| ▲ | palata 8 hours ago |
| I totally agree with the frustration of having hardware I would like to keep using but can't because it got EOL. Like a smart speaker or something. But I don't know if there is a pragmatic way to approach that. I mean, I could also say "it should be illegal to produce e-waste", but what does that mean and how do we actually do it? |
|
| ▲ | cogman10 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| If you aren't looking at capturing 100% ewaste, then simple laws around liability and penalties for reduced functionality is all you'd need. Simple things like "if an electronic device, through no fault of the owner, can no longer perform it's main function, then the owner is due a full refund. A company may escape the refund by placing all software required to run the product in the public domain." It'd miss cases like fly by night companies, but you could catch big players like google disabling their thermostats for non-hardware reasons. |
| |
| ▲ | fermuch 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | The only thing you'd achieve doing that is to change the "main function" of a device to somethings silly, like a thermostat being sold as an art decor with the optional additional of functioning as a thermostat too. | | |
| ▲ | evil-olive 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > change the "main function" of a device to somethings silly, like a thermostat being sold as an art decor that seems like it can be addressed by making sure that the regulators who enforce these laws have more object permanence than a 6 month old baby. like, if I try to sell a "metal sculpture" that by sheer coincidence is capable of firing 9mm ammunition, I'm going to have the ATF knocking on my door real quick, and they're not going to be fooled by me claiming "no that's art" | | |
| ▲ | BobbyTables2 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Probably much easier when the seller is in China and selling the product in the US on Amazon. Why would the ATF go after them instead of YOU? |
| |
| ▲ | SchemaLoad 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is why the legal system is run by people with brains and reasoning and not python scripts. A real person will see that a thermostat is actually a thermostat. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | hsbauauvhabzb 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Where does it end, should EOL windows be open sourced because some software/games/hardware do not work on newer windows versions? Open source windows 10 would cannibalise Microsoft’s long term objectives. |
| |
| ▲ | godzillabrennus 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Given that Microsoft currently intends to productize Windows users' data to build AI that replaces their users' jobs, it seems reasonable to cannibalize those long-term objectives... | | |
| ▲ | hsbauauvhabzb 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Oh no I’d love to watch Microsoft burn, but I’m pointing out that any open sourcing abandonware is not in any businesses corporate interests. They’d sooner ‘support’ software forever by a yearly pointless update. Let’s all not forget the ones who wouldn’t want this to happen are the same ones who hold all the power. No government will ever force this. |
| |
| ▲ | ezst 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If that's one way to get to Microsoft abusive planned obsolescence and absurd e-waste, I take it | |
| ▲ | SchemaLoad 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Windows isn't hardware. If the laptops were only capable of running a particular version of Windows XP, then yes they should either be unlocked or their firmware open sourced to allow running something else. | | |
| ▲ | bruce511 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Linux will run on "anything" and is especially good on old OSS. So I feel like MS is the least affected by this whole proposal. Equally, nothing stops you running XP on the device forever. (There are plenty devices out there that are.) So this whole line of comments is somewhat off-topic to when hardware is bricked. |
|
|
