Submitted by kwiens t3_z23bft in technology
Comments
SparkStormrider t1_ixemoxe wrote
I firmly agree. The amount of e-waste is staggering where I am in a rural area, can only imagine what it's like for a city. The fact that we even need to discuss "Right to Repair" tells us something is definitely wrong, not to mention screwed up, with our legal system.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixepifl wrote
It's not just the legal system. It's the whole economy.
Apple makes their billions selling everyone a new iPhone every year. So does Samsung and everyone else. If the machine is repairable (vs being just glued together as a solid lump of epoxy), it adds to the manufacturing cost, which means either less profits or higher price (and less sales). So it's easier to just say 'it's broken and it can't be fixed, throw it in the garbage and buy a new one' and everyone except the consumer makes more money that way.
Thus everyone has a drawer somewhere with an old phone that has a broken screen or a worn out battery or some other ailment that would be entirely fixable, if it was fixable.
On a societal scale though you're talking literally thousands of truckloads of broken phones and gadgets, many of which could be fixed if they were designed to be fixed. Or which could be fixed but the owner didn't want to decide between an overpriced 'authorized repair' and a cheap but 'unsafe' 'unwarranted' 3rd party fix.
And they all end up in 3rd world countries where little kids split them apart and boil the circuit boards in acid to strip the gold plating off the contacts.
I think the disease goes even deeper though. Look at clothing for example. Gotta keep up with the trend, gotta buy new outfits every year. The old ones are still perfectly good but because some asshole designer says they are out of fashion, they're no good. So they all go in the trash and we grow more cotton and make more synthetics to make more clothes to replace the perfectly good ones we already had because they were last year's color.
Jaivez t1_ixfuvzi wrote
> If the machine is repairable (vs being just glued together as a solid lump of epoxy), it adds to the manufacturing cost
This isn't even the truth of it though. Nothing about proposed right to repair regulations is about forcing companies to make changes to how a device is manufactured to make them repairable. It's about preventing companies from putting up roadblocks like permanently pairing a part to a specific device, preventing manufacturers from forcing suppliers to make parts or support software unavailable to third parties, and otherwise preventing companies from making the only option the manufacturer for after-sale support. Their manufacturing costs would actually go down, as they spend R&D and other resources creating these controls.
It does mean that their revenue will drop as people make use of repair options, but that's tangential and honestly not something that consumers should care about at all. All in all, the thing that RTR hopes to achieve is giving consumers the option to repair themselves, or use third party repair shops. For how much people hate capitalism it's wild how okay people are with what the state of the industry is when it comes to their preferred brands considering they don't even have to make use of it.
BumderFromDownUnder t1_ixh7x47 wrote
The only problem with what you’ve just said is both fixing the screen and replacing the battery are both doable. The treason they aren’t in some cases is because of software blocks, not because of how they’re manufactured.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixhqd7u wrote
Oh for sure. But I suspect if they could get away with it both Apple and Samsung would fill their casings with epoxy.
Lordnerble t1_ixg7mol wrote
I wish recycling was easier in cities. I try to recycle when I can. But regulations and fees make it stupid. No wonder people just dump that shit on the side of the road and in alleys. Need more areas to have free for all recycling or reuse programs. No fees no stupid rules
my3sgte t1_ixfhm4q wrote
We talk about this at work quite a bit - about cheap electronics and how things are made to be just thrown away now :/ …sad….
Worried_Lawfulness43 t1_ixfmrmz wrote
I feel like this a matter climate activists and right to repair activists can work together on. This is a great argument for reducing environmental waste and it should be picked up as an argument. I’d love to see right to repair gain even more traction.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixfog0l wrote
Agreed. This SHOULD be the type of thing EVERYONE can get behind. Of course those who benefit from selling disposable phones will make a stink like 'this unnecessary government intrusion into the private market will make your next cell phone more expensive' and some people will buy that :\
Worried_Lawfulness43 t1_ixfoz4q wrote
I think I’m optimistic about where we are in terms of technology for this to work. Right to repair can also mean, better quality resellers with phones being sold for cheaper prices due to there being an abundance of decent quality secondhands on the market.
