Slashdot Mirror
EU Prepares 'Right To Repair' Legislation To Fight Short Product Lifespans (bleepingcomputer.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The EU is preparing legislation that would legalize a customer's "right to repair," and would force vendors to design products for longer life and easier maintenance, in an effort to combat electronic waste and abusive practices like manufacturers legally preventing users from repairing their devices. The legislation is in its earlier stages of public discussion, but it already has the backing of several EU Members of Parliament, along with support from organizations like Greenpeace.
Currently, in the US only eleven states have similar laws, and they have been adopted after years of public discussions, and only for certain markets, and not for all types of products. It is unclear what leverage the EU will use to force manufacturers to produce longer lasting products, as this would mean lesser profits for big businesses, who often used tactics such as software DRMs, warranty contract lock-ins, and soldering components together, just to avoid users repairing products on their own.
Currently, in the US only eleven states have similar laws, and they have been adopted after years of public discussions, and only for certain markets, and not for all types of products. It is unclear what leverage the EU will use to force manufacturers to produce longer lasting products, as this would mean lesser profits for big businesses, who often used tactics such as software DRMs, warranty contract lock-ins, and soldering components together, just to avoid users repairing products on their own.
While I applaud such measures [as a techno-nerd one of the most infuriating aspects of the economy for me is the enforced obsolescence] I cannot help but wonder - since the whole planet agrees on the basic principles of free market capitalism, which inevitably result in forced obsolescence and a race to the bottom ["best product for the most affordable price' is the same as "worst product for the highest possible price"] why do we then spend absolutely enormous amount of time, money and effort to STOP the system going to where it goes naturally based on its premises.
What an absurd idea - make the worst and most destructive qualities of humans the most rewarded in the system [greed!], thus creating evolutionary pressure for all of us to become more and more sociopathic [i.e. successful] and then start pushing against the inevitable outcome.
Why don't we change the system so that it encourages and promotes human survival, procreation and happiness rather than greed and criminal wasting of resources. Ah, I know - the economists told me that the present system reflects exactly human nature [which is flawed, so we can't do jack shit about that - what a fucking LIE this is!] so this is the best of all possible worlds - where the ancestors of those economist set the system 200 years ago to benefit the "haves" and now we call that "natural system"; we claim that it is as immutable as the laws of Nature rather than a scam set up by humans to keep and increase their power.
'Summary: Humanity collectively opened the shitter above our heads and then stood in the shit rain wondering why it is shit and not honey.....unbelievable!
The main impediment to repair of electronics is simply lack of information - that schematics and board overlays are simply unavailable. Without them, a repair person is flying blind. With them, they can determine the fault by measuring voltage rails around the board, and the repair is often replacing jelly bean parts that are worth pennies - or just bypassing broken board connections. The other thing we lack is source code. manufacturers abandon products as soon as they are sold, and withhold source code (as well as locking the device up with code signing) so users cannot fix their bugs. 'Right to repair' legislation should address these problems first.
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
Oh please, melodrama much?
For once the EU actually does something to the benefit of the average Joe, but rest assured you find some dimwit to complain about it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
First of all, cost means nothing. Nothing at all. Take any phone you want. Now try to tell me with a straight face that the cost to make it has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with the price the customer has to pay. Try it and I'll yell BULLSHIT at you before you're done. Because it is.
Cost has literally nothing to do with the final price of a product. Cost determines whether a product is made, for it will not be produced if the cost outgrows the potential selling price, but that's it. Do you really want to tell me the iPhone would get a cent cheaper if it could be made for 10 bucks less?
The price the customer has to pay is a careful calculation of the profit "sweet spot". Where is the maximum of profit_per_item*items_sold? That's the question. You really want to convince anyone that the extra buck it costs to make it repairable would change that by even that buck? I call bullshit.
And thickness: Newsflash, nobody gives a shit how thick your phone is. If anything, it might actually survive being slipped into a pocket again if it's thicker than the average slice of tinfoil again.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.