[HN Gopher] FTC Pushed to Crack Down on Companies That Ruin Hard...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       FTC Pushed to Crack Down on Companies That Ruin Hardware via
       Software Updates
        
       Author : lg_rocket
       Score  : 158 points
       Date   : 2024-09-09 19:02 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.techdirt.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.techdirt.com)
        
       | nickphx wrote:
       | I had a bose sound bar, just a week outside of warranty, brick
       | itself with a forced update. Surprisingly, bose replaced the
       | sound bar when I contacted them for support..
        
         | CatWChainsaw wrote:
         | We've lowered our expectations so much that common decency like
         | that is now "above and beyond".
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | Indeed, I'm not sure why software gets so much leniency. If a
           | Bose technician had broken in at night and desoldered the
           | speakers' MCU I don't think anyone would be this generous
           | with their expectations.
        
         | christkv wrote:
         | This is why none of my brand new appliances will ever be
         | connected and allowed a firmware update.
        
           | subhro wrote:
           | Well, sometimes updates are not for "new" features but also
           | for fixing core stuff.
           | 
           | Did I ever tell you, I "love" software engineers and their
           | mentality of "ship first, fix bugs later"?
           | 
           | /s
        
             | John_Cena wrote:
             | How can I push back against PMs and suits when they want
             | stuff like this? I think whatever I think to say or have
             | said is just talking past them; they don't seem to care
             | about the ability of the product, just that it appears good
             | enough to sell.
        
           | ranger_danger wrote:
           | Until it becomes a requirement.
        
             | LeifCarrotson wrote:
             | It's often a requirement to use any smart features. My SIL
             | has a coffee maker that requires an Internet connection to
             | program the delayed start. It still has all the buttons of
             | the previous generation that ostensibly allow you to have
             | your morning coffee ready when you get up, but blinked at
             | her demanding an SSID before you could use the interface;
             | now it can do whatever they want it to do. Ostensibly, you
             | can set more options and set them more easily from a phone
             | app over the cloud, but practically I just want the coffee
             | to be hot and ready at 6:05 AM.
        
               | rurp wrote:
               | Avoiding anything labeled "Smart" is a great way to
               | massively reduce cognitive load and improve reliability
               | around the house. I recently replaced my old cheap coffee
               | maker that finally broke with a new cheap coffee maker.
               | It took about 5 seconds to set the timer for the next
               | morning and I'm confident that's the last I'll have to
               | think about it for years to come.
        
             | christkv wrote:
             | I'm talking my ovens, cooking top, washer and drier. It's
             | all Siemens and it works perfectly not being connected so i
             | can only imagine downsides by connecting it.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | Then it gets returned. "requirements" are a two-way street.
        
         | roninorder wrote:
         | I started just sending broken products back to Amazon. My DENON
         | smart speaker broke outside of warranty (1.5 years), so I
         | bought a new identical speaker and returned the broken one.
         | 
         | It's unethical but I am just tired of paying $$$ for products
         | that break right after warranty ends.
        
           | ToucanLoucan wrote:
           | I did exactly this with a busted ASUS monitor. Bought a 43"
           | 4K display for my desk and it failed after barely 2 months of
           | use. Contacted ASUS and their support said they'd be happy to
           | fix it under the warranty, after I sent the item to their
           | repair facility in Texas, on my own dime. A 43" monitor.
           | Would've costed me $180.
           | 
           | Fucking ridiculous. I ordered a second if for no other reason
           | than to get back to work, and _that one arrived broken!_ But,
           | fortunately, the power supply was in-tact so I took them both
           | apart, constructed a working one, kept it and returned the
           | broken parts. If whoever 's fulfillment can't even be fucked
           | to check the ones they're shipping out to see if they're
           | shattered, I figured it was long odds anyone would even care
           | if I did it. And I never heard a thing about it.
           | 
           | And an interesting side note, I received refunds for _both_
           | purchases. I have no idea why, but clearly some folks working
           | at either Amazon or ASUS aren 't too on the ball.
           | 
           | And the monitor I built still works too, so.
        
             | roninorder wrote:
             | This is becoming the most valuable benefit of buying on
             | Amazon. At least I can always return a broken product and
             | not just eat the cost of the ever-decreasing quality of
             | consumer electronics.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Previously:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41455273
       | 
       | Actual letter:
       | https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/group-letter-f...
       | 
       | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41455726)
        
       | swframe2 wrote:
       | MS removed support for mixed reality in windows 11 24H2 which
       | made all windows VR headsets unusable (except MS's headset). I
       | wonder if that counts.
        
         | notfed wrote:
         | Just speculating here but I assume law will answer this with
         | one word: "intent". Did MS design this with the intention of
         | planned obsolescence, or was it reasonable to impractical to
         | avoid?
        
