google is discontinuing support for first-generation nest thermostats.
it is time for lawmakers to implement a »support-or-open-source« regulation. it is ok to not want to support »obsolete« technologies forever, but it should be mandatory to make it open source when and if you stop the support.
@rabaz i‘m at the point where i never buy anything if it makes the impression that »smart« (or more recently »AI«) is a core promise of the product.
that said, i‘m rather curious whether the slate truck will find some demand from people with similar smart-rejecting needs.
@rabaz ps: i bought a TV when the only decent TVs on the market were »smart TVs«. to this day, it has not been connected to the internet, only to other devices that send video. it doesn‘t even know the correct time.
take that, surveillance capitalism! 🤡
@peterpur Absolutely agree and think that this should apply to all tech. If the company no longer supports it with regular or at the very least critical updates, then it should automatically revert to the public domain/open source.
And if we're ever going to actually get real-life cyberware at some point, this becomes absolutely critical as we can't have human bodies shutting down because the person's optics or artificial liver are "no longer supported by the manufacturer".
Right to Repair for All The Things!
@SynAck @peterpur This has already happened with vision and cochlear implants.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/bionic-eye-obsolete-2656624624
@peteriskrisjanis while that is a nice solution of people who can ride these devices (like the cowboys of the mythical yore), it does not solve anything for the people without this (priviledged) knowledge and with less interest in doing so.
as much as some want to believe, »open everything« does not solve all problems.
@peteriskrisjanis @peterpur If there's no vision implant that is, should people who want one keep walking into lampposts? If there's no pacemaker that is, should they die?
Easy enough not to buy a compromised thermostat but you have to admit some people are a bit more at the sharp end.
"Looks like you are trying to make people abandon IOT en masse." - Clippy
@vonxylofon most people don‘t choose what they purchase because of protocols. thinking about the inner workings of things is something most people don‘t want to do, and should not have to do.
maybe it would be enough to mandate open standards?
@peterpur @vonxylofon I don't think that it's a huge effort to have the thought: If I need [cloud service X] to operate the device I bought, then I'm dependent on [cloud service X].
With this in mind, I would *never* buy anything that I can't operate independently. It simply costs too much.
@Devourer_ITA @codemonkeymike while nest/google was the trigger of my post, the cause goes deeper. the whole smart home market is a minefiled of short-term-profit, incompatibility and obsolesence. beyond smart home there are prosthetics that stop functioning because companies stop supporting the devices.
we need regulation beyond companies that are willing or unwilling, friendly or hostile.
@mad77 recommendation in EU acts usually means it was a regulation that was successfully lobbied away.
sigh. so close…
@peterpur ha ha ha.
I called it. Again.
@peterpur @creideiki wonder when the 3rd gen will be discontinued.
Was my first dedicated “smart” product and through its limitations and enshittification determined to be my only and final smart product too.
Rainer 🇨🇦 🇵🇸
peter purgathofer
Ronan
Ozzelot 
Matt Palmer
Raphael
Howard Cohen
su_liam
SYN-ACK 
Dethe Elza
Pēteris Krišjānis
Major Denis Bloodnok
Mathias
marcus
Justin Derrick
Extreme Electronics
Navi 
Michael Bishop ☕
AnimalSpirits
Computeum Vilshofen
Siim Ošur
Von Xylofon
The Grue
Angus Marshall 
Pedro Du T.
Utterly Mundane
Strfnurfn
Mike 
Devourer
mad77
Pandro
A Fine Day to build a fence 🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈🇺🇦🇵🇸
kcǃ
David W. Jones
Colin