| So what benefit would the right to repair bring? Even if all the schematics were published, parts be more standardized and built in a way that things are easier to maintain, would it really make a difference? People want the shiny new PS5 no matter how repairable the PS3 is. Maybe in a few decades the technology development slows to a point where this might be reasonable, but today people think on how to get their hands on the new M2 chip even before the M1 is fully rolled out. Then there is mechanical degradation, most components degrade over time and start to cause problems. The longer you wait, the more problems (basically the same as with cars). Most people who can afford will go for a median timeline where the devices work reliably and then dump them no matter what. So unless we make them last for decades reliably (not likely in the near future) this is not a viable thing to strive for. Then there is software support. Vendors continuously improve the software and add new hardware capabilities to stay competitive, because everyone else is doing it. So if we wanted to keep stuff working, we'd have to strangle competitive innovation and mandate a specific cap on technology for a given time. So I think that's all not reasonable. Instead we should strive to make the stuff we produce recyclable (like really), so that the materials can become the new shiny stuff that people crave for. But stuff is not designed to be recyclable at all and if you look at the global recycling industry (or fantasy really, so little is recovered) you can picture a giant dumpster we leave for the next generations. |
Also, there are many devices where i don’t care for newer models, like the dishwasher.