irotsoma

joined 1 year ago
[–] irotsoma 2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Never drink booze that you don't know the origin of. And never drink homemade liquor unless it's made by someone who is otherwise a professional using professional grade equipment. It's just not worth the risk. By the time you feel the effects of the methanol, it's too late in a majority of cases.

[–] irotsoma 5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

"Look at you, sailing through the air majestically like an eagle…piloting a blimp."

I mean just quote every line from the portal games and be done with this thread. :-D

[–] irotsoma 6 points 1 day ago

Delete your account. Make it feel final.

[–] irotsoma 18 points 1 day ago

Why can't we just get private stalls with locks and not care about who is in the bathroom at all. I love when place have those, but they're so rare. We'd also need a lot fewer bathrooms and thus less space taken up by them.

[–] irotsoma 1 points 1 day ago

That's already the case with a lot of things. I have a 3D scanner and printer for fixing things. Just the materials are limited to plastics that don't need to take on load bearing tasks. I could use stronger plastics, though, if I was willing to deal with the fumes.

[–] irotsoma 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But even the car thing is not the responsibility of the manufacturer to fix. It's the owner's responsibility and only of they actually are using it.

If companies have to update all products to keep up with modern safety standards, it would mean no new products would ever be made and the products would be exceptionally expensive since you'd only buy them once. That's not the type of economic system we live in.

And no, a router that is defective is not going to tank the digital economy just because the manufacturer doesn't fix it. Definitely not a d-link product. That's why enterprise grade commercial products are so much more expensive. They are designed for longer life. If that's what you want, then buy a commercial product and pay the company a subscription fee for support or warrantee in cases like this.

[–] irotsoma 1 points 1 day ago

That's not necessarily true. That's a copyright issue. Now if d-link was to say that the product was not abandoned and thus the copyright is still theirs, then you might have a case that they need to fix the issue. That doesn't mean they need to give you the code, but decompiling should be OK. But copyright laws vary quite a bit. So that's a totally separate issue.

But you are welcome to write your own firmware and install it on the device in most localities. You just need write it from scratch, just like replacing a custom gear or motor in a vacuum would require engineering it to fit inside the case and connect with all the appropriate parts. Which you are welcome to do.

[–] irotsoma 1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Those are things that get inspected regularly because of public safety issues, not ownership issues, and in the US at least, that only happens in a subset of states anyway. That is about using something you know will likely hurt someone vs using something you know will hurt you and possibly your customers. There's a big difference in liability there.

Vacuums for example do not get regular inspections, and owners are allowed to use any product they want, even defective ones, in their own home or business, even if they pose, say, an electrical shock risk or something else that wasn't something that would have made it fail its initial certification. We don't force vacuum manufacturers to fix old product design issues.

And even if we did, how long back would we make them fix? Would 100 year old vacuums need to be brought up to modern safety standards like grounded plugs and all of the wiring to be redone to ground all the parts or more modern motors that use less power so they don't need to be grounded? What if only one person in the whole world still uses that product?

It's just not a reasonable thing to expect re-engineering old devices when a new potential owner safety issue is found.

[–] irotsoma 0 points 1 day ago

This is a misunderstanding of how Amazon works. There's a difference from them showing up as products on their "store" and them actually selling them.

Anything that was a product of that company will show if you go to their store and search for it. But if you look at the options for actually buying them you'll see that they are being sold by third parties.

For example, if you go to this link https://a.co/d/eFXaSFJ for the DSR-150 you'll see that there are only 3 sellers. The new is shipped and sold by HOLLITRONIC and the others are used and shipped and sold by other sellers. None of the products on the list, as far as I could find, were being sold by D-link or Amazon itself. D-link has no control over the Amazon marketplace and honesty Amazon doesn't do much to control it even.

[–] irotsoma 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sure, but then those new revisions that are currently being sold are what get updated. That's perfectly reasonable. We don't require physical products to go back and fix the old stuff they are no longer selling. If we said that a vacuum manufacturer has to go back and fix their old products for safety flaws to comply with modern standards, what about a company that has been around for 100 years? Do they have to go back and design and manufacture modern technology into those products that didn't exist when they were made? What if only one person in the whole world is actually using that product anymore? How long do they need to continue to revise the product?

[–] irotsoma 0 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I'm not saying they shouldn't fix the issue necessarily, assuming it's even possible. I'm saying they shouldn't be held to higher standards than any other product just because the engineering effort involved in software is undervalued compared to physical objects. If a product made 15 years ago didn't follow modern safety standards and is no longer being sold by the manufacturer, we don't make them update their old products.

As for tooling, yes, and with software it often requires "tooling" that no longer exists in order to develop the patch including hardware that may no longer be manufactured. It's not like the product manufacturer manufactures all of the parts like circuits and microchips. Just like vacuum manufacturers don't usually make the bearings and gears and such, they just assemble them. So same concept.

We may require them to keep parts with the existing design, but we don't require them to fix safety issues that were not found to be out of compliance when it was originally approved for production. We might make them fix it if they're still selling them, but we don't make them fix these issues if they are not.

[–] irotsoma 0 points 1 day ago (4 children)

That's assuming you're looking for a replacement part. This is redesigning the product to work differently to fix a flaw. Like if you made a vacuum company use a different gear because the existing one was too fragile. That's likely not something you can just swap out. First you need an engineer to decide what kind of gear and redesign everything around it to make the gear fit properly as well as creating a way for it to be easily installed by the end user or their repair service. You're ultimately changing the functionality of the original product. Yes it's flawed functionality, but there are tons of flawed products out there.

1
[W] DrunkenSlug Invite (self.usenetinvites)
submitted 5 months ago by irotsoma to c/usenetinvites
 

Looking for an invite for DrunkenSlug. Thanks in advance if you have one to spare!

view more: next ›