It could help people who wouldn’t ordinarily have the means to get a phone every couple years hold onto a phone for longer, therefor allowing them to be more comfortable in making an investment with getting a smartphone. This could lead to a great reduction in the amount of prepaid phones people actually use.
I’d love to see how it shakes out, but ultimately it’s hard not see how it’s better for the consumer and the earth. I think prepaid phone people would have a hard time creating a solid argument.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixfrmm8 wrote
> Right to repair can also mean, better quality resellers with phones being sold for cheaper prices due to there being an abundance of decent quality secondhands on the market.
Hell yes. I'd love to see that.
I'd also like to see phones just built better. EVERYone puts one in a case. So why not make the phone a few mm bigger in each dimension and make it naturally indestructible?
Worried_Lawfulness43 t1_ixfs7x9 wrote
I think right to repair is a fantastic step in incentivizing companies to make better quality devices. For what I envision, I think legislation on both the environmental side and technology side could absolutely strong arm companies into having standards for their devices out the gate. We’re already seeing this in the EU with the way they’re forcing companies to have a similar charging cable standard. I’m really hoping this swings the way I want it to, and I’m not being overly optimistic.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixftxx0 wrote
I agree. The USB-C legislation is a great step. I just wish it went further- earlier versions of it included personal mobility devices like e-bikes and scooters. With USB-C up to like 240 watts now there's no reason those devices shouldn't be included (with a provision for allowing proprietary connectors for higher wattages, although I think USB-C should still be required so you can 240w charge when the proprietary connector isn't available).
My understanding is that this got dropped and it's just electronic gadgets for now.
Worried_Lawfulness43 t1_ixfy29m wrote
I have hope that it’ll show up in the future. I do still find it a bit weird that it was dropped for the present time though.
MakesShitUp4Fun t1_ixhmmpu wrote
They'd stand a far better chance if they sent her a nice fat "campaign" check. That's the only thing that seems to work in NY these days.
SirEDCaLot t1_ixhq748 wrote
You're not wrong :\
This is why I'm against single-party rule, no matter which party is doing the single-party ruling. Reds and blues can be equally fucked up when they are guaranteed re-election.
NoGoodDM t1_ixgd2vn wrote
Ehhh. I agree with the general sentiment, but I have reasonably receive 3 faulty screen replacements from iFixit in a row. I haven’t even requested a replacement for my latest crappy screen from them because I’m just tired of the hassle, and I decided to just live with the dime-sized burn mark in my screen.
For me personally, iFixit has contributed more to e-waste than the OEM.
But apart from that, yes, obviously let people fix their own crap if they’d like to. I’m not in the least opposed to that, I’m just critiquing the e-waste portion.
doxx_in_the_box t1_ixhrdc9 wrote
Yea I want OEM authentication along with right to repair. One is useless without the other.
IFixit is a money grab using cheap replacement parts because companies like Apple don’t give them a choice.
Aleucard t1_ixif7xz wrote
The repair people have to choose between cannibalizing new products for parts and reenacting Lord of War to get what they need for your stuff. Blame the corporations for forcing this, and vote for people willing to pass laws banning that shit.
Sweet-Sale-7303 t1_ixelngw wrote
She has a whole bunch of bills sitting waiting for her to sign. She has a bill making it harder for thieves to sell catalytic converters in NY that passed both houses as wel.
voidsrus t1_ixen3hn wrote
> She has a bill making it harder for thieves to sell catalytic converters in NY that passed both houses as wel.
those rings can actually make hundreds of millions of dollars, so i'm not saying her lack of a signature is a payoff/campaign contribution but they could sure as hell afford one...
[deleted] t1_ixexesu wrote
does that tinfoil cut off circulation?
