Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

spicytoastaficionado t1_j14qv06 wrote

Excellent news, and it looks like the gov. will sign it.

Right to repair absolutely helps when it comes extending the life of electronics, which is of course tied to sustainability and broader climate change policies.

The fact this isn't the default nationwide is embarrassing.

117

DeanOnFire t1_j14sp4g wrote

What's embarrassing is how much of a stranglehold corporations have on policy. Repair shops aren't anything new, but the whole concept of planned obsolescence and intentionally blocking tech features if identical replacement parts are used (though it's been purported this has since been changed) and creating new chargers specific to just one product... there's so much we let tech giants get away with because everyone buys their goods. It IS embarrassing, but we've been on this track for a while.

52

Que165 t1_j15b9k7 wrote

I wonder how much of it is due to Apple lining the pockets of lawmakers, or an aging congress who doesnt know how to send a text message

10

IIAOPSW t1_j163anj wrote

And you know who's been lining the pockets of Apple? The consumers. Vote with your wallet, get what you vote for.

4

MachWun t1_j15wwi1 wrote

That's only the tip of the iceberg. I am an auto tech there is an organization called nastra that brings all the manufacturers together and gets their scan tool functions able to be put on aftermarket scan tools. Mitsubishi has been out of Nastra compliance for 12 years and Tesla was trying to do the same thing with their Tesla toolbox but got shut down and ended up releasing it for free Mitsubishi is still out of compliance

6

DeanOnFire t1_j15y55r wrote

Honestly, I just remembered about that whole garbage with the John Deere farm equipment having the subscription service that locks your tractor if you don't pay. I know it's not the same but the issue DOES reach further than Apple or Google.

5

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j15cv7v wrote

While there’s definitely room for improvement it’s worth noting the government has been fighting Apple on locking cameras and Touch ID sensors to phones for years because it makes it harder to crack.

Being able to use a synthetic camera or Touch ID device would be a huge win for law enforcement.

And a week later you’d see those devices show up on eBay.

4

fafalone t1_j1by6gx wrote

It would be trivial to design phones such that you could replace the fingerprint sensor only if the phone is reset, thus destroying the data. And the complexity and such an attack would mean little to no impact on resale of stolen devices. But then, security isn't the first priority with this policy, locking out independent repair shops is.

1

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j1bys6y wrote

That still leaves several vectors since that phone might be reloaded with something compromised. That phone would have the same serial number and MAC address.

That would let a someone turn it into a Trojan horse if they can replicate enough of the experience of the device.

Totally not an acceptable solution. It needs to be more obvious who/how the phone was compromised.

1

Mammoth_Sprinkles705 t1_j165tmu wrote

What does the bill really do though?

>Right to Repair” and other legislation that requires manufacturers of products sold in New York to provide information to consumers and third-party technicians about how to repair damaged products. (p. 326)

Companies will still be Free to make stuff difficult to repair without requiring specialized tools.

Companies are just going to continue to do things making phone batteries a pain in the ass to remove. Or car companies requiring you to compress the brake Pistons via a computer to change your brakes.

These anti consumer policies need to be outlawed

6

ctindel t1_j1cbxi3 wrote

Seriously just require batteries to be easily accessible and removable, boom done. Just like phones were 20 years ago. Same with laptops.

2

knockatize t1_j16pdtn wrote

Look who read just the title of the bill.

The crooks and weasels in the legislature will see to it that the only thing we have a useful right to repair is a 1974 Ford Maverick.

0

zephyrtr t1_j14qmwy wrote

Squeezing businesses is the only way to go. Right to Repair, Extended Producer Responsibility, carbon caps... All these PR campaigns to put the onus on consumers has gaslighted the public. Water flows down, and if given the option people and companies alike will go for the cheaper choice. Doing the right thing needs to be the only option, or it won't happen.

30

ShadownetZero t1_j14utot wrote

Idk man, I was told if I used shitty paper straws that we'd save the planet.

16

zephyrtr t1_j15ex3q wrote

You laugh but legislating against single use plastic is a good thing. The bags are bigger offenders than the straws, but what makes more sense: asking everyone to recycle after the fact, or disallowing businesses from giving you a bunch of trash with your order in the first place? The problem is our governments go after easier targets, like retail stores or homeowners, instead of the big problem-makers: oil companies.

People shouldn't be mad that they're being asked to do more for the planet, they should be mad that the bigger polluters aren't doing their fair share.

−1

ShadownetZero t1_j15fo3u wrote

> You laugh but legislating against single use plastic is a good thing.

It does little to actually help, and highly inconveniences customers.

Fun fact: McDonalds plastic straws are recyclable. Their new paper ones are not.

>asking everyone to recycle after the fact, or disallowing businesses from giving you a bunch of trash with your order in the first place?

Option 3: legislating against things that actually has an impact.

