I'd be a fan of a law that companies who drop support of their product would have to release code that lets 3rd parties or users themselves offer alternative support. If you want to fully abandon a product opensource it. If you're a big company that doesn't want to do that release a feature for users to self host before you cut ties. I know it's not a simple thing to do in the current world but if laws mandated it then tech would have no choice but to adapt.
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
942 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
59647 readers
3882 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Effective [some future date], in order to sell any device connected to the Internet (or Bluetooth, or whatever), you must register your entire codebase and all internal documentation with the FTC, and keep it updated, along with any signing keys to lock bootloaders. The day you abandon support, if you haven't provided everything required for end users to take complete control of their device, your code base and any other IP enters the public domain, and the FTC uses their discretion on release of keys.
It would take new laws, and you'd have to be careful with language and structure to prevent abuse of "third party" code and abuse of corporate structure to try to prevent old devices from being usable, but you could do it.
I have had a similar idea. Basically some third party that is trusted to be the escrow for all the source code and documentation would basically release it once the company stops supporting it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This would be an excellent law/regulation that makes complete sense.
The major companies can most definitely manage this (although they will cry crocodile tears).
load more comments
(6 replies)
I’d like to see a requirement that products and devices which have been deemed by their manufacturer to be end of sale/support/repair/life are required to be unlocked, with technical schematics and repair documentation made freely available, upon request of the owner.
Software open-sourced, too.
Would be nice, but I'd be happy with instructions on how to flash FOSS firmware onto it, and a description of the API surface so individuals could make their own compatible firmware.
I support it at face value, but as someone who knows little about what this exactly means/involves - what are the risks for misuse by others if everything becomes publicly available and stops making developments?
I see it just gets incorporated into their business model.
I’d argue it would meaningfully suppress the incentive for planned obsolescence for good faith manufacturers, and it opens up repurposing of equipment from less reputable entities.
A big problem is things tied unnecessarily to an internet service. We need to educate people that there may be alternatives and we need our purchasing decisions to support that. For example, most home automation stuff should NOT require or use any internet.
The article calls it “software tethering”. If any support commitments encourage manufacturers to stop that, we’ll all be better off. Let’s start with requiring users be clearly notified of software tethering, so they know what they’re buying
Let me own my fucking device so I can use it. Please. We are creating so much waste cause some program can’t run. It’s absurd.
this is so infuriating
I have a Hatch, which i have programed for my babies bed time, just play white noise sound at this time, turn off this sound in the morning, play bird song when hes supposed to wake up
I specifically got the older model, since the newer model has a lot of these basic features locked behind a paywall, while the old one they are just free.
Went traveling, and without a wifi connection it wont even do this. Apparently making an alarm clock remember its settings without a wifi connection is too much work.
In October of last year my mom came home from the ICU, now unable to get out of bed. I replaced all the bulbs in the house with smart bulbs and put the fans on a little smart plug thing. It made me really like the idea of home smart home features, but I'm not techy. They're just Alexa enabled for her to use with the fire stick, and I use google home on my phone for em.
Can you offer any advice for ones that don't require internet? Every time our power goes out (any time there's a storm), I have to go around and reset them while they flash at me like the worst night club
but I’m not techy
That’s the entire problem. Automation products depending on the cloud do have fewer requirements, are simpler to get started with, even if they’re overall poorer choices. They’re a fundamental fact that something needs to control your devices: cloud devices means the company takes care of that for you.
Taking the cloud out of the loop means you need to manage some sort of automation hub. There are many choices but I don’t know which may be approachable for non-techies. The new Matter/Thread standard tries to solve this while making everything work together, but adoption has been slow so you may not be able to use it for much yet. Your choice of automation hub drives your choices.
Maybe some of what I do is applicable, but I AM techie, I love to tinker, and I own my home, so maybe not. I try for local control where possible plus make choices that are additive: things still need to work normally.
- Prefer smart switches, not bulbs, so they still work normally. They also act as repeaters for local Zigbee or Z-Wave networks
- Z-Wave and Zigbee are local low-powered mesh networks commonly used in home automation. “Thread” is a newcomer but not widely used yet. Think of them as a network between Bluetooth and WiFi, but designed as a mesh to better cover your home. These are local networks only, there is no cloud connection (directly). They use a lot less power than WiFi, which makes battery devices more practical, and different frequencies for less interference. You should expect to pick one.
- Home Assistant (HA) on a Raspberry Pi. This was always the techie choice as opensource software that supports everything but in the last two years they have made it a lot more approachable, and Nabu Casa sells it installed in custom hardware. Among other things, it lets me use all of Z-Wave, Zigbee, and Thread devices, as well as Ethernet devices and gives a lot of automation power. When you’re starting out, you should stick to one for simplicity
- I do use Alexa, which requires internet access. I choose to subscribe to Nabu Casa to manage that in HA, since it also funds further HA development but this is not required and there are no ads or data collection
- My latest automation was for my teen staying up late all summer: at midnight, dim the family room lights and announce over Alexa that he should go to bed. He’s back at college now but I’m sure I’ll want it next time he’s home
Personally, instead of smart bulbs, I'd use smart switches for automating lighting. There's no need for every bulb to be individually controlled and carry all of the overhead involved in that. On that note, I'd also love to see DC circuits that can take LED bulbs without needing a transformer for each bulb (which tends to be what causes it to fail IIRC).