Edit: I misconstrued his tone as sarcastically implying they did, but dude is unable to admit that text based communications inherently causes such misunderstandings - despite ample research saying it does.
voidsrus t1_ixexit5 wrote
did you learn reading in school?
​
> i'm not saying
[deleted] t1_ixey027 wrote
You're coming across as sarcastically implying that they did bribe her
Fapdooken t1_ixf1bal wrote
It came across as a joke to me and certainly not anyone saying the governor is in the pocket of catalytic converter thieves.
[deleted] t1_ixf1pma wrote
Yeah, like i said to him - text based communication robs us of accurate tone. 50% of the time misconstrued. So he's going to have people interpreting it how he intended, and misinterpreting it. I was one of the latter, you were one of the former.
voidsrus t1_ixeynve wrote
i'm sarcastically saying they could afford to.
sometimes, when reading something, it actually helps to get to the end of the sentence:
>they could sure as hell afford one...
[deleted] t1_ixezpai wrote
Sigh, dude - we read to the end of the sentence. even with the end it comes across as you sarcastically implying they did.
Keep in mind that 50% of all text based communications are misconstrued for tone. We don't know you and we lack facial expression, body language and verbal tone cues to help interpret your intent.
voidsrus t1_ixezzch wrote
>we read to the end of the sentence. even with the end it comes across as you sarcastically implying they did.
which goes back to my first question:
>did you learn reading in school?
[deleted] t1_ixf0vt6 wrote
OK I hate to have to be that person but
> did you learn reading in school?
Yes. Yes I fucking did, and my test scores bear it out.
You however never learned to admit when you failed to effectively communicate and just double down on defensiveness even when offered an entire fucking airport hangar sized open door to walk through and chalk it up to the known errors text based communication introduces.
voidsrus t1_ixf1bkr wrote
>Yes. Yes I fucking did, and my test scores bear it out.
you failed this test, so clearly those scores are a mistake
​
>never learned to admit when you failed to effectively communicate
it's a perfectly clear sentence, you just can't read & decided it meant something else
[deleted] t1_ixf1laj wrote
you need to get therapy for your screaming insecurity bro
voidsrus t1_ixf1thr wrote
i'm insecure because you can't read? lol
[deleted] t1_ixf2224 wrote
You're insecure because of your reaction to an easy to occur and understandable misinterpretation of tone, and your refusal to admit that happens despite massive amounts of research saying it does. You're insecure because you started trying to attack my intelligence when after I pointed out that effect.
Sorry your life sucks so much dude that you cannot just accept that misunderstandings happen. I hope it gets better for you.
Abedeus t1_ixgsv6y wrote
Bro your post 100% sounded like you were implying bribery.
Seems like you're the one who failed to learn how to read, or I guess write in this case.
teddytwelvetoes t1_ixfzrs5 wrote
solid chance her commute is sitting in the back seat of a private car with her eyes buried in her iPhone lol
Ratnix t1_ixgoa4o wrote
That's what i was thinking. I would be surprised if this wasn't the case. The chances of someone like that seeing something like this seem rather small.
gazorpaglop t1_ixewov6 wrote
Repair info is more accessible than ever for almost every device or appliance. Shoot, if I have something broken and I can find 10 videos of shlubby looking dudes like me fixing it, I’m going to take a crack at it 9/10 times. Just this year I’ve avoided replacing a tv due to a bad backlight strip, a dishwasher due to a common leak, my switch due to a bad battery, and a load of stuff on my cars.
I’d love it if repairability had to be engineered in from the beginning for everything at this point. It makes little sense not to
Suffuri t1_ixg1mbz wrote
Every day I hope Apple makes back glass anything like Samsung phones, because holy shit if that breaks it's a massive pain to replace, and can easily lead to more damaged stuff with how all their cabling and such is routed.
Salad55 t1_ixgf5cv wrote
Their newest model has replaceable back glass for like 100$ oem and will 100% have aftermarket options for under 20$ soon.
