930
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] postnataldrip@lemmy.world 115 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

the pairing restriction would "undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices."

If only there were options that would encourage the use of safe, genuine parts.

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago

What, like companies selling high quality, reasonably priced parts?

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 61 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My favorite part of the MN right to repair bill is that it requires OEM parts/software/schematics to be offered to consumers at the lowest possible price, including any rebates, sales, deals, etc. It's not quite an "at cost" situation, but it's probably about as close as you can get without crossing that line

[-] sramder@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

It sounds good, but that’s enough wiggle room to drive a truck full of money through. Even “at cost” has been abused pretty badly.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yea, I agree. I think these bills should require the maximum cost to be cost of manufacture at the date of engineering; i.e. a part designed in 2008 can not cost more than the materials to make it and it must keep that price for as long as it is used.

But progress is progress, we'll get there eventually as long as we keep up the political pressure.

Edit: please read the spirit in that example rather than to the letter. There's a lot of nuance that I just skimmed over, and that's because I don't want to write the bill.

[-] naonintendois@programming.dev 9 points 1 year ago

The issue with that is it leaves no room for paying the engineers who actually designed the device. The cost of designing the parts is really expensive. I have no issue with a small markup. I definitely agree though that the costs shouldn't be so absurdly prohibitive to repair though.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I think that it would still leave room for engineers to be paid a living wage. After all they aren't getting paid for designing parts, they're getting paid to design a product made of interoperable parts

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

That's what the auto industry does. They have to sell you access to their system to allow third parties to program modules, but that cost can be excessive, especially if a small shop only needs to program one module in a blue moon.

[-] sramder@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I was actually thinking about OBD2 when I wrote that. The old CRT pedestal style code readers cost as much as a new car, fairly reasonable from an automakers perspective but expensive enough to put plenty of small shops out of business.

It was one of the first big top-down push that I remember. It’s a pretty good parallel for the current right to repair legislation. The automakers fought it tooth and nail back then too. They made similar claims about their new cars being so complex that they simply had to be serviced at the dealerships. And, to your point, they are still getting away with it to a degree.

[-] stinerman@midwest.social 12 points 1 year ago

The "undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices" line is the same reasoning used by AT&T back in the old days as to why you couldn't buy your own phone or use a dial-up modem.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fiercekitten@lemm.ee 92 points 1 year ago

Parts pairing is prohibited only on devices sold in 2025 and later. And there are carve-outs for certain kinds of electronics and devices, including video game consoles, medical devices, HVAC systems, motor vehicles, and—as with other states—"electric toothbrushes."

What’s a good-faith argument for exempting these devices? Or was it simply successful lobbying in protecting corporate interests.

[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago

I could see an argument about medical devices, HVAC, and vehicles... But I don't think I'd agree with them. Except maybe medical.

Consoles and toothbrushes though? What the fuck?

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 24 points 1 year ago

I don't see any argument for vehicles, tbh. HVAC tinkering is almost exclusively high voltage so that makes just a little sense, don't want people swapping a 350 volt AC capacitor with a 250 volt DC capacitor and having it blow up, but Vehicles means a manufacturer can do everything imaginable to limit part availability and kill aftermarket parts purely for profits.

[-] bluGill@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Vehicles need it because the keyless entry radio needs to pair with the engine start. Otherwise a thief can steel a car in a few minutes by bringing their own computers.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I guarantee you keyless start cars aren't more secure because of paired parts. The encryption for the fob's signal isn't the result of a paired part.

[-] T156@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Particularly as a lot of newer thefts just use an amplifier to boost the key signal, and fake the key being in the car. Part pairing wouldn't help at all there.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Otherwise a thief can steel a car in a few minutes by bringing their own computers.

.....you mean like they do currently?

[-] bluGill@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Which is why manufactures are now putting those pairs in so you cannot do that anymore.

If the security was so bad that removing part pairing would crash this, then it wasn't secure to begin with. Same argument as apple pairing the fingerprint sensor, the emsensor is only doing the reading, not the authentication.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Melt@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

I guess console because they want the whole thing intact to enforce DRM?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] brsrklf@jlai.lu 14 points 1 year ago

Good thing part pairing doesn't exist for the Switch.

Mine is the Ship of Theseus at that point.

[-] oo1@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

For toothbrushes, are they worried repair won't re-seal it effectively so make it unsuitable for use in the wet environment?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago
[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I mean, I don't want the thing supplying the air I'm breathing to accidentally not burn all the gas and lead to carbon monoxide poisoning etc.... Things like the ductwork and shit, for sure, but not like, a burner.

[-] oatscoop@midwest.social 7 points 1 year ago

The great irony is it's frequently the "ductwork" that's the problem: plugged or badly installed exhaust pipes, which the manufacture has no control over. The rest are the appliance itself wearing out or failing with no warning.

I've repaired furnaces myself several times including replacing burners and exhaust fans -- it isn't rocket science. It's no different than working on any other "dangerous" thing like a car. If someone somehow manages to fuck up so badly it hurts or kills someone that's on them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

So you want to be stuck with the same thermostat forever? Imagine it comes with one of those Amazon ones with a persistent camera and microphone in it that you can't opt out of.

[-] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

A thermostat doesn't have refrigerants/gasses in them. It's nothing more than a complicated on off switch

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You need some sort of licensing to do most HVAC work anyways. Theres no point in forcing companies to make all the parts available to the average joe when the average joe can't legally do the work anyways.

[-] tyler@programming.dev 20 points 1 year ago

The goal of the bill was to get something with teeth passed. Fighting every lobby at once would be impossible, so they leave those devices out of it and will now be able to work on different laws for those things. At least that’s what I read they’re doing for the John Deere stuff at least. The legislators know it’s going to be a difficult battle, so they segmented the law to make it so that a failure in one spot wouldn’t cause a loss everywhere.

[-] Aylex@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Heh. Teeth.

[-] pmmeyourtits@ani.social 56 points 1 year ago

GET FUCKED VOLKSWAGEN YOU COCKSUCKERS

[-] atrielienz@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

Motor vehicles are exempt and the law doesn't affect anything until 2025.

[-] pmmeyourtits@ani.social 34 points 1 year ago
[-] sarchar@programming.dev 18 points 1 year ago

You didn't think the law was for you/us, did you?

[-] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Lol, of course.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago

HP screaming

[-] sramder@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

I’m waiting for Apple to announce they are pulling out of Oregon 😂 [^1]

[^1]: Also the impending injunction 😒

[-] bcron@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Next up: printer ink??

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Oregon Governor Tina Kotek today signed the state's Right to Repair Act, which will push manufacturers to provide more repair options for their products than any other state so far.

The law, like those passed in New York, California, and Minnesota, will require many manufacturers to provide the same parts, tools, and documentation to individuals and repair shops that they provide to their own repair teams.

“By eliminating manufacturer restrictions, the Right to Repair will make it easier for Oregonians to keep their personal electronics running," said Charlie Fisher, director of Oregon's chapter of the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), in a statement.

Apple opposed the Oregon repair bill for its parts-pairing ban.

John Perry, a senior manager for secure design at Apple, testified at a February hearing in Oregon that the pairing restriction would "undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices."

According to Consumer Reports, which lobbied and testified in support of Oregon's bill, the repair laws passed in four states now cover nearly 70 million people.


The original article contains 311 words, the summary contains 185 words. Saved 41%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] dog_@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
930 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73331 readers
3586 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS