
A Washington state bill that would make it easier to fix your electronics - maxpert
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/zmqa49/washington-right-to-repair-iphone-cpu-throttling
======
Shank
> Prohibited from designing or manufacturing digital electronic products in
> such a way as to prevent reasonable diagnostic or repair functions by an
> independent repair provider. Preventing reasonable diagnostic or repair
> functions includes permanently affixing a battery...

This is exactly how iPhones currently are. The batteries are affixed using
adhesive strips that can be pulled by repair locations, including Apple.
Anyone can open an iPhone with the proper screwdriver, and the first thing you
can take out is the battery. Then you just remove a shield, swap some cables,
put in a new battery, and it’s done.

If they actually wanted to make change, they would have explicitly said
“without adhesive” or “consumer is able to open without specialized tools.”
This is no more than posturing.

Edit: To clarify, adhesive strips aren’t glue. Glue implies you can’t remove
it at all without melting the glue. Adhesive strips have pull tabs that, when
properly used, will completely take the battery out of the case.

~~~
zkms
> If they actually wanted to make change, they would have explicitly said
> “without adhesive” or “consumer is able to open without specialized tools.”
> This is no more than posturing.

They could also target availability of repair parts and tools (both the
software kind and the electromechanical kind) rather than dictating design
constraints.

~~~
userbinator
_They could also target availability of repair parts and tools (both the
software kind and the electromechanical kind) rather than dictating design
constraints._

More critically, repair _information_. Schematics and service manuals for
Apple products get leaked pretty easily, and similarly for a lot of other
products (notably laptops), but that's only because of largely lax security.

Compare this to the early computers (like the IBM PC) which came with the full
set of schematics as well as things like BIOS source code.

~~~
JdeBP
> _More critically, repair information._

You might want to read the actual bill, rather than the news article. Clue:
section 3.

------
ken
This is a knee-jerk bill written by people who don't understand technology. It
specifically calls out glued batteries, for example, and not any other
permanent attachment of any other component. It claims that "operating
system", "machine code", "assembly code", and "microcode" are all "synonyms".

I'm all for being able to repair one's own devices (my alarm clock is a 1980's
HeathKit that I've saved from an early grave more than once with a soldering
iron), but this is a poorly written bill that wouldn't help consumers.

~~~
pm24601
Really. Enabling consumers repair/hack their own electronics is great.

~~~
tytytytytytytyt
This doesn't even appear like it would accomplish that...

------
21
> Prohibited from designing or manufacturing digital electronic products in
> such a way as to prevent reasonable diagnostic or repair functions

So, are soldered CPUs, RAM and flash memory "reasonable" or not?

~~~
bdonlan
Those are still repairable with the right equipment (SMD/BGA rework station)
and training. The hard part is getting access to schematics (to diagnose which
part is bad) and spare parts.

~~~
walterbell
Are there third parties which will upgrade soldered SSDs in Apple devices?

~~~
gambiting
Sure. There are shops in china which literally repair broken CPUs in Apple
devices by micro-soldering on the CPU itself - it's absolutely nuts. But this
sort of thing is only possible because hugely skilled people who can do this
thing are still paid very little - so it's worth their time.

This one for example:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2Q00py88L8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2Q00py88L8)

No one in the West would do that for an iPhone, because their time doing it
would be worth more than a new phone, if they have the skill level necessary
to do this.

~~~
greglindahl
There are places in San Jose, CA that do that, but their business is reworking
under-development circuit boards and devices that have design flaws. The price
is pretty good for that purpose (time is money), but way too expensive for
repairing a laptop board.

------
kabdib
"... prohibited from _designing_..." isn't going to past 1st amendment muster.
You can design and publish designs to your heart's content.

Manufacturing is often performed outside of the state of WA.

Bans on imports, not sure.

This bill is going to have a rough time if it reaches court.

------
tyingq
_the bill would ban the sale of electronics that are designed “in such a way
as to prevent reasonable diagnostic or repair functions by an independent
repair provider_

Wow, that's pretty broad. Affects almost every kind of consumer electronics.
Will be interesting to watch the resulting lawsuits.

~~~
ken
"Sec. 5. (1) Nothing in this section applies to motor vehicle manufacturers,
any product or service of a motor vehicle manufacturer, or motor vehicle
dealers."

The proposed law starts out by being very broad, and then carves out
exceptions for cars, off-road motor vehicles, generators, medical devices,
etc. It seems like they only wanted it to apply to smartphones, tablets, and
PCs, but couldn't come up with legal definitions for these devices.

Interestingly, the definition of "motor vehicle" carves out an exception for
motorcycles and RVs, so if a motorcycle has a CPU and a flat panel display,
the law _does_ seem it would apply to those. I don't understand the logic
behind what classes of products got exceptions in this bill.

~~~
kevingadd
The exceptions are likely a result of lobbying combined with fear of lawsuits.
Motor vehicle manufacturers are a very powerful lobby and in particular have a
historical grudge with repair shops (they want everyone to go to the dealer).

------
kjgkjhfkjf
This would hurt consumers. Closed hardware has advantages (as well as
disadvantages), and consumers should not be forced to forgo these. If you want
to change your own battery, you are free to buy a phone from a manufacturer
other than Apple.