LurkingLarry43 t1_ixfao27 wrote
What a strange state we live in that this is even needed.
loliconest t1_ixhbrrj wrote
I mean... in the past people used to fight with their life for basic human rights (even now). It's not like we don't still have a tons of problem to solve, but we gotta fight for our rights.
SynbiosVyse t1_ixjq5la wrote
I'd say it's not really needed, but it doesn't necessarily hurt either. It's an extra level of consumer protection that I support.
You can vote with your wallet by purchasing products that respect your freedom. I know it reduces options but if it's really important to you, you wouldn't give business to Apple, John Deere, etc
usesbitterbutter t1_ixg3ms3 wrote
So that the person driving the governor can read it?
p0inted t1_ixglx4v wrote
English is my second language, I find "America's" a little strange, I read it as "America is". I would instinctively write it as "Americas". Can someone enlighten me? 🙂
Blazecan t1_ixgo04d wrote
An apostrophe, (‘), is used in two ways. The first is when combining words in a conjunction. For example, can’t stands for can not. The apostrophe can also be used to show ownership. In this case, “America’s first electronics Right to Repair Bill” means that this first electronics Right to Repair Bill belongs to America
xternal7 t1_ixguhha wrote
Notable exception being pronouns, where [pronoun]'s means [pronoun] is, and [pronoun]s suggests possession because English says fuck you.
vedyzal t1_ixh0lg6 wrote
huh? that's not how it works. Possession is a whole inflection in english. His, Hers, Theirs, Mine, etc. The 's thing is an abbreviation bc that's how every single language on earth works, they tend to have abbreviated forms of words and expressions. With all the valid criticisms you could've given (inconsistent spelling being a big one) this one just ain't it, chief.
I hate it when natives pretend that their language is "hard". It seems like a common attitude around the world. Native speakers are unable to objectively (if that was even a thing) discern how hard or easy their language is.
[deleted] t1_ixh1k6u wrote
[removed]
wysiwywg t1_ixgngaa wrote
I believe the reason is that it implies ownership, hence written this way.
LongjumpingMonitor32 t1_ixh3t4c wrote
All you need to know is that if you ever see anything come out of The States using AMERICA'S, it's most certainly going to imply that its US centric and has absolutely nothing to do with either Canada, Mexico, or South America. It's all nationalistic pertaining to the USA itself and nothing else. That's how we see ourselves. As someone else pointed out, a simple way to gesture self importance and an F U to everyone else.
glassFractals t1_ixj00tk wrote
This legislation is a huge deal, I hope she signs it. It would be some of the best pro-consumer legislation in recent American history. It would help combat planned obsolescence, it'll save people money, and it'll reduce e-waste and pollution.
The bill makes it so companies that sell products in NY that contain electronic components would have to offer parts, tools, info, documentation, and software that allows owners and 3rd-party repair shops to service and repair products long-term. It also makes it so 3rd party repairs don't void the warranty.
It will help people everywhere, especially people that use products long-term. Inevitably, stuff breaks over time. Without any published documentation or repair parts, it can be extremely difficult to fix something that should be easy to fix.
When France passed a similar law, a lot of companies were forced to publish documentation that really helped people add years on to the lifespans of products.
The bill isn't perfect, it doesn't apply to lots of stuff that it probably should apply to: major home appliances, cars, farm equipment. But it's a great first step, and by far the most sweeping example of this sort of legislation so far in the US. California attempted to pass such a law and it failed to pass. Hoping that Hochul makes the right call here.
[deleted] t1_ixedrg3 wrote
[removed]
tubepatsy t1_ixgp96u wrote
It's not for her to see it's for her to hear about.
Hopefully some news outlets picks it up and maybe Twitter and some other places and gets some attention.
I think Ifixit should have just mailed her the money it's how politics works :-)
SirEDCaLot t1_ixekfn8 wrote
Good. Hope she signs it.
The less e-junk we have the better. Always better to fix than to replace.