2x63: Give You The Key

Stuart Langridge, Jono Bacon, and special guest Jorge Castro present Bad Voltage, in which the nature of purchasing goods is discussed.

There seem to have recently been various examples of companies selling a thing and then exerting control over it after they’ve sold it. Sonos speakers have “recycle mode”, HP printer cartridges in their “Instant Ink” programme stop working if you unsubscribe, and farmers buy 30-year-old tractors rather than new ones because they’re still fixable in the field. But are these actually examples of a trend for the worse, or is this not actually the problem that it’s being painted as? Is this just how capitalism works, and is this how we want it to work? We’ll dive into this, from a few different perspectives, and see where we end up…

Come chat with us and the community in our Slack channel via https://badvoltage-slack.herokuapp.com/!

Download from https://badvoltage.org

I have to admit that it’s really exhausting, in 2020, to imagine that the response to “company got money from a multi-millionaire, campaigned for years to add users, dodged around paying taxes, made their product more addictive, and buys up competitors to limit competition” is to pretend there’s a fair market that can make decisions based on anything users care about and blame the users for the company’s bad behavior. That’s especially true when the addictive system has experimented with manipulating its users.
The free software networks (that aren’t populated exclusively by white supremacists) are much better experiences, but they don’t have a chance against a behemoth of a company that’s OK with treating people as experimental subjects without permission.
The DRM world is similar, and increasingly a problem, but that’s definitely a problem that free software/culture can help resolve. After all, Sonos or HP can’t hold our social circles hostage or manipulate our opinions of them.

I think the HP InstantInk guy just tried to farm some cheap social media points, maybe to cover up his mistake. As Jono said InstantInk is an optional convenience program in which they will send you ink cartridges to your home before your printer runs out. It’s not even just “hold your credit card in front of the printer”, you have to go through a full ordering procedure, choose one of five packages, enter your address etc.

Maybe his partner bought the printer and set everything up, but it’s completely clear someone who had all his data did join the program on purpose. The error message was most likely displayed because HP wants to keep people from sharing the ink cartridges provided through this program with non-enrolled printers, violating the terms of this exact program. But other cartridges would have still worked.

2 Likes

No!

One prerequisite for a free market is that consumers can compare and understand their choices. And unlike you three, plus members of this community, rarely does anyone understand the gizmos they are buying.

The regulations should require manufacturers to clearly expose behaviours of the device. Like nutritional info on food. There should be label that says what the manufacturer can do once you buy the device, in a simple format.

So you are fully aware you are buying a fridge that tracks your mayonnaise consumption. And if you’re ok with that then great (@jonobacon will have to hide his mayonnaise in random jars).

And if manufacturers felt everyone knowing they could remotely brick your fridge would be bad for sales then maybe they will make a fridge that can not be remotely controlled. Or not because people don’t care but at least they know.

And if you’re ok with only three years of security updates, after which the Australian Marmite syndicate will hack your fridge and flood the American market, then great. But maybe exposing that risk will make manufacturers consider making better fridge software - or at least update for longer.

The purpose of consumer regulation should be to educate the consumer.

In case @jeremy wants to weigh-in on this discussion here’s a starting point just for him: You spoke, we didn’t listen: Ubiquiti says UniFi routers will beam performance data back to mothership automatically

I’m surprised HP and not Epson was covered here. Epson have a “waste tank” on their inkjets which is basically a sponge when it cleans itself. When a counter says it is full the printer bricks itself, they do not sell a replacement sponge. They even explicitly document that they do this for the error code on their site.
You can buy the sponges on eBay but you then need a firmware hack too.

Et tu Elon? Beware, Tesla might take away your car's autopilot if you buy its vehicles from third party dealerships – plus more news • The Register

I wrote up a blog post on “Right to Repair” Here:

1 Like

These two things are, sadly, not the same. The prevailing view seems to be that, except for certain tightly-regulated industries such as consumer finance, it’s the consumer’s job to compare and understand their choices, and the vendors don’t have to make it easy for them; they just have to make it possible. Maybe this should be different, but currently it ain’t. :frowning:

I guess it varies by country, but where I am there is quite a bit minimum required information and standard presentation and calculation. Other examples that come to mind are spec sheets glued to car windows at the dealership, EnerGuide labels on appliances, R-value for insulation, octane levels for gasoline, obviously anything financial such as investments and real-estate must use a common methodolgy to present their figures, and the list goes on.

