The only way out of the planned obsolescence hellhole.

[ImorallySourcedElectrons]

  On 8/8/2024 at 9:08 AM, Mark Kaine said:

found the mega corpo CEO!

*underpaid mega corpo engineer with a serious lack of motivation

[Caroline]

  On 8/7/2024 at 2:39 PM, Ertio said:

During that time, non-replaceable batteries escalated to serialized batteries, like a cancer that grew. And then not only smartphones but also laptops had them. This is what happens whenever evilness is not nipped in the bud in early stages: it grows and then takes over.

My man dropping an Inquisitor speech on a post about batteries, this is peak.

 

It is correct, however evil isn't the reason, greed is, when it comes to coporations evil or wrongdoings are byproducts of greed. You can make laws but they'll find ways to bypass them via legal loopholes, like saying X product isn't a phone but something else even though it has the ability to make calls and connect to mobile phone networks, wanna bet someone will do something like that?

 

I never identified myself as a right-to-repair activist or whatever, that gives me a little more freedom to write about certain things, main difference is R2R supporters are at the same time consumers that like and purchase things like smartphones, and I'm not, basically this:

  On 8/7/2024 at 8:02 PM, Kisai said:

Alternative solution. Stop buying junk. You do not need a $2000 smartphone or a $5000 laptop. Buy a desktop. Do everything on the desktop, and minimize what you "have to" do on the phone.

but a bit different, I can't afford a smartphone even if I wanted to (high upfront cost + insanely high monthly bills in my country), so I keep using my old brick and will continue to do so until it "dies", it works for me and that's what matters.

 

Other than phones I do build my own stuff, not because I'm a hippie that loves the environment but because of costs, everything is scarce in my side of the world, therefore expensive, so I work my magic when it comes to appliances, most of the stuff we have came from a recycling centre or was discarded as trash, managed to repair most of it for a fraction of the cost of a new one. I'm making truly long-lasting LED lights now, at least one for each room, they'll run off a solar panel and battery so they're relatively simple compared to AC powered ones, if I didn't have patience I could go and buy a bunch of prebuilt batten lights but I know they're crap and will die after a few months of use so I rather do this.

A pencil lead in a jar running off a router power brick will probably outlast most commercial AC LED bulbs you can get in my country right now.

 

Take off your shoes, we're gonna ignore the FBI warnings and watch Lain VHS rip on a 1950s TV set

[ImorallySourcedElectrons]

  On 8/9/2024 at 7:24 AM, Caroline said:

It is correct, however evil isn't the reason, greed is, when it comes to coporations evil or wrongdoings are byproducts of greed. You can make laws but they'll find ways to bypass them via legal loopholes, like saying X product isn't a phone but something else even though it has the ability to make calls and connect to mobile phone networks, wanna bet someone will do something like that?

There's a few ways to write these laws in ways that can't be bypassed, the issue is that lawmakers are listening to lobbyists instead of engineers.

 

But the amount of misinformation going around about lithium batteries is quite ludicrous in its own right - even amongst "professionals". Like how many of my colleagues never grasped the fact that we already derate the batteries so they'll last the lifetime of the product who then go "why isn't there a charge to only 80% option?" Well, the reason is that we'd have to go for a BMS that costs ten times as much while it'd only increase the longevity by maybe 1% because we already derated it to 60-70% from the get-go. But good luck explaining this to someone who can't grasp why a fixed resistor divider to specify a voltage is significantly cheaper than getting a far more advanced BMS.

[Ertio]

  On 8/8/2024 at 12:23 AM, LAwLz said:

Okay, but it feels weird to have a call to action and then not have a plan on what the action is or should be.

Indeed. The point is to stop patiently waiting for miracles.

 

  On 8/8/2024 at 12:23 AM, LAwLz said:

It means OP felt really proud of what they wrote and want to give everyone permission to repost it.

Yes. You caught me there.

 

  On 8/8/2024 at 8:14 AM, cooky560 said:

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm almost certain that as you posted this on a public forum, where the license for posts will be the one you agreed to provide to LMG when accepting the forum TOS, that this is worthless. 

Not exactly. Indeed, I couldn't make the license less permissive if I wanted to, but I made the license more permissive.

 

Everything from the TOS still applies, but on top of that, I granted additional permissions for the text.

 

  On 8/8/2024 at 8:58 AM, Mark Kaine said:

in fact, you can't even pull ! it doesn't work! lol... (just noticed this, in chrome only tho) 

In Chrome on Android, if you scroll up by swiping down, then hit the top of the page, then swipe down again, you trigger a refresh. This is pull-to-refresh.

 

I get why it would be useful for social media apps (you want to see the new content above the top), but most websites don't work that way, meaning pull-to-refresh is unwanted on most websites.

