cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/13401615

Something that should be considered when buying your micromobility device: Try to get something that will last and not end up as trash.

  • jabjoe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I see right to repair as the thin edge of the wedge, and it is being driven into cracks. The is good movement for this in the US and the EU. France has a repairability index. It will take time, but in the end openness will win out because it is just better. Part of the way of forcing the issue is copyleft. So much out there is already built on open and closed the last mile. Good example of copyleft doing it’s thing is in 3D printers, for example : https://github.com/SoftFever/OrcaSlicer

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      i wish!

      eventually the suits will start pushing back. and most of these getting passed are (to my knowledge) actually hamful if you get to the nuts and bolts.

      • jabjoe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Suits aren’t evil. I mean I’m they aren’t good either, but all they care about is money. They push for closed because that is where the money is, but they have no resolve on anything. Law makers either try and follow experts or money.

        To the extent either believe anything, they believe the IP lie and thus don’t see the tragedy of the commons they advocate.

        Open however has passion, and is technically correct. (The best kind of correct.)

        Little by little, we’ll keep winning out. Right to repair is an important front, but so is digital rights, privacy and competition.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          caring about money above all sounds pretty evil to me.

          and the result in this case is the OP article… at the end they make more money from wasting materials, and wont allow this to be fixed if they have the power to do so.

          • jabjoe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            They don’t care about being bad or good. They just care about money. Change what makes money and they change. There is no resolve. Along with changes happening I listed before, one big thing we need do is bring environmental cost on to the balancesheet. At the moment it’s all external costs. Move the costs of items disposal on to the up front cost. Scale it by item’s life time. Incentivize better behavior.

            • umbrella@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              money for money sake leads to evil, even if money itself is not.

              people after it above all else are evil.

              • jabjoe
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                The point is that they are malleable.

                • umbrella@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  only if it makes them more money.

                  if climate disaster is not enough to make them stop i doubt they ever will.

                  • jabjoe
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Ah, but that lost money in the future, not making money now. They don’t really do long term. It’s money for share holders now.