" service is to be a subscriber, not a "buy once" customer. If you're a part of their revenue next year, they're going to try to keep you. Otherwise, you're just one excuse away from being dropped. The "right to repair" laws being developed might help here, but I don't know what this means for anything "connected to a service". If the service goes down, are there laws that say we need to be able to connected to something else? I'm not aware of much. I mean, as an Arlo customer, I knew this was coming, but that's because I've worked in tech for over 20 years, and know none of these companies can operate a plan that looks ahead more than 2 years. Ultimately technology is either subscribed, or "rented" for an undefined period of time. It's never "bought". It's gonna take some serious regulation to make that happen, and I'm not even sure how that will work.
ErikVandeWater 4y ago
Disappointing the article didn't specify the marketing that was used to sell the cameras five years ago. Obviously planned obsolescence is bad, but I'd like to know how misleading they were when selling the product.
wwfzyn 4y ago
Sounds like we don't purchase cameras anymore. We purchase a subscription to use the cameras until our subscription expires.
omershapira 4y ago
The interesting arbitrage here is: • Product BOM prices are more-or-less known by the public, product margin not as much • Cloud prices are low • Customers expect low product but high subscription prices I wonder if consumer protection can make a separation like this work. The Playstation model (sponsoring the hardware assuming >100% ROI over the product's lifetime) is bad for small companies, and definitely bad for e-waste when they fail. But mobile phone contracts make it clear you can own the phone after the contract, and still need to pay service fees throughout the usage, and that's mostly considered fair; and could definitely be a lot worse in terms of e-waste.
prpl 4y ago
There is probably a useful life of ~10 years on most types of consumer internet-connected hardware. I doubt these are 10 years old, but it would probably be in everybody’s interest to just say “we’ll support this connecting to the internet and requisite services for 10 years.” - Especially for hardware that could seriously infringe on a persons home privacy.
- ilyt 4y ago
  That's why it should be OSS, at the very least code released after vendor decides to stop supporting it. It's of little cost to the company (competitors seeing your 5 or 10 years code is non-issue really, tech went forward enough for that to not matter) but prevents at least some from going to landfill
Ekaros 4y ago
I think "free" cloud services and addons should always include prominently visible end of service dates. As such buyers could reasonably estimate is the life time left for device good enough at the time of purchase. With physical product this should be printed on the outside of the box in very prominent manner. And with digital, it should be visible in big enough typeface also. Breaking this would result in possible damages or full refund to customer. And in bankruptcy certain amount should be hold to keep the services running.
khromov 4y ago
While we wait for better legislation, all we can do is vote with our wallets. That's why I started the review site Unwanted Cloud to review how well devices work without "cloud" connectivity: https://unwanted.cloud/ https://unwanted.cloud/
pandaman 4y ago
Games, just as movies, have anything from dogs to the people who kicked in $2 on the Kickstarter in credits, there has to be more to this story than this or there is soon going to be a massacre of some "rogue" catering driver taking down Disney's blockbusters.
gtvwill 4y ago
This is basically every apple product ever. Get turned into paperweights despite being fully functional devices just because apple won't supply updates, won't open firmware or software up for users to apply updates. Can't claim your a ethical company when you do toxic unethical crap like that. Legit e-waste created for nothing but maintenance of a companies profit. Shit drives me up the wall. Should be legislated against. You can tell alot about people's ethics by how much they like to fix and reuse things or how much value they put on repairable items. Business tactics that are this malicious towards society on so many levels should be legislated out of existence.

