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.
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.
This sounds like a security nightmare though. A central repository of all code and keys is a gold mine for exploitation. Don’t get me wrong, I would really want this to work, but if it was compromised it could he catastrophic.
I do think there should be regulations in place that are clearly and easily enforceable by the FTC though. I’d love to see companies be hit with fines and/or compulsory refunds if they stop supporting devices and don’t provide some path forward for customers to keep using the device. That doesn’t solve for startups that go out of business, but it would at least cover the tech giants who are doing this garbage.
The government holds loads of confidential information, including keys. It’s perfectly fine.
Anything short of the code already existing and being ready to release allows bankruptcy to kill devices and isn’t good enough.
This is essentially the premise of Stop Killing Games but in a different world.
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).
This is a commendable goal; though it would still rely on good faith that a lot of these companies won’t have.
They’d rather screw the users anyway, sell the IP and let it rot within the maws of some holding company.
We’ll need some clauses that the tech cannot go inactive as it trades hands as well.
Further, some teeth will be needed toward feature deactivation, as there’s nothing stopping a company from yanking features and packaging it up as efficiencies made or product evolution.
Just because a product went defunct does not mean the entire code base is obsolete to the company.
Suppose I release software that makes a profit for a while, then falls off and starts costing me money, obviously time to retire that thing. However, a ton of code in that original product was a stepping stone for newer projects. I now have two choices.
A) Drop support and give world+dog my code, giving everyone a look into my existing products.
B) Keep losing money on the old project and make up for it by overcharging for my latest work.
That’s a lose-lose proposition.
Your self-hosting solution sounds mighty fair!
I’ve been in software for more than 20 years now. I’ve done some pretty innovative things from time to time. There is nothing I have ever done or seen in any proprietary code base at any company I’ve ever worked at that isn’t at every other company. The only unique thing at any company is how all the puzzle pieces get connected. It’s pure ego to think that any idea you have in that now open source project is unique or what’s giving you any competitive advantage in your other projects.
If there’s nothing unique or special in any company’s code base, then why does SAP software suck so much more than anything else?
Definitely not supporting their quality, but a ton of the wtf designs are because of legacy customers paying millions to have it.
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.
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.
The new Thread/Matter standard is an attempt to bring together various home automation protocols for exactly things like this.
- Previously an appliance manufacturer may have needed to support multiple protocols and decide how to expose functionality.
- the new standard is IPv6 based: Matter is the Ethernet protocol and Thread a local-only low power mesh network, and it’s sponsored by Apple, Amazon and many other players. However another great feature is a standard set of device types, so most of the functionality you need to implement is already defined and other services already know how to interact with it.
If were Matter/Thread, I can already ask Siri the status or configure Alexa to announce when it’s done or script my home automation hub to flash an LED indicator.
I agree. But the people who have one should not need to buy new machines just because support ended. And it’s my understanding that it’s currently the case with several brands.
For real, 90% of AI is off-device on phones, and that is bullshit.
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)
Or they take out 70% of the features it had at launch and make you wonder why you still use the thing anymore.
Let’s add AI!
Apple Mindset. I gave up on the iPhone after v3 bricked within a month of the v4 release.
Android does the same shit, and I hate it.
I’ve had to give up phones that still worked fine because the app updates killed the responsiveness
Android does the same shit, and I hate it.
My OnePlus has been solid for the last five years. Idk about the Pixel, though.
Yeah I’ve never had this issue with Android, not least of which is because you’re able to just root it and install whatever ROM/OS you want. If Google pushes an unstable update just wipe that shit and put Lineage on it.
Apple only gets away with it because they put their users in a walled garden where you have no choice but to receive Apple’s updates on their timeframe. I quit that life in 2006 when they updated my iPod Touch into uselessness and haven’t come across the problem again since switching to Android.
Back around android 3-6 it was more common, really hasn’t been a thing for a while IMO. Have non-daily driver Oneplus 5t and 6t, both Lineage os 14, they work well.
Yeah it was an older model phone, so it could be the reason as someone else mentioned that older android versions had that issue
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.
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.
So if you spent $130k on a Tesla that came with Disney+ and then the CEO has a completely irrelevant spat with Disney and removes it 5 years later, you should be able to return it for a full refund?
If your phone gets a software update and the WiFi and Mobile Data quick-toggle disappears and is replaced by an “internet” toggle 5 years later, does that entitle you to a full refund?
Just trying to see how deep this rabbit hole goes.
For the first example, absolutely. If some execs have a meltdown, it could change future services but anyone who was promised Disney+ on their Tesla with no limit on it should get a fair refund. I understand that there’s a slippery slope argument here, and no– the value of Disney+ in a car isn’t 100% the value of it. But it’s BS that a manchild having an Internet meltdown loses people a service they had and “paid for”
Just trying to figure out exactly what “changing the service” means.
I don’t know that non-lawyers need to figure out exactly what it means, but in an ideal world: if you pay for something that includes a continuation of services and the services stop continuing, you should be compensated fairly. I am not smart enough to word that in a way that can’t be worked around, “gotcha’d”, etc. but I’m guessing the spirit of the rules is fairly common ground for anyone who isn’t trying to rug-pull a service out from under those they sell it to.
Yes
Might sound stupid, but perhaps then they shouldn’t be offering services like Disney Plus and instead simply offer a car that lets you download any streaming app you have your own subscription for.
That’s a fair point.
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.
New account = new TOS I imagine?
Well the new account was for the new streaming service which replaced the old one. And since that’s a different company… different TOS, obviously.
It was mildly annoying, but at least it means I can still use the radio I bought.
Because as a consumer, I’m now quite hesitant to buy a thing without knowing if it’s going to be properly supported.
The end-game is to have every consumer appliance operate with a shelf-life. Yeah, you’ll have older models that don’t do this, but they will become increasingly rare (and, consequentially, expensive) while the mass produced disposables will saturate the market.
Basically, that experience is why I’m no longer willing to buy things that wholly depend on outside servers
What do you do when this becomes “Everything”?
“IDK, depends on how many people buy our idea. Would you like a smart hair dryer?”
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.
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.
yes thats the default value because thats how it pretty much is not because its ideal :)
5 year minimum and the are forced to open source every abandoned project
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?
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?
