2 ms·

You can't start production before work on the product dis-continues. A lot of e-waste gadgets are therefore effectively discontinued before the launch day. They

You can't start production before work on the product dis-continues. A lot of e-waste gadgets are therefore effectively discontinued before the launch day. They don't ramp up and down like cars, they source parts and make few batches and move on, like how you make cookies. IMO the ideal end state to this problem cannot happen before massive debloating and standardization of software and hardware. It's just not realistic when anyone's writing C-like code on a sandbox atop dozen layers of C-like environments.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
The end date isn't when you stop manufacturing the product, it's when you stop supporting it, e.g. when it has a known security vulnerability and you've gone an unreasonable length of time without releasing a patch.
- numpad0 2y ago
  The original developer team, source codes, and build instructions would all be gone by then. Otherwise you should be able to issue a patch. I suppose you can codify code archives and code release enforcement framework in penal codes, like use of components with non-escrowed firmware code or losing access to code felony crimes with long sentences, but that's horrible.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    The source code gets released at the point when you're discontinuing support. At that point you still have it, and the team, you're just not planning to continue supporting it tomorrow, so you release it now. If tomorrow comes and for the next vulnerability you can neither patch it nor release the code because you don't have it anymore, now you're in trouble, because you have an obligation to do one or the other. But whose fault is that? You had it a month ago and were supposed to release it before you delete it. Imposing penalties for that kind of pointlessly destructive behavior is hardly unreasonable.
    - kube-system 2y ago
      What kind of penalties? Are you willing to throw developers in prison to enforce this?
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The ordinary penalties for violating this type of requirement in other contexts. That's typically a fine for negligence and more serious penalties for willful violations.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

The end date isn't when you stop manufacturing the product, it's when you stop supporting it, e.g. when it has a known security vulnerability and you've gone an unreasonable length of time without releasing a patch.

numpad0 2y ago
The original developer team, source codes, and build instructions would all be gone by then. Otherwise you should be able to issue a patch. I suppose you can codify code archives and code release enforcement framework in penal codes, like use of components with non-escrowed firmware code or losing access to code felony crimes with long sentences, but that's horrible.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  The source code gets released at the point when you're discontinuing support. At that point you still have it, and the team, you're just not planning to continue supporting it tomorrow, so you release it now. If tomorrow comes and for the next vulnerability you can neither patch it nor release the code because you don't have it anymore, now you're in trouble, because you have an obligation to do one or the other. But whose fault is that? You had it a month ago and were supposed to release it before you delete it. Imposing penalties for that kind of pointlessly destructive behavior is hardly unreasonable.
  - kube-system 2y ago
    What kind of penalties? Are you willing to throw developers in prison to enforce this?
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      The ordinary penalties for violating this type of requirement in other contexts. That's typically a fine for negligence and more serious penalties for willful violations.