website/content/posts/data-collection-right-to-repair.md

title	date	draft	description	type	tags
Data Collection and Right to Repair	2022-06-12T10:57:28-05:00	true	An unfinished analysis of a discussion about data collection and right to repair, highlighting incorrect arguments	post	right-to-repair society companies

A: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/06/07/tech/europe-uscb-requirement/index.html we live in the best timeline

me: in the best timeline Apple wouldn't exist

B: SEE SOMEONE AGREES

A: Why would Apple not exist but Microsoft does

B: they dont either B: in the best timeline

A: So in the best timeline there is no big companies and therefore generally speaking worse products?

(Monopolies ruin competition and generally lead to worse products. Having real competitors can work wonders in improving product quality)

B: no B: the big companies release open source products and have consumer friendly policies B: ie totally different from any of the ones we have

(Sounds reasonable)

A: If your products are open source you aren't making very much money if any A: and then you aren't a big company

(Red Hat was in the Fortune 500 (before it was bought) and a lot of AMD's software is open-source. (However, AMD is a hardware company so that might not be a good example.) Also, most open-source software is developed by communities so do we even need companies at that point?)

B: the consumer friendly policies (ie right to repair, no/minimal (or at least disableable) data collection) B: are the more important of the two

(Important distinction: the first one is for hardware and the second is for software and software and hardware companies are pretty different in terms of how they earn profit, although many hardware companies are trying to become software companies now.)

A: I don't know enough about the finances but idk if that would necessarily be viable at least the less data collection part

(That's right, data collection is super profitable)

B: it totally is, as much as i like to shit on apple they dont collect much data B: its one of the few things i give them credit for

(Apple is a hardware company mostly, which is how they can afford to not collect as much data)

A: But they also charge more outright as a product of that choice

(Apple products are overpriced because they want to make the most profit possible, not because they don't collect as much data. Those two things are separate.)

B: besides in the best timeline the consumer comes before finances

(YES exactly)

B: ok and

A: That in its own way is less consumer friendly

B: not imo B: thats subjective though

(Well, I guess you could indeed say making your products overpriced is less consumer friendly)

A: Not really, more expensive = less people can buy = less consumer friendly

B: its still subjective, to me thats still more consumer friendly B: less data collection = more privacy = more consumer friendly B: also in the ideal timeline this isnt even a consideration, as the company dosent need to bother with this concern, it is funded and consumer friendly

(As I said above, the issues of being overpriced and data collection are separate and not really related)

A: How is direct correlation subjective. Whether the good outweighs the bad is subjective but raising the price is consumer unfriendly whether it outweighs collection

B: "Whether the good outweighs the bad is subjective" B: then theres no point to your statement here, its still totally subjective as to whether it is net friendly or unfriendly

A: bruh I'm done with this shit

C: What is the actual argument

B: read it?

C: can I get like a 1-2 sentence abbreviated version

B: in an ideal timeline, companies would have consumer friendly policies (ie reduce data collection, right to repair your stuff, computer is owned by you rather than the right to use it) B: and maybe release their products as open source as well

A: But is the ideal timeline possible or realistic

(Yes, see Red Hat or System76 or Canonical)

B: not what we are talking about

(Well, that is a good thing to talk about though)

C: #communisim

A: Literally is

(If you don't want companies at all, technically it's anarcho-syndicalism, and if you do want smaller ethical companies, I'd call that capitalism with good regulations since tech companies can be natural monopolies and should be regulated.)

C: anyway

A: because the issue I had was that it was unrealistic A: if you look up

B: AMD's drivers are open source, they are doing fine

(AMD is a hardware company so not a good example)

D: I swear, y’all don’t even know what you’re arguing about, smh

(So true!)

A: drivers are different from full OSes

(Well yes, they are different, but I don't think those differences are relevant in this debate)

B: apple dosent collect data they are fine

(Hardware company again)

A: drivers are literally only useful if you have AMD products A: But you also claim apple shouldn't exist

C: this isnt an argument, it's an opinion. Is there an actual argument statment

A: so they aren't a good example

(AMD and Apple aren't great examples because they are hardware companies)

B: also something I said and A disagrees with

C: k C: so C: my opinion is that B's above statement sounds great in practice, but is entirely unrealistic

(I think it's realistic)

B: mostly yeah

D: Though I would say that under stringent enough regulation, some of those goals could be achieved

(YES, exactly)

B: but apple dosent do data collection in any significant capacity, and they are functional

(Bad example again)

D: Certainly right to repair, and also that for other industries

(Apple has been a terrible enemy of right to repair, since that does cost them a lot in profit, so this is an actually good use of Apple as an example)

B: so the data collection one is realistic B: and right to repair has literally no argument against it B: aside from literal greed

(I haven't gotten to analyzing the remainder of this section)

US Fish and Wildlife Service — Today at 6:29 PM Other than this argument: $ Enigma_Alliance — Today at 6:29 PM the statement as a whole is unrealistic Osage-Chan — Today at 6:29 PM ok refined : the companies would support right to repair and reduce data collection (except error reporting) Enigma_Alliance — Today at 6:30 PM "reduced" is not a good definition Osage-Chan — Today at 6:30 PM remove or at least make optional US Fish and Wildlife Service — Today at 6:31 PM If they support it, I think that’s unrealistic. The only way they would support that is if they thought they would lose revenue over public backlash to their policies Osage-Chan — Today at 6:31 PM support was bad word choice : regulations force them to "support" it FeenixFobia — Today at 6:32 PM It depends on how that works in practice, it's hard to prove someone broke the product while modifying its insides but it wouldn't be viable for apple to replace accidental damage caused by opening the device So maybe right to repair using third party products Osage-Chan — Today at 6:32 PM refined (2) : the companies would be forced by regulations to support right to repair and remove or make optional data collection (except error reporting) FeenixFobia — Today at 6:32 PM but voiding warranty does have an argument Osage-Chan — Today at 6:33 PM actually its literally illegal to put warranty void if removed stickers on products noone takes them to court though because no resources FeenixFobia — Today at 6:33 PM Ok but, if you break your device doing an unintended use they can't be held accountable. Banning the stickers makes sense in some context but no sense in others Osage-Chan — Today at 6:34 PM if there was unintended use there will be evidence, if there isnt then the damage is identical to non misuse damage and should be treated the same anyway also having people damage the products improves sales of non third party repair parts FeenixFobia — Today at 6:35 PM Evidence like a removed Warranty sticker. A battery can rupture from either impact or literally opening it and stabbing it, how do you prove which it was? Osage-Chan — Today at 6:36 PM i actually partially agree, but putting the sticker on the outside of the case is bullshit, also, what if I open the battery, do no damage, and it fails unrelatedly and they oh the stickers broken ur screwed FeenixFobia — Today at 6:36 PM What companies put it on the outside??? Osage-Chan — Today at 6:36 PM put the sticker on individual components/assemblies that cannot be safely serviced but even then i dont agree very much Osage-Chan — Today at 6:37 PM they are not necessarily on the outside but placed in such a manner that the sticker is damaged by opening the outer casing, mb on phrasing