       | subhro wrote:
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/sousvide/comments/1e6su45/anova_dis...
       | 
       | Morons.
        
       | bearjaws wrote:
       | I have been working to eliminate all my wifi IOT devices.
       | 
       | Years ago I gave them a separate guest network / vlan to use,
       | with only 5mbit of bandwidth.
       | 
       | The only thing I have left is some ip cameras and my roborock
       | vacuum.
       | 
       | We seriously need a local first law that enables all these
       | devices to work 100% on local wifi.
        
         | ajsnigrutin wrote:
         | Just look at the ones that support Tasmota (or ESPhome).
         | 
         | Those use opensource software, integrate nicely into home
         | assistant, and well.. are "local first".
        
           | simcop2387 wrote:
           | For lights and relays (haven't bought the others yet) i;ve
           | been really hapoy with the quality of athom devices. Tasmota,
           | esphome and wled support natively.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | I really wish that what we got instead of "Hey, your device can
         | connect to smart-things.com and do stuff, ain't that need!" we
         | had "Hey, this device speaks Protocol 1.2.3 over bluetooth
         | which you can import to smart-things.com or other services".
         | 
         | There really is no reason why a phone couldn't, for example,
         | have a home management app on it that manages all the IOT
         | devices over bluetooth or other protocols directly rather than
         | needing an internet connection.
        
           | vineyardmike wrote:
           | This exists, it's "Matter", and it's a smart home local-first
           | IP based protocol. It's available through the SmartThings,
           | AppleHomeKit, and GoogleHome apps, as well as other smaller
           | companies (eg. Alexa).
           | 
           | It can operate over WiFi/Ethernet, as well as thread and
           | Bluetooth.
           | 
           | Edit: the implementation is also open source, and you can
           | roll your own
        
             | schmidtleonard wrote:
             | Does pairing (or network joining or whatever it's called)
             | work in Matter? Or is this going to be like Bluetooth where
             | 30 years later the most fundamental underlying workflow
             | still finds new and innovative ways to be completely broken
             | for the most basic tasks?
        
               | meepmorp wrote:
               | Iirc, Matter uses BT LE for adding devices; not sure if
               | that's required or just a supported option, though.
               | 
               | Yay?
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | Pairing mostly works. Matter is still "new", despite
               | having been in the cooker for a few years, and there are
               | glitches to the setup process, but it works eventually.
               | 
               | I've got a few cheap Matter light bulbs that I've picked
               | up mostly just to play with, starting a few months ago.
               | 
               | This fleet has several random and forgettable names on
               | the packaging and exactly two (also unmemorable)
               | manufacturers so far.
               | 
               | Pairing is a little weird: It seems to broadly involve a
               | pocket supercomputer with Alexa or Google Home or Home
               | Assistant or whatever, and scanning a QR code.
               | 
               | This QR _apparently_ begins Bluetooth handshake between
               | the light bulb and the pocket computer, wherein things
               | like WiFi information seem to be exchanged.
               | 
               | After that, Matter devices (in my application at least)
               | just live on WiFi.
               | 
               | This all happens without needing weird(er) apps, overseas
               | clown accounts, or manufacturer-specific hardware. It is
               | local. (Well, Home Assistant is local. The others...are
               | whatever hybrids they are.)
               | 
               | And multiple local control systems (like the three I've
               | already mentioned) can each monitor and control each
               | Matter devices directly. There's probably a limit, but
               | it's nice to have these things non-interactively
               | interacting. ;)
               | 
               | And they seem to be working fine. Boring, even. Right now
               | I just have all of my IoT stuff on the same VLAN/SSID as
               | everything else because it is easy, but I have 100%
               | confidence that these Matter devices would continue to
               | boringly Just Work if I were to isolate them to their own
               | VLAN with zero WAN access.
               | 
               | (Maybe that's something I will work on when setting
               | everything up again after the next move.)
        
             | WaitWaitWha wrote:
             | > There really is no reason why a phone couldn't, for
             | example, have a home management app on it that manages all
             | the IOT devices over bluetooth or other protocols directly
             | rather than needing an internet connection.
             | 
             | >> This exists, it's "Matter"
             | 
             | Sadly, I am not sure Matter will solve the problem. Not
             | because it _cannot solve_ it, but because what I see in the
             | industry manufacturers _will not_ solve it.
             | 
             | I have tried several (e.g., Aqara, Google, GE) Matter
             | products that supposed to "just work", but they did not.
             | Every one of the devices I tried failed or made it
             | extremely onerous to function with non-native hubs.
             | 
             | At 3.5% profit margin for the hardware, there is little
             | incentive to truly interoperate. The money is in
             | subscriptions, locking the user into an ecosystem that
             | makes them dependent for the life of the product.
             | 
             | (Caveat emptor - I am an old crotchety, jaded grouch.)
        