 

Most websites don't require refreshes, and when they do, the refresh button in the submenu (from your screenshot) does just fine.

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

  On 8/14/2024 at 5:08 PM, Ertio said:

In Chrome on Android, if you scroll up by swiping down, then hit the top of the page, then swipe down again, you trigger a refresh. This is pull-to-refresh

im telling you this doesn't work, neither chrome nor firefox... it does work on both samsung browsers tho!

 

i get why it might be annoying but its like my most used feature lol... its the equivalent of hitting F4 on pc... gotta do it  constantly or you might miss something! 

(゜o゜)

[Ertio]

  On 8/14/2024 at 6:13 PM, Mark Kaine said:

i get why it might be annoying but its like my most used feature lol... its the equivalent of hitting F4 on pc... gotta do it  constantly or you might miss something! 

Many websites are not feed-based. For example, do you ever need to refresh a YouTube video or a Wikipedia article? No. All it does is waste your battery charge and your data plan (if you are on cellular network).

 

And if you really do need to refresh a page, you can access the refresh button in the submenu in half a second. That's much faster than scrolling all the way to the top.

 

For non-feed websites, all pull-to-refresh does is trigger refreshing accidents when scrolling up because you hit the top before you realize, swipe down again, and trigger a refresh. Pull-to-refresh is only desirable for feed-based content, nothing else.

  On 8/14/2024 at 6:13 PM, Mark Kaine said:

im telling you this doesn't work, neither chrome nor firefox... it does work on both samsung browsers tho!

 

Pull-to-refresh is mandatory since version 75 (mid-2019). This means it can not be turned off anymore. From 2015 to 2019, it was optional.

 

Which version of Chrome for Android are you using?

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

  On 8/14/2024 at 7:12 PM, Ertio said:

Many websites are not feed-based. For example, do you ever need to refresh a YouTube video or a Wikipedia article? No.

constantly. (esp yt) 

 

also it's easily controllable if you want to refresh or not - sure it can happen by accident but rarely  - i just don't see a super convenient feature otherwise as problematic? 

 

 

  On 8/14/2024 at 7:12 PM, Ertio said:

accidents when scrolling up because you hit the top before you realize, swipe down again, and trigger a refresh. Pull-to-refresh is only desirable for feed-based content, nothing else.

disagree, its very hard to trigger by accident, but yes it can happen and be annoying, not doubting that, it's just hard to imagine this happens regularly? 

 

 

 

here... super easy *not* to refresh, the last one i do it on purpose

Edited August 14 by Mark Kaine
add video

[Mark Kaine]

  On 8/14/2024 at 7:12 PM, Ertio said:

From 2015 to 2019, it was optional.

... its not even an option for me, neither chrome nor Firefox... i bought this phone like 2 years ago iirc

 

*gonna chk brb

 

EDIT: yeap kernel vers 2020 (but i bought it later)

 

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

 

i repeat:  IT DOES WORK ON BOTH SAMSUNG BROWSERS idk...

[Ertio]

(Apologies for necro, but this point didn't come to my mind back then.)

  On 8/7/2024 at 5:04 PM, whispous said:

Strong, effective regulation with teeth is the way forward to ensure simple reusability/recyclability and repairability.

Realize that the law is not on the end user's (your) side.

 

How do the bureaucrats who determine the law benefit from you owning repairable stuff? Remember how a technofascist signed DMCA into law in 1998? The DMCA section 1201 limits what you can do to your property that you paid for.

 

Were you or me asked whether we even want this law? Who really wanted it? Most people didn't. But I know who did. Bill Clinton's technofascist buddies at the RIAA and MPAA.

 

I don't live in the USA, but USA politics have an international impact.

 

  Quote

Imagine for a moment now that we can build public libraries all around the world, basically for free, even in the most remote of places, each having so many books that they could fill an ocean, each book in so many copies that arbitrarily many people could lend the same book at the same time, for as long as they want. Wouldn't that be great? People promoting anti-piracy are those who say "no, we are against this". You just can't argue anyone supporting anti-piracy is not evil.

(source, Miloslav Číž, CC0)

Edited December 4 by Ertio
+quote; clarified I don't live in USA

[CatTNT]

I think the big difference is that public corporations are garbage, and private ones tend not to be. From what little I know, companies that are private, regardless of industry, like Steam and Chick Fil A, provide a higher quality products at a fair deal, unlike public companies. These companies do not have as much pressure to forgo their reputation, morals, and long term sustainability to increase short term profits. A shareholder only cares about a company in so far as they can return them a profit, and whoever gets fucked at the end of the day doesn't matter as long as profits continue to rise. 
 

