For a $100k device, I would expect better long term support.
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
905 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
58279 readers
4909 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 would, but if there's no reason for them to spend the money on it why?
This is what regulation is for, and it needs to have teeth.
corporations are a problem we need to solve as a society.
there is absolutely no excuse for this
any company who locks medical device repair should be burned to the ground. and dont bullshit me about liabilities bla it is more likely cash grab which they get in the form of "extra care packages" or exorbitant repair prices charged after the guarantee period ends.
A right to repair is long overdue but more than that when it comes to medical devices it's obvious battery replacement is going to be necessary and should be user accessible.
Line must go 🆙
Corporations are a fucking curse.
Update: He temporarily gained the ability to walk again after touching a spinning steel ball, despite the recovery not lasting he will still be competing in upcoming cross country horse race.
Keeping repairs locked into your system of parts/techs can at least feign “safety” or “quality”.
But essentially just refusing to repair is an absolute fuck you.
I’ve started choosing the companies I use based much more on the experience offered when their product/service DOESN’T work, rather than when it does.
I’ve started choosing the companies I use based much more on the experience offered when their product/service DOESN’T work, rather than when it does.
Easy to do for a cell phone or a toaster, but I can't imagine there's a ton of options for exosuits that correct your condition, covered by your insurance, that your doctor is familiar enough with to prescribe (for lack of a better term).
Some things are annoying to make abandonware, and some things should be criminal.
That’s the most dangerous part of it for sure. Inherently, the more a company has a monopoly over an industry, the less incentive they have to actually do a good job with anything.
And it doesn't preclude the company just deciding your product is no longer worth supporting/going bankrupt.
It might have been fine and seemingly trustworthy to begin with, and then it stops, a few years down the line.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Right it begs the question.
Is me not receiving care or having access to care REALLY better for me?
If the answer can't clearly be yes, then they are just choosing to make me ill or kill me for their perceived interests.
For me it's a mix of what you said and how they treat their employees/where they're making the product.
I spend extra time trying to find higher priced, higher quality, more fairly manufactured products.
load more comments
(2 replies)
The manufacture should have zero say if their product gets repaired or not. The only person who can give permission to repair it is the owner. It should be illegal to implement tying to lockout parts being used as a replacement. Right to repair
They call it jailbreak because this is an issue of freedom: software freedom
They call it jailbreak because this is an issue of freedom
I support your position and the right to repair, but that’s not the origin of the term jailbreak in the context of computing.
The term jailbreaking predates its modern understanding relating to smartphones, and dates back to the introduction of “protected modes” in early 80s CPU designs such as the intel 80286.
With the introduction of protected mode it became possible for programs to run in isolated memory spaces where they are unable to impact other programs running on the same CPU. These programs were said to be running “in a jail” that limited their access to the rest of the computer. A software exploit that allowed a program running inside the “jail” to gain root access / run code outside of protected mode was a “jailbreak”.
The first “jailbreak” for iOS allowed users to run software applications outside of protected modes and instead run in the kernel.
But as is common for the English language, jailbreak became to be synonymous with freedom from manufacture imposed limits and now has this additional definition.
With the introduction of protected mode it became possible for programs to run in isolated memory spaces where they are unable to impact other programs running on the same CPU. These programs were said to be running “in a jail” that limited their access to the rest of the computer. A software exploit that allowed a program running inside the “jail” to gain root access / run code outside of protected mode was a “jailbreak”.
I still miss the narrow window in which you could make use of paging without technically being in protected mode. Basically there was like one revision of the 386 where you could set the paging bit but not protected mode and remain in real mode but with access to paging meaning you got access to paging without the additional processor overhead of protected mode. Not terribly useful since it was removed in short order, but neat to know about. Kinda like how there were a few instructions that had multiple opcodes and there was one commercially distributed assembler that used the alternative opcodes as a way to identify code assembled by it. Or POP CS - easily the most useless 80086 instruction, so useless that the opcode for it got repurposed in the next x86 processor.
Thanks for the history and technical explanation. I didn't mean to imply that was the origin (for computing) and was only talking about a specific usage of the word.
I think most people say it to refer to manufacture imposed limits but I wanted to promote a broader usage. That using proprietary software is like being in a jail because your software freedoms are denied.
Oooo healthy online discourse. Where's my popcorn...
Lemmy is such a rad place, I love it here
load more comments
(29 replies)
This is what Louis Rossmann has been screaming and fighting about for years. It's the most fucked up shit ever. It is affecting our food supplies and we are not paying attention to it.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Medical device manufacturers also threatened iFixit because it posted ventilator repair manuals on its website.
What the fuck is wrong with people. Anyone who opposes the right to repair for MEDICAL DEVICES is irredeemable.
load more comments
(4 replies)
The right to repair is such an obvious good in the world that those opposed to it should be publicly shamed.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Absolutely hate this shit.
It's four journalists who broke away from their former employers and started their own thing. It's ok to charge money to run a business. The quality of their work is top notch.
It’s ok to charge money to run a business.
They're not charging money. They're just throwing up a big sign demanding my email address.
load more comments
(8 replies)
view more: next ›