4 ms·
> Letting people know if a part is genuine empowers the user. And putting DRM on hardware to prevent people using third-party peripherals disempowers the user,
by PontifexMinimus 2y ago
> Letting people know if a part is genuine empowers the user.
And putting DRM on hardware to prevent people using third-party peripherals disempowers the user, and should be illegal.
- thebruce87m 2y ago> And putting DRM on hardware to prevent people using third-party peripherals disempowers the user, and should be illegal. This is not relevant to this discussion.
- g15jv2dp 2y agoWho are you to decide that? I find the concern very relevant to the discussion.
- thebruce87m 2y agoBecause in my original reply I said “alerts” and not “blocks using drm”? I have a preference for OEM parts. Other people can use a third party battery. Given the fire hazard on cheap batteries, I’ll pass.
- PontifexMinimus 2y ago> Because in my original reply I said “alerts” and not “blocks using drm”? And how soon before manufacturers move from the first to the second, if they are not stopped by law? I have no objection to alerts per se, as long as it is done in a non-obnoxious way.
- thebruce87m 2y agoNot sure, but if it was my own company I’d want to block third party batteries to ensure my users get the experience that I have designed and tested for. If that wasn’t legal, then I’d want to at least log it. That way when someone claims my product burned down their house, I would have proof that it wasn’t my battery that did it. This isn’t bullet proof however- if you are a big enough company the media headlines will still have your product in the headline, and you’d be lucky if the main body mentioned the manufacturer of the fault-causing component.