The problem is that it makes it impossible to have a version 0 to iterate on until a whole lot of other industries have advanced. Imagine the situation of in-ear hearing aids: they shouldn't be allowed to exist until they're perfect, unless we're happy telling deaf people they have to wear much larger than necessary devices and advertise their disability.

I'm glad we're reducing e-waste. I'm not thrilled about the idea of saying you can't make a thing until 100% of the bugs are worked out, meaning you can't have a beta version for research and fundraising, meaning, you can't conjure the perfect version into existence.

▲

numpad0 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"Invisible In-the-Canal" hearing aids are battery replaceable. That argument just won't fly.

1: https://assets-ae.rt.demant.com/-/media/project/retail/audik...

▲

wing-_-nuts 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's hyperbole and I think you know it. I'm pretty sure they explicitly exclude medical devices.

▲

kstrauser 15 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not hyperbole at all.

Fortunately, your link basically says it doesn't apply to something you wear on your hands or arms:

> By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the following products incorporating portable batteries may be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals:

> (a) appliances specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable;

But the only mention of "medical" comes right after it, and doesn't include hearing aids, future smart glasses, etc.:

> (b) professional medical imaging and radiotherapy devices, as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/745, and in vitro diagnostic medical devices, as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) 2017/746.

So ironically, the law allows disposable "junk devices" people are complaining about here, but doesn't allow factory-only serviceable hearing aids. How 'bout that? We can buy our smart rings and throw them away, but hearing aids will have to remain giant hunks of heavy plastic, or at least the models purchasable by average people who can't fly out of the EU to buy the good ones.

Edit: It's easy to downvote. I cited the relevant law. If I'm wrong, cite other law that explains why.

	▲	ddoeth 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Hearing aids have had replaceable batteries since they were invented basically. I still remember my grandma 20 years ago fiddling with the small batteries, so that really is not a problem.
	▲	DrammBA 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Edit: It's easy to downvote. I cited the relevant law. If I'm wrong, cite other law that explains why. > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

▲

i_cannot_hack 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you want more freedom to design medical devices for people where there is an actual need, it would easily be done by expanding the exception for medical devices that already exists in the law.

If you think people to be able to sell unsustainable and mostly superfluous electronics because any improvements there might eventually trickle down to hearing aids, your argument is basically "we should accept the millions of tonnes of unnecessary e-waste in order to get slighly smaller hearing aids", which think many reasonable people would disagree with.