Some might come from self-regulation with in the industry, all the better. Though often that’s just done to pre-empt government regulation so at least the threat of state regulation needs to be there.

Of course the consumer still has to make the comparison and there’s no shortage of induhviduals who won’t bother. They’ll just choose the shinest or newest or whatever their favourite influencer is flogging.

But I would still be in favour of regulation that required the manufacturers to present the after-purchase behaviour and on-going support for IoT devices (or any intelligent, programmable, and especially connected device - including things routers, eReaders, etc.). At minimum no one can plead ignorance, and hopefully it will force some manufacturers to be more responsible if their level responsibility is exposed and directly comparable to other manufacturers.

I do like shiny.

And cheese.

Hi everyone,

I am new to the Bad Voltage community, I love the show. I am now going through and listening to a load of episodes in reverse order. Have just got as far as this one.

As someone who cares passionately about the right to repair I think one thing that was overlooked is the rights of those who have never had the resources to buy products new. They have no power over the market, they they are the most affected.

As a bit of context, and to reveal my bias. I work at the University of Bath on the OpenFlexure project which is an open source hardware project that is trying to empower local manufacturers in sub-Saharan Africa be able to build laboratory grade microscopes, with the eventual aim of getting these into clinics for medical diagnosis. Issues around right to repair, such as availability of spare parts and service manuals, chipped components stopping unauthorised repair is literally killing people. The WHO estimate that 70% of medical equipment in Sub-Saharan Africa is out of service!

The point with the tractor for example is not whether it voids the warranty if you take it to the wrong dealer. The problem is that many farmers in remote communities (and especially in the Global South) don’t have fast access to a dealer, whether or not the equipment is within warranty. If I have 20 acres (and you have 43), now I’ve got a brand new combine harvester, and it better work when I turn the bloody key. If it doesn’t I need to fix now it before my plants rot on the ground. This is why farmers are often the brilliant mechanics. The John Deere DRM (probably the wrong term) can stop me buying a second hand spare component and replacing it because I don’t have the dongle to pair the it to the harvester. The real problem probably is not warranty, but the fact that 40 years from now when John Deere will have forgotten about these models, people should have the right to keep them working with second hand spare parts. During this pandemic the exact same issue of trained engineers not being able to repair ventilators without a dongle!

The topic of cars that used to be repairable and now aren’t is an interesting one. I visited an area of Ghana called Suame magazine, it is about 200k mechanics working in small businesses of just a few people who repair everything from 18 wheelers to farm equipment to cars. They are casting iron, re-boring engine blocks, building new chassis from scratch. But you will notice all the cars are pre-fuel injection. We talked to one of the government trade schools and they were saying that while the off the shelf device that reads error codes are available, much of the advanced diagnostics needed to repair and replace sensors is proprietary and manufacturer specific. A company in the UK or the US can afford to buy licenses from 10 manufacturers for diagnostic computers, in much of the world this is not the case.

Another point is the recycling policy. Recycling tech generally means that it get stuffed in a bin and sent to Africa. Much of this is not broken down into the raw materials. The TV with a line of dead pixels just get re-used in an area where a TV with dead pixels it better than no TV. Bricking a device before “recycling” it is insane. Many things are not economic to repair in the Europe, but I have seen people in Tanzania chiseling out the windings of an electric motor and rewinding it by hand for say the motor in a fridge. What is repairable should not be left up to the whims of people who have the disposable income to buy a fridge that can access facebook.

The market cannot be left to self regulate this. Affluent people in affluent countries buy new cars and new tech, but these policy largely affect people who have no power to affect these markets. Government regulation does not need to force companies to extend a warranty to a device that has been mended by someone who is not approved, but it needs to stop them creating software “solutions” that hinder the repair. Regulation can also force manufacturers to make spare parts available for a number of years for certain classes of devices. Obviously we don’t want governments regulating everything, and this is where the discussion should be. Do you have a “right” to repair a smart light bulb that you bought so you can use your phone to turn the lights off when your partner is taking a dump? Probably not. Do you have a right to repair a tractor that your livelihood and the food security of your community depends on? Yes, very yes! Other devices fall somewhere between these extremes.

Sorry for the long preachy post.

1 Like