There are 3, really 2 ways to solve this

Increase competition between public companies 
and
Start private companies with some sort of suicide pill clause if they are bought by a public company
or
A benevolent billionaire buys the company and takes it private, like Elon. 

[rikitikitavi]

  On 8/7/2024 at 2:49 PM, Ertio said:

I will have to figure it out. Won't be easy, certainly.

 

But anything is better than begging and hoping lawmakers will listen.

  On 8/7/2024 at 10:17 PM, Ertio said:

The masses just care about the next shiny new thing (shiny object syndrome) to show off infront of their friends. They don't care about "will it work in 5 or 10 years?" and only see today and tomorrow.

 

Here's a plan for you - start educating people about the evil called consumerism and how they can avoid it:

1. Stop buying stuff unless necessary

2. Buy quality, avoid trendy and gimmicky

3. Used market is your friend

4. Have a life, that includes touching grass, learning and socializing (not on twitter or tiktok)

 

TLDR: people are idjits that should not be trusted, you are the chosen one

[thrasher_565]

i cant build a phone so... im sol i guess...

i no it can be done i seen a youtuber do it...just i cant do it...

Edited December 9 by thrasher_565

[GreenLeaf]

Sure mate

 

let me a minute and i’ll do an engineering degree and pay a visit to the intel fab 15 minutes from my home and manufacture my own shit

 

wtf should we do?

 

[smcoakley]

  On 8/7/2024 at 5:15 PM, ImorallySourcedElectrons said:

May I introduce a "Don't attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity."?

 

You attribute certain design decisions to conscious choices, while in reality it's just lemmings trying to cost-down a product to increase the profit margin because some manager is shouting to hit some ludicrous target to get their bonus. This is then inherited into the next design (because designing from scratch is rare), and it gets dragged along. Then you see your competitor is doing this, you make the cost calculation and realise you can increase your profit margin by doing so as well, and that's how shitty features from the competitor also end up in your product.

 

The solution is honestly to vote with your wallet whenever possible, because every company tries to imitate the perceived market leader.

Expand  

It's also not always as malicious as increasing profit margin. I work at a mid-sized tech company. Sometimes, we just squeeze costs because we know customers don't want to pay 20% more for a product in the following years even though our operating costs went up by that much. So we gotta cut the cost somewhere, and customers vote with their wallet again and again that they prefer an inferior product over one that increases in cost.

[smcoakley]

  On 8/7/2024 at 8:35 PM, Ertio said:

No, but InkScape already makes users less dependent on greedy Adobe. InkScape can get many tasks done that would usually require Adobe's expensive proprietary software.

 

Yes, I know, InkScape can't do everything that Adobe Illustrator does, but it does a good share of those things.

It's "Inkscape" by the way, not "InkScape". The "s" is not capitalized.

 

Source: I'm an actual Inkscape user, been using Inkscape as my preferred graphics program for a decade.

[smcoakley]

  On 8/7/2024 at 10:17 PM, Ertio said:

We arrived at a point where smartphones are the cheapest 4K camcorders. A smart "phone" is more of a camera than a mobile phone. Smart "phones" are digital cameras with mobile phones attached, not vice versa. While cameras on mobile phones used to be an optional extra, they are now a major selling point.

It makes sense though. The best camera is the one you have with you and not the one you don't, so the camera-ification of phones is surprisingly practical. Decent cameras on phones saved us from the early 2000s world of most family photos looking like they were taken on a potato, and not even being able to see what your child is holding because there's only 16 pixels there.

 

Personally I still do have a decent DSLR that I bother to carry around for events or vacations where I know I'll be capturing memories or interesting spectacles because they still look better than my phone camera by a lot. But video? Nah. I just use my phone for video.

[smcoakley]

  On 8/7/2024 at 10:17 PM, Ertio said:

You can not put a desktop computer in a suitcase and travel with it.

Au contraire

 

 

/s

[smcoakley]

  On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 AM, Doobeedoo said:

Nah, it's not one lucky thing only. Many still have them, oven or washing machines that last decades. I knew people who worked on these and people that came to inspect or fix some minor stuff on some said also these are high quality, don't get rid of them for no reason. Said also some xyz parts just don't get worn out vs new models. Also mentioned if a thing actually breaks down that they'd want to pick the thing themselves. 

I mean let's not pretend most things are not made with high quality in mind.

These things were not some super expensive products. If you want something affordable today expect problems few years down the line and rust as somehow paint starts to peel away.

Expand  

Agreed. In general, yes survivorship bias is definitely a possible explanation for many examples, but for appliances specifically I think we have quite a few appliances from the 1950s that have survived, and some good explanations for why they lasted. You can't just assume it is survivorship bias in the same way you can't just assume it isn't.

