• sramder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    It sounds good, but that’s enough wiggle room to drive a truck full of money through. Even “at cost” has been abused pretty badly.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yea, I agree. I think these bills should require the maximum cost to be cost of manufacture at the date of engineering; i.e. a part designed in 2008 can not cost more than the materials to make it and it must keep that price for as long as it is used.

      But progress is progress, we’ll get there eventually as long as we keep up the political pressure.

      Edit: please read the spirit in that example rather than to the letter. There’s a lot of nuance that I just skimmed over, and that’s because I don’t want to write the bill.

      • sramder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Even better. I thought we were just talking about the cost to provide the repair information, which should be free after so many years of shenanigans.

        Good points about parts cost/availability. Hopefully ORs bill keeps costs down with the threat of competition.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      That’s what the auto industry does. They have to sell you access to their system to allow third parties to program modules, but that cost can be excessive, especially if a small shop only needs to program one module in a blue moon.

      • sramder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I was actually thinking about OBD2 when I wrote that. The old CRT pedestal style code readers cost as much as a new car, fairly reasonable from an automakers perspective but expensive enough to put plenty of small shops out of business.

        It was one of the first big top-down push that I remember. It’s a pretty good parallel for the current right to repair legislation. The automakers fought it tooth and nail back then too. They made similar claims about their new cars being so complex that they simply had to be serviced at the dealerships. And, to your point, they are still getting away with it to a degree.