84 points by Aloha 4y ago

https://archive.ph/QeoIO https://archive.ph/QeoIO

This problem will only be solved by legislation. If countries seek to reduce e-waste they need to force electronics makers to ensure a minimum length of support on the same conditions as existed on the date of sale - say 10 years.

gedy 4y ago
Or vote with our dollars and reject "cloud" connected devices
- alkonaut 4y ago
  It’s really hard for the average user to even tell what’s local and what’s not. Perhaps some labeling similar to energy efficiency labeling could be regulated where anything that doesn’t allow for use without the remote service gets a big red “D”sticker, while things that are completely local gets a big green “A”? Some of the best gear I have uses different cloud services but I won’t buy something that would be a paperweight should the cloud service disappear. The cloud service merely improves the product (e.g keeps video from surveillance cameras) but the cameras work without it, and you can set up your own recording if you want.
  - eropple 4y ago
    Transparency in terms and branding is a really good idea, but it's probably insufficient. In this scheme, devices marked "A" will effectively be restricted to people with the time to manage local infrastructure--recording cameras, for example, will eventually have disks fail, and at that point the repairs are likely beyond more than a subset of people. Probably a small one, at that. Cloud stuff is here to stay. We deserve clarity in what does use cloud stuff, but we also need legislation that puts a proper fear into bad actors who make expansive promises (and, likely, stronger liability applied to shipping software that needs patching).
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      > at that point the repairs are likely beyond more than a subset of people. Replacing a hard drive trivial, though. But in any case, if someone doesn't want to do such maintenance every decade or so, there are repair shops that will do it for them.
      - eropple 4y ago
        A hard drive under constant write load is unlikely to last a decade. And replacing them in some of these devices isn't trivial (even if the physical connector is straightforward, how many of them understand receiving a new drive that needs formatting, how do you get to the panel to do it, etcetera etcetera). In isolation, the smartest thing a hardware vendor could do is make this process difficult so you give up and buy a new one. You could say "well, filter on reviews", but the review space has been drastically compromised with the rise of "influencer" types, too.
        JohnFen 4y ago
        Interesting. The video system that I use is a cheap one (and doesn't require internet access, but optionally supports it -- I don't even have it on a network of any sort at all). Replacing the hard drive in it couldn't be easier. You do have to remove four screws to get into the box, but once there, you just unplug the old one and plug in the new one. When you power it up, the box notices that the hard drive is new and asks you if you want it to be prepared for use (with requisite warnings about losing any data that may be on it). If you click "Yes," it does what it needs to do and starts using it. Aside from opening the case, my grandmother could handle this without any problem at all. I simply assumed that better systems than mine would be as easy, but perhaps I assumed too much.
    - alkonaut 4y ago
      > In this scheme, devices marked "A" will effectively be restricted to people with the time to manage local infrastructure--recording cameras, for example I think in terms of waste, the key is that devices are still functioning and valuable, even if they aren't as good to the original buyer as they once were. A different cloud service might pop up to replace the one that the smart doorbell maker canceled. Or the initial buyer can sell the smart doorbell to a customer that does have the patience to deal with local recording. It'll always be hard to use tech for non-technical people, but at least avoiding the situation where thousands of functioning gadgets are bricked and thrown away should be possible to achive through regulation.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    > It’s really hard for the average user to even tell what’s local and what’s not. Especially when there's no legal consequences for manufacturers publicly and unambiguously lying about it. Remember how Anker said that their Eufy product line stored all of your data locally, and then they didn't get punished when the truth came out?
    - pixl97 4y ago
      Exactly. You could buy a local device and then run a manufacturers update and suddenly you have a non downgradable online device.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Most people are quite stupid otherwise this would work for other situations and in the past
- adrianN 4y ago
  Shifting responsibility to consumers has only ever worked to further enrich corporations.
- tarotuser 4y ago
  That's exactly what I do, and advocate. I've been suckered to buy cloud-shit that I wasn't aware it was. When helping some family with a failed wifi/router, I got some newer Linksys router. Brought it over to them, and demands an online account with some app on the phone. Looked online with my phone, and verified they went cloud only and no reasonable (non-ddwrt, etc) way to bypass it. I wrote "DEFECTIVE" in sharpie on the bottom of the router, packaged it right back up and took it back to the retailer for a refund. I bought a non-Linksys/Cisco brand that didn't play stupid games. Changed the SSID, BSSID, and WPA2 config to be the old one, and finished the install in just a few minutes. It does its job and just works. Has been for like 4+ years.