 

With appliances specifically, some commonly attributed changes:

• Appliances were expensive back then. As a family you saved up to buy an appliance as a big purchase, and you expected it to last a long time. It was like buying a car. Therefore the manufacturer had every reason to compete on things like reliability, design, repairability, and extra features, because there was no chance they could get it under the cost of one paycheck anyway. Nowadays your fridge probably costs less than your laptop, and cars are 10x or 50x the cost of a fridge.
• Appliances were mechanically much more simple, and therefore less point of failure in design. The more complex the design, the more points of possible failure. Modern appliances are vastly more energy efficient and safe to operate (which is a good thing), but they're also more complex. The mainboard PCB is probably one of the most common parts to fail first, a part that didn't even exist in appliances then.
• Due to the prior point, they were more easily and readily repairable, and thus created a culture of repair. Your grandma's 70-year-old fridge that is still running was probably repaired multiple times to keep it running, and there were actually people who you could pay to do the repair. Modern devices can be more difficult to repair, and people might just throw it away when broken instead.
• Plastic parts were less prevalent, especially in appliances. Instead you might find more steel or cast iron parts, which have more wear resistance over time. They're also way heavier which is a downside and more work to machine, and therefore higher cost.
• We smartly moved away from chemicals we know are bad for the environment to ones that we don't currently know of any significant environmental impact, but sometimes those chemicals performed their primary task better than their replacements. For example, pure lead is a good conductor and can be used as a durable material for electric devices due to its flex tolerance, but well, it's lead. There's a reason why we don't use it everywhere any more! Another example is fridges used R-12 as their refrigerant back then, which was not only effective at heat energy transfer but also worked well as a mechanical lubricant to reduce wear between connected parts. But turns out R-12 is not great for the environment so now we use something else.
  • In other words, we can't really go back to doing things the way they were done then because we know now the other ill side effects of the materials we were using, even if they were part of a whole that produced more durable products.

If you want to go down a rabbit hole, look up sewing machines. The big, heavy, energy-hog sewing machines of yore are preferred by many and quite a few of them are available (if you can convince someone to give up theirs) due to more flexibility and stitch modes, durability, reliability, and repairability. Don't ask me more because I don't actually know anything about sewing.

[Beerzerker]

  On 12/10/2024 at 1:13 AM, smcoakley said:

If you want to go down a rabbit hole, look up sewing machines. The big, heavy, energy-hog sewing machines of yore are preferred by many and quite a few of them are available (if you can convince someone to give up theirs) due to more flexibility and stitch modes, durability, reliability, and repairability. Don't ask me more because I don't actually know anything about sewing.

I can answer that.
Sewing machines are prone to a multitude of problems, that's why the older ones are valued as much as they are because the materials used to make them are much better and hold up well too vs what new ones are made from.

Such is why and fits into the topic too because they just don't make 'em like they used to.

At the job I had before retirement, I worked on some of these in a production/industrial enviroment and although they were indeed older models they too had issues along the way we had to fix..... And alot of the time it wasn't easy to do.

These machines are tempermental to say the least of it because of how precise things like timing when the needle goes into the cloth and the little foot moves the cloth so a stitch is done correctly. If the timing is off you'll know it and I've seen these break needles like it was nothing before if it's timing was off too much.
You have to get thread tension on the thread spools "Just right" or you'll have a mess of thread wadded up at the seam of what you're sewing (Or just wherever), or be breaking thread all the time while using it (Annoying).
Maintenance is compounded by all the lint that gets into the machine and the oil tank underneath the machine for lubrication, that can clog up oiling ports and from there you've got a problem.
Not to mention the occasional electrical problems they have which can require tearing one down and having to completely redo it's setup which takes time.

What I worked on was made by a brand called "Juki" it's a japanese made machine and although it's high quality it still has problems like all the rest.... But when one of these is right, nothing else I've seen sews like them. WAY overkill for home use but if you had one you can get alot of stuff/sewing done in a hurry because these machines are fast - Really fast when you wind one up.
DO NOT get your finger caught in it - That never ends well and they can spool up to a speed that's so fast there is no stopping it on the spot if you do, even though they do have a "Brake" to stop it when you take your foot off the pedal.

Note I'm talking about the ones used in sewing factories, those machines are tanks for what they are but even their home use machines are good - Just not the same as what I was working on, partially because these days they are computerized vs what I was working on before.

[freeagent]

To quote the great and powerful Joe Rogan:

 

"If I gave you a hammer, and sent you off into the woods, how long until you can send me an email?"

[thrasher_565]

  On 12/10/2024 at 3:32 AM, freeagent said:

To quote the great and powerful Joe Rogan:

 

"If I gave you a hammer, and sent you off into the woods, how long until you can send me an email?"

its obvious...punch wood...