6 ms·

Idea: if a cloud-connected product is bricked within 7 years of purchase, the company responsible must make the code open-source and freely available in a publi

• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• bArray 2y ago
  In this case it makes a lot of sense to open-source the product, at least the non-proprietary parts. It would be extremely cool to provide a build process, a framework and drivers for each actuator/sensor. From there these devices could live a new life quite easily.
• drvladb 2y ago
  I’d like that idea, but I feel like more would have to go into it. Things like user-accessible updates/reflashing, or someone to care enough about the software to fix it for use by everyone else. Support requirements + this are probably a better way to go.
• cjrp 2y ago
  What if they're going bankrupt anyway though? No fine will matter surely
  • noja 2y ago
    Pierce the corporate veil?
  • jeroenhd 2y ago
    You'd probably need to put the source code/keys in escrow. With legally mandated escrow, you can go after the owners/executives if they're not compliant.
    • Aurornis 2y ago
      Businesses are more than some source code. Even if you forced a company to release source code, you’d need to have access to the cloud domains and be able to have someone setup and operate servers at those addresses for everyone to use. Forcing companies to forfeit their IP to public domain is an idea that appeals to tech people who imagine they’re going to reboot the entire service themselves, but it wouldn’t actually solve these problems in real life business cases. It’s also effectively an appropriation of the company’s IP. Any country that introduced legislation that mandated companies run products for 7 years or completely forfeit all of the IP would immediately see development and production of that product move to other countries without such laws. These ideas get floated on Hacker News but they’re completely unrealistic. > you can go after the owners/executives if they're not compliant. Holding startup founders personally liable if their product or business fails before 7 years and their business can’t be open sourced would create a very bad business environment, to say the least. This also ignores the real problem that parts of source code are frequently licensed, not owned. Companies can’t just open source everything because they’re often using some licensed software or libraries. This entire plan would make it effectively illegal for companies to develop or release a product which contains code they licensed from another party. The number of issues with these kinds of ideas are numerous. It’s the domain of Internet fantasy, not actual policy.
      • paulryanrogers 2y ago
        > This also ignores the real problem that parts of source code are frequently licensed, not owned. Companies can’t just open source everything because they’re often using some licensed software or libraries. Regulation can require that sublicenses extend to private individuals for repair of devices or services that are EOL. It could even limit the versions covered and commercial use. Regardless, perfect doesn't need to be the enemy of the good. As it is consumers are increasingly powerless and landfills are overflowing.
        • Aurornis 2y ago
          What you’re suggesting is a ban on licensing closed source software. Any country that did something like this would see every hardware company immediately relocate to a different country that didn’t have such weird laws. Regulation like this is how you completely crush a country’s tech industry. > landfills are overflowing Tech waste is a tiny fraction of all garbage. People throw out more volumes of household trash in a week than they might discard tech devices in many years.
  • teeray 2y ago
    Then threaten the corporate officers’ freedom instead
    • plagiarist 2y ago
      This category of consequence would solve so many problems. Think of how much everyone's lives would be improved if stealing wages was a crime with actual repercussions.
      • hluska 2y ago
        Where do you see evidence of wages being stolen?
        • deleted 2y ago
          [deleted]
        • charlesabarnes 2y ago
          Wage theft is extremely common in the US, to the sum of billions https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-from-workers-paychecks-each-year/ https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-fro...
          • hluska 2y ago
            Perhaps but there is no evidence of wage theft in this instance. Is there evidence of it occurring in this case?
            • majewsky 2y ago
              GP was drawing a parallel, not alleging that wage theft is a part of these particular bankcruptcy proceedings.
    • Aurornis 2y ago
      Threatening to jail startup founders if they can’t open source the entire code for their product if it fails is one of the more out of touch ideas I’ve seen on Hacker News lately. Many products are developed with software licensed from vendors, which cannot be open sourced by the startup. They don’t even own the IP, just a license to use it.
  • citizenkeen 2y ago
    You could add it to the bankruptcy laws; the trustee would hire someone to release the code.
    • Aurornis 2y ago
      Many hardware products are built with licensed code. It cannot be released because the company doesn’t own all of it. There’s also more to a product than just some source code. You’d need the cloud domains, the private keys and certificates, and other bits. Releasing many of these to the public domain wouldn’t solve anything because you’d need someone to operate the cloud servers at the known address and trust with the private keys and certificates All of this quickly begins to look a lot like requiring someone to operate the business again, which is obviously a silly thing to require in bankruptcy proceedings. Forcing companies to release their IP if they go bankrupt is equally silly, because it renders the value of the company’s IP as $0 before anyone can be paid out. The only thing this would incentivize is for companies to either relocate to countries with sane laws, or to shut off the servers and avoid bankruptcies by keeping the company technically alive but doing nothing other than staying as a registered business. It would act as a holding company to keep the IP in case someone wanted to buy it.
  • mcv 2y ago
    Maybe on bankruptcy, any source code or data should not be part of the sale of the company to potential buyers, but first examined to see if it should be owned by the customers instead. Also relevant to 23andMe.
    • Muromec 2y ago
      If you didn't own it before bankruptcy, why should you own it after? You are not even their creditor.
      • mcv 2y ago
        Because it's necessary for the thing you do own.