  - GirlFriday 4y ago
    Got burned with a Linksys/Cisco router, in, i wanna say 2011 or so, when they changed my username & password security setup back to factory default (no security) without my knowledge or permission. Tried to get their overseas tech support to help me, spent HOURS on this via phone & ridiculous chats that I archived, only to have them try to extort money from me to “extend” this needed feature on their junk that I owned — that’s when I knew it was intentional. 2nd example: Discovered during setup that my HP printer/scanner/fax/photocopier/photo printer came with expired ink cartridges; no instruction book, of course, so hours of research revealed these have chips on them that only let you do initial setup w/ original non-expired cartridges — not with new replacements. Overseas HP tech sed on phone: just throw this printer away & go buy a new printer — to them this sophisticated machine/potential e-waste is just a disposable thing, like paper towels et. al., or a 20-lb paper weight. I persisted & did get it to work on my own, entirely self-taught, but have found each time I replace the expensive HP cartridges they “expire” much more quickly than did the previous batch. Plus this fancy machine only exists to extort you for ink with all its apps & crappy refills. 3rd example: My Dell laptop’s “lifetime PC support” as touted on QVC was denied to me, then when I threw a fit they grudgingly referred me to their new tech service provider (no more helpful than the first) BUT WAIT not actual lifetime of the PC itself but of Microsoft’s SUPPORT (updates & bug-fixes expiration time determines its death, to them) of this PC laptop. 4th example: My Dell laptop’s entire Wi-Fi capability/setting/existence seemingly being erased entirely several times by Windows 10 updates. The Wi-Fi setting completely vanished on all the main settings pages — chicken-or-egg dilemma where, I no longer had wired, Ethernet connection at home anymore after Cisco router fiasco to go online to download/fix it (I’d gone totally “cutting edge” all-wireless at home!) & libraries/coffee shops no longer had Ethernet either. I spent 2 hours working with one “lifetime support tech” who couldn’t hack my PC — since I had no Internet at all — & tried to walk me thru it via phone while offline, but to no avail; also spent many hours in a museum’s library using their Ethernet contacting Microsoft & others. I finally found a hotel in an adjacent county with a wired portal in their “Business Center” — so I crashed it posing as a hotel guest, where it took a lifetime tech with the 2nd tech support provider 4 HOURS to figure out how to restore the device driver W10 update had ham-handedly obliterated. But it was erased again next W10 update, I You-Tubed it from there on out, & learned the updates weren’t literally erasing the Wi-Fi — just turning off its device driver, or putting it to Default state, which would then remove Wi-Fi from the settings page (where it’s usually there next to Ethernet, VPN, etc.) I’m not a natural computer tech person, but in all I figured out at least 3 distinct ways to restore Wi-Fi in the bowels of my computer’s two different Settings fiefdoms as W10 kept erasing it — along with monkeying around with my preferences, my colors, my attempts to “schedule” the updates themselves so they wouldn’t just start updating & interrupt my work deadlines & lots of other needless meddling with my stuff that should have nothing to do with MS’ updates. But see, that’s Microsoft saying: This is not YOUR computer, Dear Stupid Customer. Remember the opening credits of that old TV show “The Outer Limits” ? Where it says: “We control the transmission.” (and other stuff) ? So I became The Accidental Computer Tech. But I only ever wanted to be a clueless, joyful user like I was in the early days with Macs & now with my iPhone. 4th example: I was so naive when I got my first home computer many years ago. It was several years in when I learned the updates support was ending on Tiger? And I now had to buy - Snow Leopard? Or was it Leopard? And eventually learned even those updates would end, as Apple considered that my beautiful $1,000 MacBook —,which I had planned to use forever! — was ready to be put out to pasture, ready for Hospice care, to be put on a raft & floated out to sea. OMG, many companies had put cookies on it that don’t expire till the year 9999 (4-digit limit, I guess, but will the Earth even be around that long?) Yet its “creator” disagreed, said do-not-resuscitate, pull that there plug! Eventually it lost its Internet-surfing power — because of Them — but I still use it as an external hard drive (it has its own monitor, unlike other hard drives & thumb drives), as a way to access my original iTunes library (I like the user interface better than the version I copied over to the much-hated Dell PC) & as a CD player & disc burner. So it’s now like a disabled, much-loved favorite child. But Mac really makes it hard, as a replacement battery & repair to the mousepad are not in any way cost-effective. So I don’t really OWN that device nor do I own any of the tablets, phones or Chromebook devices I’ve gotten since. 5th example: All those iPods I got, from the shuffles to the iPod Touch with color screen, are disposables, despite all the paraphernalia (WARDROBES of various colorful cases, screen protectors, designer earbuds etcetera). When the batteries all die, they’re gone. The first shuffle to go, I realized: This thing is no more than a souped-up thumb drive. 2 pods still work — but now we know they were just a fad, outpaced by their own Cousin iPhone. All this is the reason I have never gotten home security tech & never gotten my animals microchipped. Don’t trust the technology will last, don’t want a subscription, don’t want no more disposable tech, don’t believe no Lifetime Anything.