~~~
pishpash
Closed hardware has what advantages? I can see forcing consumers onto one
platform has advantages (as well as disadvantages) but closed hardware by
itself has no advantages I can see.

~~~
simonh
It depends what you mean by closed.

Gluing in batteries enables much thinner, lighter construction. Maybe you
think that’s unnecessary for a phone, others might differ, but for things like
AirPods it’s a huge difference. In any case this issue is at least partly
overblown, dealing with glued components makes home repair hard, but
professional workshops and recycling specialists can often use heat systems
and solvents.

Apple’s touchID is only secure if the system can trust the fingerprint data it
gets from the touch sensor in the screen assembly. If anyone can plug in
whatever screen assembly they like with no hardware secure identification,
guaranteed security becomes impossible. The same is almost certainly true of
the FaceID sensors.

So yes there are very real direct advantages from these manufacturing methods
and from closed hardware systems. Whether you care about them is up to you,
but surely it’s also up to each of us to choose for ourselves?

~~~
pm24601
Did you notice that the recyclers are saying that the new macbooks are
difficult to recycle.

If Apple wants to continue to do this then they should be force to pay for the
cost of recycling their product.

The non-repairability is imposing a real pollution cost on the rest of the
world. In recent news China has decided to stop taking in the rest of the
world's garbage. The toxic metals are now going to be leaching in to US water
supply not just China's. Recycling/reuse/repairability has a positive economic
benefit.

~~~
simonh
>Did you notice that the recyclers are saying that the new macbooks are
difficult to recycle.

Yes I did, if it’s a problem with specific products then yes I think it should
be addressed. Apple prides itself on an industry leading record on
recyclability and any backsliding from that is unfortunate. However using
glue, by itself, isn’t always a problem. It would set a significant ussue for
recyclability if iPhones for example.

------
TheRealPomax
My first thought was "who's Washington Bill and why should I care about him?".
Capitalization. Hilarious.

------
vinniejames
So any device smaller than a phone, say idk like a watch would be banned? Ok
DC

~~~
TheCoelacanth
DC has no involvement in this bill at all. This is a bill in Washington state,
roughly 2500 miles away on the opposite side of the continent.

------
lousken
we need this in the EU as well

------
todd8
I’m happy this is happening in a state that I don’t live in. What next, in
their infinite wisdom and prescient vision, will the political class think up
for us? Maybe every restaurant’s deserts must be gluten free or automobile
repair places must be open every day until at least 10:30pm.

I see no reason to trust others to make decisions for me about the kind of
electronics I can purchase.

~~~
parent5446
The entire purpose of these types of laws is to protect consumers against
overwhelming corporate interests. Are you saying that all laws governing
product quality are nonsense and that we should be relying entirely on the
free market to protect our interests? Or do you just not like this particular
law because you personally don't agree with it / don't care about device
repairability?

~~~
todd8
The answers to your questions are no and no, but the reasons for my not
wanting a repairable electronics law are economic, philosophical, and
pragmatic/political.

Naturally, consumers should be protected from fraudulent claims and misleading
advertising. You are advocating something different, laws governing particular
product qualities that _you_ feel are important. Insisting on repairable
electronics will increase the manufacturing costs (otherwise electronics would
already be repairable due to price competition). The cost of repairable
electronics will be born by everyone while the benefit goes to the people that
care about repairable products. These costs seem hard to quantify and
consumers preferences may change due to circumstances, but how can we fairly
balance these trade offs? Who can we trust to be so wise and so impartial to
shift the balance? Isn't it better to allow manufacturers to compete for
consumers by making these trade offs? Isn't it better to allow consumers to
make the choices themselves? Where is the line?

Personally, I believe the line is somewhere around suitability for the purpose
that a device is sold for. A printer should be capable of printing, otherwise
the manufacturer has misled and committed fraud. But not every printer needs
to be a color printer, not every printer needs to take inexpensive ink
cartridges, not every printer needs to print on both sides of a sheet of
paper.

There are consumers that will choose printers that I wouldn't. I pay more for
my printer because it uses larger less expensive ink that comes in less
wasteful containers. I pay more for a printer that prints on both sides of a
sheet of paper and saves paper. I hope that my printer is better for the
environment, but many people wouldn't want to pay three times the cost of a
basic printer for the printer that I use. Why is it right to take away the
choices that others have?

Why is it right to say only the rich can have a big screen TV that's
repairable while others can't afford these new "better" but more costly TVs
and consequently can't have any big screen TV?

The reasoning that leads to this bill under discussion leads to all sorts of
restriction on our ability to make choices in our lives. If you are sensitive
about gluten, a law requiring gluten-free deserts at every restaurant might
make sense; after all, I've had tasty gluten-free dishes. If you are allergic
to peanuts, why not outlaw them in the state of Washington, because hey, we
could all live without peanuts. There may be a day when all restaurants
provide only gluten-free dishes; you can help them get there by opening your
own restaurant and seeing if that's what consumers want. Likewise you can give
your business to companies that you judge provide better products, whatever
that means to you. Asking politicians to change the rules to restrict our
freedoms seems like a bad idea.

Just a couple more points:

Generally, corporations are in life and death struggles with their
competition. If a company can make a better product at the same price,
consumers will buy it. If consumers want repairable electronics more than they
want batter-life companies will compete on that basis.

A big problem with regulations is that politicians can be lobbied to change
the rules by corporations and special interests that have large vested
interests. Smaller impacts spread across the entire population may make
everyone worse off, but not by enough to move them to match the contributions
of the special interests.

I recommend the following video series by a Nobel Prize winning economist[1]:

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3N2sNnGwa4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3N2sNnGwa4)