           | bsder wrote:
           | > I really wish that what we got instead of "Hey, your device
           | can connect to smart-things.com and do stuff, ain't that
           | need!" we had "Hey, this device speaks Protocol 1.2.3 over
           | bluetooth which you can import to smart-things.com or other
           | services".
           | 
           | The problem is that end users _suuuuuuuck_.
           | 
           | Oh, by the way iOS and Android do everything in the universe
           | to make using Bluetooth absolutely miserable. Which Android
           | or iOS version are you running? Which buggy Bluetooth stack
           | did Samsung saddle you with? Oh, we retired that version of
           | the app 18 months ago, please, for the love of God, update
           | it. And, oh, you're using a shitty cracked Chinese version of
           | the app <facepalm>.
           | 
           | If I make the users connect to the "cloud", I can control the
           | device, the backend talking to the device, and the front end
           | talking to the user. I now know _exactly_ what the versions
           | are, and the Chinese can 't pirate the app. The customer
           | support is _orders of magnitude_ easier.
           | 
           | From the perspective of the device developer, the "cloud" is
           | simply a no-brainer on every single front.
           | 
           | You, as a local-only user, simply won't pay anywhere near
           | enough money to make supporting you worthwhile.
        
           | commandar wrote:
           | >I really wish that what we got instead of "Hey, your device
           | can connect to smart-things.com and do stuff, ain't that
           | need!" we had "Hey, this device speaks Protocol 1.2.3 over
           | bluetooth which you can import to smart-things.com or other
           | services".
           | 
           | I made a conscious decision to build out absolutely
           | everything HA-related that I could using Zigbee and Z-Wave
           | devices. I intentionally avoided anything based on wifi and
           | proprietary apps. It's basically what you're describing. I
           | switched from SmartThings to Home Assistant about a year ago,
           | and everything flipped over without any real drama.
           | 
           | As others have said, Matter is another step in this direction
           | with the end goal of making setup a little bit easier; it's
           | still incredibly immature at the moment, though. But Z-Wave
           | and Zigbee are both here now and work fine.
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | I'm currently doing home assistant + zigbee/zwave as well
             | for everything. The main issue I have is it seems like the
             | amount of those devices being released is fairly limited.
             | It can be hard to find devices for some applications (like
             | high current switches, for example).
             | 
             | Be that as it may, the issue is also that you can't take
             | your phone and hook up directly to these devices which is
             | the bigger issue for wider adoption, IMO. It's fine for
             | someone like me that has a home server laying around where
             | I can plop in HA. But what about the average consumer who's
             | only device is probably their phone and maybe a smart
             | speaker?
             | 
             | That's more the problem I was talking about that needs
             | addressing.
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | I just bought a bunch of Shelly wall switches and US outlets.
         | They are very affordable and use an open source OS on what I
         | think is an ESP32 enabling Bluetooth and WiFi. They have an IoT
         | cloud thing paired with their app BUT you can disable their
         | cloud or use your own cloud URL, enable RPC over http or UDP
         | and write your own code, use MQTT, local web server in the
         | switch, etc. The outlets are just relays though they measure
         | load current and voltage. Bonus is they do not need to be
         | commissioned through an app - you can do everything over a
         | browser or http calls via curl so you can use whatever OS and
         | even script it.
         | 
         | My only gripe is the wall switches do not have any ability to
         | accommodate retrofitting a 3/4-way setup which is quite common
         | for stairwell and hallway lighting.
         | 
         | Edit: here's the dimmer API for reference https://shelly-api-
         | docs.shelly.cloud/gen2/Devices/Gen2/Shell...
        
         | AyyEye wrote:
         | If you want to cloud delete you may be able to install valetudo
         | on your roborock. You still get a local control via webpage or
         | the (foss) app.
         | 
         | https://valetudo.cloud/pages/general/supported-robots.html
        
           | darknavi wrote:
           | Valetudo has been awesome on my Roborock S5s. It does
           | occasionally hang up so I have some reboot cludge scripts,
           | but in general its pretty solid. And way more than you can
           | ask for from some random guy on the internet.
        
         | thebasic wrote:
         | Agreed - can't tell you how many cloud connected devices I've
         | had that completely stopped working. Like my Mellow Sous Vide.
         | Most of my house now is Z-wave and Zigbee.
        
       | Fauntleroy wrote:
       | Given recent rulings by the US Supreme court, how much actual
       | authority does the FTC have left?
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | A fair amount. They are more limited to the letter of the law,
         | but they already had a lot of authority.
        
       | aatharuv wrote:
       | This reminds me of when Sony disabled their officially supported
       | OtherOS support (used to install Linux and other os's dual boot)
       | with an update. Of course without the update, no access to the
       | Sony Store, games that require the latest Sony PS3 stopped
       | working, etc...
        