- fallinghawks 4y ago
  I prefer local storage as well, but the downside is the potential for data loss to theft. Non technical consumers may not realize that if the SIM is physically on the camera, and the camera gets stolen, they lose everything. Camera systems that store the video on a hub indoors are the best IMO.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  I never buy equipment that requires connecting to a server somewhere to work. A couple of years ago, I bought a some surveillance cameras and a recorder unit to manage them. Finding one that didn't require an internet connection was exceedingly difficult. It can be hard to even tell if they require an internet connection or now -- and it seems most of them do. I did eventually find one, but if I need to do something like this again, I'll build it myself. It would be much faster and easier.
themitigating 4y ago
More government regulations?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- anotherboffin 4y ago
  If the manufacturers can’t figure this out on their own, then yes, by all means.
- JustSomeNobody 4y ago
  Why not?
fsflover 4y ago
Minimum length of support is not necessary. It's sufficient to force the companies to release the software as FLOSS after the support is ended.
- kragen 4y ago
  while this would be an effective defense, it isn't an effective legal policy at the point that the support is ended, the company isn't making any more money on the product, so legal remedies like forbidding its importation or halting its manufacturing would be ineffective; even remedies like fines and injunctions to specific performance might be ineffective if the company no longer exists or no longer exports to your country, or if they've laid off the people who knew how to compile the firmware so to have an enforceable law you need to require the release (or at least deposit) of the complete corresponding source code up front, not at some future time
  - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
    Legally mandated code+key escrow?
- josephcsible 4y ago
  That's not quite sufficient, since the hardware could be tivoized. Releasing all of the company's private signing keys for it should be required too.
- tengwar2 4y ago
  Length of suppport is necessary. It is not sufficient to just hand the source over. As an example, I paid for TiVo lifetime programme guides. This was quite explicitly a lifetime service. They cut it off when they introduced an HD service. Making the sw open source would in no way mitigate that termination.
_fat_santa 4y ago
The FCC could have a rule when you are releasing "Cloud Connected" hardware that would specify that you must provide an "EOL plan" for when you no longer wish to support the hardware. A good example would be Sonos, they would be within their right to end official support for a speaker, but they must provide some EOL support that will let these devices function in perpetuity (or at least until the hardware breaks down).
- ilyt 4y ago
  Cue vendors putting non-replaceable batteries that just happen to run out after 10 years, bricking device, and making effort to fix enough of a hassle most don't bother... But yeah, would be nice. "No updates - give source code on OSS license + reasonably easy way to flash".
  - shortcake27 4y ago
    The battery issue will probably be legislated first. There are already talks of banning non-user-replaceable batteries in consumer electronics.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  Yes, and there should only be two choices for what the EOL plan can be: 1. Give everyone who ever bought the product a full refund 2. Publicly release all of the source code plus any and all private signing keys necessary to overcome tivoization
rolph 4y ago
how about software, or firmware, or any other digital component of a device must provide function as existed at time of sale for the physical lifetime of the product
RobotToaster 4y ago
Just require them to have a local only mode with feature parity and publicly documented interface.
chiefalchemist 4y ago
Perhaps. But the hardware isn't the issue here. The hardware works, but the company is no longer offering free software / storage. The customes need to switch to a paid plan. While it makes a case for self-hosting your software that doesn't come for free either. Ideally, you get to control your own destiny, but not for free. The lesson? Nothing is free. There's always cost / risk; hidden or otherwise.
- pixl97 4y ago
  Then we need to ensure that manufacturers are not allowed to say 'free' when they mean something else.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    This is the real issue, yes. Manufacturers lie and get away with it.

