[londons_explore]

> So when those disappear, the customer-owned hardware is bricked? No thanks.

Yes please. If the company that developed some consumer networked hardware goes away, I don't want botnets of that hardware sending spam...

Software updates for security are now the norm for internet connected things, and if a piece of hardware can't be supported anymore, it will probably be exploited and siphon your private data to the highest bidder. It's far better to disable unsupportable hardware than keep using it.

If companies going bankrupt starts harming consumers, government could step in and force companies to contribute to a "support fund" for continued support of their hardware after bankruptcy if necessary.

[LocalH]

Thank you for advocating for the continued erosion of user rights with regards to hardware they own. How about we stop tethering devices to manufacturer servers and reserve that for optional, over-the-top features?

[alisonkisk]

The right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

Internet connectivity is an optional over the top feature. You don't deserve the right to be on the shared public internet using a computer someone else made if you can't be cut off for antisocial behavior.

You can make your hardware from raw components if you want.

[LocalH]

That's a pendulum that swings both ways, however. Disabling a manufacturer's entire fleet of product when they go out of business is a little bit far on that scale, IMO. Like you said, the right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

That's why I said "how about we stop tethering devices to manufacturer servers" implying that their basic functionality should always be standalone. Why should we be increasing long-term waste by bricking such products?