         | Matheus28 wrote:
         | They got sued in a class action lawsuit for that, which got
         | dragged out for ~7 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS
         | 
         | And in the end users who had used that feature and lost it
         | got... $10.07
        
         | rgovostes wrote:
         | Exactly what I thought of, too. Was the PS3 the first forced-
         | downgrade?
        
       | PaulKeeble wrote:
       | We have been calling on laws to stop this practice for at least 2
       | decades now. Early examples include the bricking of PS3 Linux
       | support and HP printer modules. This situation needs to change
       | especially with so many cloud connected IOT devices. The law
       | really needs to not just be about functionality loss or bricking
       | remotely but also components that work without the cloud that can
       | work locally.
        
       | stanski wrote:
       | Hello, HP!
        
       | toss1 wrote:
       | The solution that would not require govt cost or enforcement is a
       | legal change:
       | 
       | A company introducing a product that requires a connection to
       | their service _M UST_ maintain utility and features at the same
       | or better for at least 7 years after the hardware product is last
       | sold at a retail establishment (equal or expanded features and
       | lower cost).
       | 
       | At whatever time they reduce features or increase cost beyond a
       | faster level of inflation, they are required to release all
       | related current source code, comments, documentation, test
       | suites, etc. required to make usable all product features, into
       | the public domain.
       | 
       | All parties are also fully permitted to use any measures to
       | reverse engineer or otherwise hack the source code and firmware.
       | 
       | Simple: You maintain it, it's yours as long as you want. You stop
       | maintaining it, everyone else can do it for you.
       | 
       | Let the bean counters trying to cut this months bottom line costs
       | fight with the IP lawyers trying to hide everything forever.
        
         | janalsncm wrote:
         | I think this gets tricky if their source code uses other
         | proprietary software that can't be open sourced. So in practice
         | open sourcing would not be an option.
         | 
         | I could also imagine a common situation where there was some
         | complex integration with various third party like OpenAI where
         | it wouldn't be that easy for users to handle themselves.
        
           | toss1 wrote:
           | For sure, there will be edge cases and such as you describe.
           | That is no reason to not do it.
           | 
           | 1) resolve them in favor of the customers/users. If it is
           | required to use it, release it, and anyone is free to hack.
           | If it integrates with some 3rdPty service, they'll pretty
           | quickly update their TOS to prevent such risks to their
           | codebase, so it won't be an option.
           | 
           | 2) it'll encourage corporations selling products to use
           | modular and local-first design. If the product works by
           | itself, local-first, and using a software package delivered
           | with the product, and they sell an _ADD-ON_ cloud-based
           | service, they 'll have zero problems. They can discontinue
           | the _ADD-ON_ cloud service at will, and people can still use
           | the original product as sold.
        
           | datadrivenangel wrote:
           | The classic example is deep use of cloud services. If the
           | whole thing is built on AWS services, you won't have a
           | meaningful app to deploy. Or if they use proprietary assets
           | from somewhere like unity.
        
       | dev1ycan wrote:
       | I'm scared for the next election, remember Ajit Pai in the FCC?
       | If Lina Khan goes away the FTC will most likely get a corporate
       | stooge and all the wins under her will be gone
        
       | atum47 wrote:
       | LG Smart TVs, for sure
        
       | alphazard wrote:
       | What we really need are a variety of certifications enforced by
       | the FTC, not blanket regulation. Like you can put a sticker on
       | your product, which would be illegal for non-complying products
       | to have. One seal could be for Open Source, another for Cloud-
       | Free, Firmware Rollbacks, Telemetry-Free, E2EE, 10 years of
       | replacement parts, etc.
       | 
       | It's clear just from this thread that different people care about
       | different things. And I'd rather see a certification that never
       | gets used, than a whole kind of product removed from the market
       | because the FTC got it wrong, and now it doesn't make sense to
       | produce it.
        
         | ok_dad wrote:
         | Good idea! Like a nutritional label for electronics. The FDA is
         | very strict about nutritional labels, as they should be.
        
       | bokchoi wrote:
       | The recent Synology update removed Video Station and HEIC support
       | from Photo Station. I'm annoyed that they can arbitrarily remove
       | consumer focused functionality in an update like that. There has
       | been quite a bit of grumbling in /r/synology about this.
        
       | doctorpangloss wrote:
       | Are they growing to crack down on Apple? Or are they the only
       | ones allowed to make money by limiting software capabilities?
        
       | avmich wrote:
       | Judging by the URL, the full name of the article is "FTC pushed
       | to crack down on companies that ruin hardware via software
       | updates or annoying paywalls".
       | 
       | Regarding annoying paywalls, it's ironic that the page says
       | "Checking your browser before accessing this site.", "Please
       | allow up to 5 seconds..." and then keeps showing the wait sign
       | indefinitely.
       | 
       | I guess Techdirt site could be a subject to FTC push?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-09 23:00 UTC)