tarotuser 4y ago

To put bluntly, anybody who buys hardware that is inexorably linked to some cloud-crap should be ashamed of themselves and deserve the loss of money as a learning experience. I *only* buy hardware that can be controlled and/or managed locally. Sure, it means some 'cool' gadgets aren't available in my world. But it does mean that what I buy will be supported and will just work. If that means you buy PoE cameras and get a video storage solution? Well, so be it. That's the cost of doing it yourself, BUT it also means you have your own destiny in your control. Whereas if you buy cloudcrap, *when* the company decides to alter the deal, you're at their behest. Dont like that? Too fucking bad.

kbuck 4y ago
Just because a device isn't cloud-connected doesn't mean it isn't designed for planned obsolescence. For example, the ongoing cheapening of major appliances, or the DRM applied to printer cartridges and coffee pods. This is a legislation problem IMO: companies need to be held to reasonable expectations when they sell a product. My ink cartridge shouldn't say it's "empty" when the page counter reaches 100 [and it's still actually full]. Neither should cloud devices go to the landfill because the company selling them decided that they don't want to support them anymore. Companies foisting negative externalities on us (like more e-waste) in exchange for more profit are a blight and should be treated (and prevented) as such.
- DyslexicAtheist 4y ago
  fully with you except > because the company selling them decided that they don't want to support them anymore. in IoT for consumer devices companies must ensure that a software is free of security issues. in some cases the support period of 3rd party dependencies is out of control of the vendor. and vendors usually don't control the upstream silicon and firmware. so if an SDK ships an outdated mbedtls and upstream refuses to patch their SDK also downstream will not be able to release a patch. and in that case the law says connectivity needs to be disabled for that appliance. the situation today is that vendors are only starting to realize that this is the future in which they operate. so while the appliance is still operable in a dumb-mode any smart-features will have to be reduced to the max time you can ensure support. while this sounds like pretty normal and sane to most it absolutely isn't how IoT vendors in the past have operated. And i hope the minute RED directive kicks into gear by Aug 2024 consumers will start to sue them into oblivion if a vendor is for some reason unable to ship a security update.

bell-cot 4y ago

Idea: Prosecute such companies for obtaining money under false pretenses. If you only get the thingie which you "bought" for a limited time - that is clearly a rental, not a sale.

themitigating 4y ago
So if ford stops making spare parts 30 years after a car was discontinued is the car rented?
- belorn 4y ago
  If the car has drm in it that refuses alternative third-party parts, then yes, the car was rented. This is why right to repair laws are needed. It fixes this missrepresentation.
- shkkmo 4y ago
  If they take steps to prohibit other people from making their own parts, then yes.
- Forge36 4y ago
  This is more like if BMW stops supporting their servers so they disable your heated seats.
- LocalH 4y ago
  Bad analogy. There's a difference between that, where the hypothetical car in question has malfunctioned, and a company being able to just decide that a feature that they offered across the board for free is suddenly being discontinued. Imagine that you have a Ford that comes with seat heaters. You've been able to use those seat heaters, at no additional charge, for several years. All of a sudden, Ford decides they want to make existing customers pay for something they've been using for years. The next time you go to the dealer for an unrelated reason, they silently install Ford's new update that restricts you from turning on the seat heaters without paying a monthly subscription to Ford. Even this analogy breaks down, as with the Arlo situation they have to provide server-side storage for the feature, whereas such a seat heater conundrum would not. However, this analogy is closer to the real situation than "manufacturer stops making parts three decades after discontinuation".