Just tried looking at the state of the smart switch market and fuck Samsung for naming their app for transferring files from phone to PC "smart switch". Especially because there's plenty of ways to do that already that don't require a shitty Samsung app.
Excluding Samsung from the search, I'd suggest not looking for products directly but finding enthusiast communities that are building their own smart homes. There is more to it than just getting devices that don't rely on some specific company's web services. You'll need to also setup a controller/server, connect all of the devices to that, and then figure out how you want to interact with it (eg via phone, scheduling, voice commands, etc). I haven't done this myself, but I'm guessing all of these are solved problems, but doubt that anyone would call setting it all up easy.
Bulbs v switches is actually why it took me so long to get them to begin in. Having bulbs, inherently disposable things, full of tech seems... Less than ideal. But where I live, the electrical is rough. Like, we have 1 circuit, the light circuit. Everything else is messed up and turned off at the box, including all the 220s, except for the water heater. Run everything off power strips and have to turn everything off to cook. Lol. I don't want to mess with the electrical in this house. I want to move. Lol
load more comments
(4 replies)
At least make it required to not brick at EOS if it's a device that would otherwise run. Like a laundry machine.
There’s no reason a laundry machine requires an internet connection
- if an internet connection provides additional functionality such as notification, it easier to have the machine work normally without notifications
- there’s no reason a machine requires an internet connection, especially with the release of the Matter/Thread standard to unify home automation local protocols
When I got new machines about five years ago, I briefly considered connected machines. It would be really nice to get notifications on my phone but how can it possibly cost that much and why does the only option depend on a cloud service?
I think a LAN-connected machine would be good, if you could use an app or open-source, well-documented API to control the machine, but there is no reason a washing machine should need to connect to the outer internet. You can VPN into your local network if it's that necessary to control it away from home.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's not only that, the issue is that they release updates that slows down the device, and you get so irritated that you buy a new "faster" device
I’m not an IT expert, so I don’t know how feasible this is, but they should have at least two branches of updates. One that is strictly security and the other that are all the bells and whistles. I would love to stick with an old os if it’s not vulnerable to the outside world.
It's called a LTS (Long Term Support) builds versus the current build. There is even sometimes ELTS (Extended Long Term Support)
(Please do not start a Linux discussion by replying to this comment)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Or they take out 70% of the features it had at launch and make you wonder why you still use the thing anymore.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Products that change the service they offer after you purchase it should also be eligible for a full refund (plus a % on top for the hassle). Such as offering a service through the product for free at the time of purchase but then moving it being a monthly subscription paywall later on, or just removing the feature completely.
Perhaps more important is to have devices start or fall open... if the OEM has lost interest in it, let others support the device. Make ewaste valuable and avoidable.
It’s really in the tech sector’s best interest to do that anyway. Because as a consumer, I’m now quite hesitant to buy a thing without knowing if it’s going to be properly supported.
We’ve all been burned before. My Sonos webradio lost functionality for a while after some backend streaming service was defunct. They did manage to fix that but it meant installing a new app, new account that sort of thing. It’s annoying- but at least the manufacturer did the right thing to keep it working. I can only imagine how frustrating it would’ve been if the entire thing stopped working with no support…
Basically, that experience is why I’m no longer willing to buy things that wholly depend on outside servers and the like to keep working. There’s too much risk of ending up with an expensive paperweight.
I only buy stuff that runs on standards and is accessible by FOSS or open protocols. I've never had to retire something because of the decision of a tech company.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I’d be a fan of a law that requires local control through standardized hardware and software protocols for any devices sold.
And no, I don’t think the standard needs to be codified into law, but I do think it should meet minimum requirements.
“IDK, depends on how many people buy our idea. Would you like a smart hair dryer?”
"As long as line go up. After that, who knows?"
It would be a nice gesture, but I will believe those promises of support when they have teeth to them.
What happens if they stop doing it? Do I have to sue them for breach of contract, have to prove actual damages, and settle the class action lawsuit for $5 in store credit?
What happens if the company goes bankrupt or creates a new subsidiary to service the product and the subsidiary folds?
What level of support are they obligated to provide? What issues must be fixed and how promptly?
default value: 2 years
2 years plus source code and working oss backends or 10 years (and still source code).
2 years will just ensure endless forced upgrade cycles IMO.
load more comments
(1 replies)
5 year minimum and the are forced to open source every abandoned project
It might provide value to our customers, but does it provide value to our ShArEhOlDeRs?
To clarify, the FTC is being urged to craft this regulation. They have not recently urged for this regulation. Gotta love the English language.
Can they even after the Supreme Court ruling?
A more important thing is update schedule, like oneplus used to state that they support their device for 3 years, but they only have one year of reasonably frequent update, after that it is like yearly update.
Dooo it!
view more: next ›