• manarth 2y ago
  > CPU and memory are good enough that most regular consumer devices shouldn't need an internet connection Moxie appears to use ChatGPT and an in-house LLM for facial/speech recognition. https://moxierobot.com/products/ai-robot https://moxierobot.com/products/ai-robot "emotion-responsive HD camera and GPT-powered AI"
  • devsda 2y ago
    So, there's a physical product out there utilizing LLMs, the company secured funding from some well known VC funds. Yet, this company failed to secure additional funding at the last minute in an atmosphere where Gen AI is the buzz word everyone's after? Is this a one off case specific to this company or is it some sudden realization among businesses about the current viability of AI products?
    • thrw42A8N 2y ago
      Eh, that's like talking about the viability of computer products... Yeah, many will fail. And many will prevail in sizes you can't even imagine. There's nothing about AI that would tell you which company is going to be which.
      • pdimitar 2y ago
        > And many will prevail in sizes you can't even imagine. Been more than a year, still waiting. Sure, it might take 50. But the AI craziness is made no less crazy in the meantime. Way too much time and money thrown for fairly marginal benefits.
        • thrw42A8N 2y ago
          Still waiting for what? When OpenAI gets another 100 billion net worth? Marginal benefits? Even just Github Copilot itself is absolutely worth it, itself probably a billion dollar company, and changed the world.
          • 2y ago
• fbn79 2y ago
  Most likely the source code alone is not enough, probably the system works with third party paid cloud services or third party components that could not be licensed.
  • paulryanrogers 2y ago
    Cloud providers are available to competitors and private individuals, so it could still help. Any step in the direction of repair is a positive compared to the black boxes we have now.
  • Aurornis 2y ago
    And you need the private keys, the certificates, the cloud domains. Can’t release those publicly, so you’d need someone to hold the domains, the certs, they private keys, and operate the servers. That costs money, so they’d need to collect payments and manager customers. Starting to look an awful lot like running the company again. You probably also need the customer database including user accounts and user data. Obviously can’t release that, so you’d need some process to release everyone’s data individually on some ongoing basis. And you couldn’t release any code that was licensed rather than owned, so users couldn’t build most software anyway without acquiring their own licenses for that 3rd-party code. There are so many problems with this idea that would prevent it from being viable.
• NamTaf 2y ago
  This is a very hackeresque, blinkers-on response. Your idea may work for technical systems used by technical users, but in this case (and I'd bet my bottom dollar most cases are similar) that the products are intended for non-technical end users. How is some random family supposed to take the public repository of source code and set it up so their child's emotional support robot works? How is your middle-aged neighbour supposed to set up their Nest doorbell with someone else's server and establish trust? How is your aunt supposed to set their Alexa speaker to a self-hosted server? These are people who call a desktop computer a 'CPU'. Put yourself in their shoes, their IT skills are basically 0. Where would they host the compiled code? How would they even know where to start? The intention is certainly good and it would be an improvement, but it would not allow consumers - most of whom are buying an appliance - to continue using their products. Would it really also push investors and managers to pause? It's a non-monetary impact and I can't imagine they'd allocate any effort building systems that package it up so that it's simple to stand up the cloud services. It has no benefit to them. Most consumers aren't hackers/developers. Most are non-technical. Implicit in the purchase of a cloud-connected appliance is an expectation that some geeks somewhere make everything Just Work for them. They're not looking to have to tweak (digital) knobs and configure parameters - that's the company's job. That's why so many of these sorts of devices are designed with very simple user interfaces. Your suggestion is good within the narrow window of technical systems for technical consumers, but this is a far tougher nut to crack than that when considering the broader audience.
  • majewsky 2y ago
    But it is a necessary prerequisite for any solution that is accessible to non-technology-minded consumers.
    • NamTaf 2y ago
      Not at all. It’s about as necessary as owning a metal foundry is for someone who wants to use their cloud-enabled car. They don’t need the base materials, they need a turnkey solution. It’s a nice-to-have if you could resolve the part about needing to trust some random person picking it up and modifying it, or hosting their own server for you to use. Unlike when you purchase an item from a known legal entity, there’s way less assurance about your data, security, etc. The lay-consumer isn’t going to spin up a DO droplet to host their own instance. They’d be hard pressed to sign up to ChatGPT and drop in an API key. These are all very hard problems and I don’t pretend to have any answers.
• Muromec 2y ago
  Alternative idea -- regulate unnecessarily network connected shit out of the market. Just don't buy smart doorbells, robot vacuums that call upload your house maps to the cloud and 800 bucks teddy bears. Petition your overreaching unelected bureaucracy to disclose network connectivity, ask for the effective right to repair and the right to reconfigure network-depending shit to your own server (or one supported by 3rd party provider). Eventually network connected shit will piss off enough people to do a combination of all of above without the need to opensoure and deal with it yourself.
  • passwordoops 2y ago
    This is the correct response to my suggestion
• mulmen 2y ago
  This sounds far fetched but we do have precedent for companies paying for future contingencies up front. The first example I can think of is unemployment insurance. It’s a payroll tax so even if the company goes broke and has to fire everyone the state has some cash on hand to make the employee’s whole. Something like that could be done here. If you make products that don’t last a reasonable amount of time or you pack up in the middle of commitments then there’s some way for your relevant corporate assets to be transferred to another entity that will take up support.
• bborud 2y ago
  This is one law that would stand an exactly zero percent chance of ever passing the US congress. For the simple reason that those who would stand to potentially lose money over such a law own the law makers. I'm sorry, but the legislative branch isn't of or for you. It is of and for the companies that pay for the congressional campaigns.