cs702 4y ago

In short, the people who "purchased" these cameras do not own them. Specifically, the owners of these cameras may own the hardware, but cannot use it because they do not own nor control the software that runs it. Richard Stallman predicted this decades ago. Regardless of what you think of him, he was the first person to come up with the idea of free open-source software expressly to give users the ability to (quoting) "control the program and what it does for them. When users don't control the program, we call it a 'nonfree' or 'proprietary' program. The nonfree program controls the users, and the developer controls the program."[a] He was, and is, right about this. [a] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ilyt 4y ago
Not that I disagree but in this case it seems to be mostly about "free" cloud storage ending: > Starting April 1, the company would no longer support models that included no-fee seven-day rolling storage of video clips—a well-advertised selling point. And cameras were still being able to be used with external storage > Instead, Arlo device owners could upgrade to one of the company’s paid plans, starting at $13 a month or buy an add-on device to store videos. Which is... exactly what you'd have to do with fully open source system anyway, buy a box to store it or pay someone for storage.
- cs702 4y ago
  > Not that I disagree but... :-) Keep in mind: Customers thought they were purchasing cameras with seven days of storage.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - ilyt 4y ago
    I mean if you thought you will pay flat fee and get online hosting till the end of time (and most likely didn't read the fine print that said it isn't infinite in time), that's on you

travisporter 4y ago

I’m just waiting for this to happen to newfangled connected cars. Hopefully then people will start to vote about the issue

jimhuntpl 4y ago
Already happened. Cars can and are being remotely shut down, irrespective of their purchaser's wishes.
JohnFen 4y ago
Indeed. I cannot imagine a circumstance where I'd be willing to buy a car that requires a connection to someone else's server.

formerly_proven 4y ago

> internet-connected security cameras These stopping to work is actually one of the best outcomes you can have As opposed to e.g. internet-connected security cameras being hacked so that anyone can watch your home or footage from internet-connected security cameras being shared by the service provider with just about anyone or footage from internet-connected security cameras being completely useless because of the cheap hardware used for them, creating a feeling of surveillance without any of the benefits

1-6 4y ago

When companies advertise free for life, take it with a grain of salt. If they can't force people into a paid subscription, then they'll simply stop making the device work. Remember, if Google can cut off support, what makes you think others wouldn't? Remember Stadia? Customers should agree to nothing less other than getting refunded for their camera setup.

pepperidgeFarm 4y ago
Perhaps Stadia is a bad example, because Pepperidge Farms remembers when Google refunded every purchase when Stadia shut down. It was, however, surprising they chose to do so.
lokar 4y ago
I do remember stadia. I got a full refund for the hardware and all games purchased.

vouaobrasil 4y ago

A lot of people advocate for traditional cameras gaining some sort of smart interface to facilitate sharing or some other such features. What they don't understand is that traditional cameras work extremely well with their dedicated but seemingly outdated interfaces, and moreover, they prevent things like this from happening. Replaceable batteries, replaceable storage, and "primitive" but exceptionally functional firmware makes it so that you can still pick up an 8-year old camera like the Nikon D7200 and produce shots that have the same quality as today's cameras without worrying about it not being supported (because it's essentially a complete product).

switchbak 4y ago
Not sure how better usability wrt to sharing from the camera would ensure that this kind of thing never happens. I think cameras tend to work well over time because that's the expectation of the manufacturers and the purchasers, and photographers would rebel en masse otherwise. If most consumers would be a little more prickly about these things and strongly punish these greedy companies, I don't think we'd see nearly as much of this. This kind of thing simply wouldn't fly in the 60s, but we've been conditioned to just accept it. Well that and consumer protection is basically non-existent. I still want to share photos easily from my camera though!
m463 4y ago
"smart" televisions just means long boot times and... intrusion. Why would smart cameras end up any different? I will say the DSLRs understand the necessity of immediacy - turn it on and take a shot. (well, there is the "turn it on" part) Honestly I don't know why phone cameras haven't understood the immediacy thing. why not dedicate one button to ALWAYS take a picture, getting the shot even at the expense of accidental shots.
- dzikimarian 4y ago
  Maybe not one, but double-press power and then volume button and you have photo pretty fast.
  - 4y ago

jhonovich 4y ago

This can get even worse, e.g. Verkada, Meraki, what we named "Hostage as a Service" https://youtu.be/_vhIdsHeI0M https://youtu.be/_vhIdsHeI0M

voakbasda 4y ago
This is a brilliant term that perfectly summarizes the status quo of most IoT vendors and products. I will be using it henceforth and forever more.