5

NotTheOnlyGamer t1_j16aset wrote

Option 4: Public advocacy, without trying to put unreasonable burdens on either American citizens or American business.

2

zephyrtr t1_j16idp2 wrote

The problem is citizens and businesses alike have a very broad definition of "unreasonable."

2

NotTheOnlyGamer t1_j16qono wrote

Right, and as Americans, we should remain dedicated to not overstepping that definition. Freedom is paramount, always.

1

zephyrtr t1_j16i7sk wrote

You're making my point for me bud. Recycling is a band-aid, with low compliance. Recycling costs energy, it requires a market for recycled materials, and it once again throws the burden on the consumer. We have to collect it, transport it, wash it, refine it, transport it again. Why don't we just ... make less trash?

Again, it's the wrong posture and the wrong question. You should be doing your part, and demanding big business do their part as well.

2

ShadownetZero t1_j16kegy wrote

Thanks for the shit take. Your false equivalence makes big businesses happy.

0

AcrossAmerica t1_j1758kp wrote

The US doesn’t really recycle much.

I think about 70-80% ends up in a landfill?

Banning single use plastic also helps. Look at the thrash in NYC around parks. Mostly single-use plastics.

That being said, the paper ones suck and maybe we should learn from Italy where they use pasta instead?

2

smoke_crack t1_j14pk44 wrote

FTA: >Gov. Kathy Hochul requested the bill last Thursday, which means that she has until midnight Dec. 28 to sign or veto the bill. PIRG is organizing members to email or call the governor at 518-474-8390 to sign the original legislation passed by the Legislature.

Here's a link if you want to email the govenor: https://www.governor.ny.gov/content/governor-contact-form

26

actualtext t1_j1679tg wrote

My understanding is if she signs or doesn't sign, thr bill becomes law either way. She would have to actively veto it for it to not become law. Unless she plans to veto it, then it seems this will become law before the end of the year?

5

yallaretheworst t1_j1gf2td wrote

That is how legislation works yes. Main thing would be to ensure she doesn’t veto.

Better if she signs bc they signals it is a priority and can help with implementation chances

1

sunflowercompass t1_j15dysg wrote

Fingers crossed it affects appliances and not just Iphones.

You shouldn't have to spend $400 to replace a gasket on your clothes washer, or resort to grey market shenanigans to replace a circuit board on your air conditioner (they only sell to licensed HVAC techs).

11

73577357 t1_j160q5k wrote

There's concerns she will do amendments to the bill and limit it based on recommendations from lobbyists. We probably won't know how bad it is until she signs it.

The John Deere exemptions already in the bill were extensive. The state is going to require you to get an electric lawn mower in a few years and you'll have to throw it away and buy a new one every three years because it will be too expensive or impossible to repair, but it's electric and green lol.

4

sunflowercompass t1_j16m447 wrote

Thanks for the info

I think big appliances are important to fix because they are expensive ($3000 LG fridges are not that rare, for example.) If we can get big markets of NY and Cali going perhaps we can revive small appliance repair as a trade.

I do have a cheap little electric lawn mower. It's great. The only maintenance I foresee is having to sharpen the blade and change the battery eventually.

(I had a gasoline snow blower and I had so many problems. Apparently normal gas will gum up the engines, you need to find gas without ethanol. And then somehow drain the tank after winter is over? Too much of a pain. )

1

catschainsequel t1_j17gi8s wrote

I emailed and called her and all my representatives on Monday asking them to nudge her. Glad to see everyone is still pushing on this.

3

rootbeer_racinette t1_j18vekh wrote

Last time I submitted an article about this it got removed by the mods for violating rule #5 as if NYC wasn't part of New York state.

3

thereia t1_j1619ma wrote

The article supposes that right to repair will cause consumers to keep their phones on average for an additional year. Is there any research to support that aspect of this? It sounds like that could be an outcome of this, but I'd rather see something backing it up. Phone are often upgraded to get the latest thing, not because they stopped working, so to get to an average across all phone users of an additional year, you've actually got to be convincing a significant segment of the population to keep their phones for quite a bit longer. But I am very much willing to read any data/research on this.

Im sort of back and forth in my head about if doing this via a state law will be effective or not or if it would need federal backing to be successful. Would it have the eventual effect of something like the California emissions standards (tho that seems to have taken decades to get it finally uniformly accepted 1970-2022) or will they just sell lesser, right-to-repair versions of their phones to the relatively small subset of NY users who wouldn't just drive to NJ and buy the better one?

2

MLao_ t1_j1gukc5 wrote

How much will they water this down?

1

Puzzleheaded_Okra_21 t1_j14iu1o wrote

That's good, but we need to do so much more than that. According to climate scientist, sea levels will rise drastically in the next 12-15 years if we don't cut our carbon emissions right now.

−22

GreenTunicKirk t1_j14rzyi wrote

Okay, yes, but you do understand that this is only PART of the discussion, right?

21