this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
239 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
59390 readers
2617 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I see right to repair as the thin edge of the wedge, and it is being driven into cracks. The is good movement for this in the US and the EU. France has a repairability index. It will take time, but in the end openness will win out because it is just better. Part of the way of forcing the issue is copyleft. So much out there is already built on open and closed the last mile. Good example of copyleft doing it's thing is in 3D printers, for example : https://github.com/SoftFever/OrcaSlicer
i wish!
eventually the suits will start pushing back. and most of these getting passed are (to my knowledge) actually hamful if you get to the nuts and bolts.
Suits aren't evil. I mean I'm they aren't good either, but all they care about is money. They push for closed because that is where the money is, but they have no resolve on anything. Law makers either try and follow experts or money.
To the extent either believe anything, they believe the IP lie and thus don't see the tragedy of the commons they advocate.
Open however has passion, and is technically correct. (The best kind of correct.)
Little by little, we'll keep winning out. Right to repair is an important front, but so is digital rights, privacy and competition.
caring about money above all sounds pretty evil to me.
and the result in this case is the OP article... at the end they make more money from wasting materials, and wont allow this to be fixed if they have the power to do so.
They don't care about being bad or good. They just care about money. Change what makes money and they change. There is no resolve. Along with changes happening I listed before, one big thing we need do is bring environmental cost on to the balancesheet. At the moment it's all external costs. Move the costs of items disposal on to the up front cost. Scale it by item's life time. Incentivize better behavior.
money for money sake leads to evil, even if money itself is not.
people after it above all else are evil.
The point is that they are malleable.
only if it makes them more money.
if climate disaster is not enough to make them stop i doubt they ever will.
Ah, but that lost money in the future, not making money now. They don't really do long term. It's money for share holders now.