ecpottinger 4y ago

I never understood why I need MY hardware to use their servers. If I buy something it should be mine alone.

compiler-guy 4y ago
You don’t. The timing getting cancelled here is the free storage tier. But if you want to use your own local storage you can.
ilyt 4y ago
The people that bought it and complained it stopped being free don't want to put their own storage servers up

mr_tristan 4y ago

The cloud era seems to exacerbate these kinds of issues. The only way to truly have "long term" service is to be a subscriber, not a "buy once" customer. If you're a part of their revenue next year, they're going to try to keep you. Otherwise, you're just one excuse away from being dropped. The "right to repair" laws being developed might help here, but I don't know what this means for anything "connected to a service". If the service goes down, are there laws that say we need to be able to connected to something else? I'm not aware of much. I mean, as an Arlo customer, I knew this was coming, but that's because I've worked in tech for over 20 years, and know none of these companies can operate a plan that looks ahead more than 2 years. Ultimately technology is either subscribed, or "rented" for an undefined period of time. It's never "bought". It's gonna take some serious regulation to make that happen, and I'm not even sure how that will work.

ErikVandeWater 4y ago

Disappointing the article didn't specify the marketing that was used to sell the cameras five years ago. Obviously planned obsolescence is bad, but I'd like to know how misleading they were when selling the product.

wwfzyn 4y ago

Sounds like we don't purchase cameras anymore. We purchase a subscription to use the cameras until our subscription expires.

omershapira 4y ago

The interesting arbitrage here is: • Product BOM prices are more-or-less known by the public, product margin not as much • Cloud prices are low • Customers expect low product but high subscription prices I wonder if consumer protection can make a separation like this work. The Playstation model (sponsoring the hardware assuming >100% ROI over the product's lifetime) is bad for small companies, and definitely bad for e-waste when they fail. But mobile phone contracts make it clear you can own the phone after the contract, and still need to pay service fees throughout the usage, and that's mostly considered fair; and could definitely be a lot worse in terms of e-waste.

prpl 4y ago

There is probably a useful life of ~10 years on most types of consumer internet-connected hardware. I doubt these are 10 years old, but it would probably be in everybody’s interest to just say “we’ll support this connecting to the internet and requisite services for 10 years.” - Especially for hardware that could seriously infringe on a persons home privacy.

ilyt 4y ago
That's why it should be OSS, at the very least code released after vendor decides to stop supporting it. It's of little cost to the company (competitors seeing your 5 or 10 years code is non-issue really, tech went forward enough for that to not matter) but prevents at least some from going to landfill

Ekaros 4y ago

I think "free" cloud services and addons should always include prominently visible end of service dates. As such buyers could reasonably estimate is the life time left for device good enough at the time of purchase. With physical product this should be printed on the outside of the box in very prominent manner. And with digital, it should be visible in big enough typeface also. Breaking this would result in possible damages or full refund to customer. And in bankruptcy certain amount should be hold to keep the services running.

khromov 4y ago

While we wait for better legislation, all we can do is vote with our wallets. That's why I started the review site Unwanted Cloud to review how well devices work without "cloud" connectivity: https://unwanted.cloud/ https://unwanted.cloud/

pandaman 4y ago

Games, just as movies, have anything from dogs to the people who kicked in $2 on the Kickstarter in credits, there has to be more to this story than this or there is soon going to be a massacre of some "rogue" catering driver taking down Disney's blockbusters.

gtvwill 4y ago

This is basically every apple product ever. Get turned into paperweights despite being fully functional devices just because apple won't supply updates, won't open firmware or software up for users to apply updates. Can't claim your a ethical company when you do toxic unethical crap like that. Legit e-waste created for nothing but maintenance of a companies profit. Shit drives me up the wall. Should be legislated against. You can tell alot about people's ethics by how much they like to fix and reuse things or how much value they put on repairable items. Business tactics that are this malicious towards society on so many levels should be legislated out of existence.