Sonos bricking devices intentionally
-
@polygeekery said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@timebandit said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@hungrier said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
What's the "Sonos experience" that apparently needs more than this device can do?
It must be something magical
https://what.thedailywtf.com/post/1290973
For many years Rolls Royce listed the horsepower output of the engines in their vehicles as "Sufficient".
Yeah, based on my experience with the LSX community, where many people are running 600, 700 or more wheel horsepower on cars that made half that amount from the factory, I'm going to have to dispute that claim.
-
@blakeyrat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
It makes you wonder why anybody who didn't actually kill millions of Jews would have to buy advertising space to say so...
I think it has something to do with Israeli prime minister saying Poland has been collaborating with Nazis in extermination of Jews.
-
@gąska Well, didn't they?
-
@blakeyrat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Sure, short of using correctness proofs (which we are actually slowly getting around to... in that regard programming is slowly moving from a craft to a science...), we cannot guarantee the absence of all bugs.
Correctness proofs will never find usability bugs. Neither will unit or integration testing.
Neither would testers, nor QA, nor customers, nor anybody who isn't you. Because only you think features working a little different from what you'd like are bugs.
-
@blakeyrat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@gąska Well, didn't they?
As a government, no. As a nation, no. As individual people, well, yeah, there were few who did, but it was much less common than among Jews.
-
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Because only you think features working a little different from what you'd like are bugs.
I need you to introduce you to my customers, everything is a bug. Even the feature that they approved years ago but finally got around to using and have now decided they want it to work differently.
-
@marczellm said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
I've read the title as "Soros bricking devices internationally". I should take break from political news...
and you're not even living in Hungary.
Translation please?
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
BTW @Lorne-Kates, your original reason not to update was awful UI changes in FF23. If you finally got past it and updated to 28, why not go all the way to newest
nightlystable?I did that. I've always had Firefox on auto-update as long as it's been available.
And then the last time that happened the sole reason I use Firefox anymore (a particular download manager) was no longer supported.
So for the second time in my life I had to back to an older version of some software because the newer version was so much less useful.
-
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The first one says, "I will not buy this record, it is scratched."
And the second one says, "My hovercraft is full of eels."
-
@coldandtired said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The first one says, "I will not buy this record,
it is scratchedSoros scratched it."And the second one says, "My
hoverSoroscraft is full of eels."FTFY
-
@thecpuwizard said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Alas, there have been legal rulings that can cause a company to be exposed to significant liability even for something that is "no longer supported". It would be a great conversation around that, but it is really independent of this specific thread.
On the contrary, I would guess that this exactly is the reason for the "bricking update": they are scared that one of the old batteries goes up in flames, and they get sued over it; so they prefer bricking all devices rather than taking that risk.
-
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The man pictured here will molest your children.
-
@hungrier said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@coldandtired said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The first one says, "I will not buy this record,
it is scratchedSornos scratched it."And the second one says, "My
hoverSornoscraft is full of eels."FTFY
FTFTFY
-
@coldandtired said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The first one says, "I will not buy this record, it is scratched."
And the second one says, "My hovercraft is full of eels."
@blakeyrat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Translation please?
The man pictured here will molest your children.Y'know, I just don't think I believe you two. Why would eels use a picture of an old white guy to molest my non-existent children in a hovercraft?
-
@polygeekery said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
...and due to quote nesting fuckery we cannot easily see it. :P
I guess we should just use Discourse, then it would Just Work
. Because quoting on Discourse is 
, so the proper way would have been to ninja-edit the first post and make @Gaska looks like an ass for not getting it the first time.Oh, sorry, this isn't the garage!
(also, what the fuck happened to emoji/username completion, it suddenly broke half-way in the middle of writing this??)
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@blakeyrat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
It makes you wonder why anybody who didn't actually kill millions of Jews would have to buy advertising space to say so...
I think it has something to do with Israeli prime minister saying Poland has been collaborating with Nazis in extermination of Jews.
Source of this shitshow is polish government trying to distract general public from their doings by firing off a stink bomb. And what works better in this role than good old holocaust blaming and playing the greatest victim of all time.
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
So if I'm not the maker, I shouldn't be held liable for what I sell?
I'll going to assume you're not trolling me and again IANAL so I may be wrong (and it may vary according to local law). But generally speaking, if you're not the maker, no, you are not necessarily liable for defects in what you sell, provided you did not know about it.
If you buy a brand new car, with defective airbags, and you never have an accident so you don't know about it, and you sell it, you are not liable for the defective airbags. The original manufacturer of the car still is, even though the car now belongs to someone with whom they never dealt. Of course if you know about the defect (for example because there was a product recall) and you still sell it claiming (or implying) that the airbag works, then you would be responsible for mis-selling the car, but even then I don't know if you would be liable for the broken airbag itself (just for having lied while selling the car, which is a different offense -- but given the consequences, the actual sentence might not be that different in the end...).
-
@dreikin "Don't let Soros have the last laugh." "99% opposes illegal immigration". "National Consultation about the Soros Plan".
Also we've got TV and radio ads saying
"Soros is the most influential billionaire in the world. He wants to settle millions of immigrants in Europe. THIS IS DANGEROUS."
etc.
-
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Of course if you know about the defect (for example because there was a product recall) and you still sell it claiming (or implying) that the airbag works, then you would be responsible for mis-selling the car
Not under current law in Poland and USA (and I'm sure in many other civilized countries as well). I'd say the "as is - no warranty" problem is even bigger than in software industry - because with software, you can at least hope the worst of the bugs will be fixed eventually, and in consumer software market, these fixes are usually free.
What I'm saying is, there is precedent in "as is" agreements, so I'm not as outraged by EULAs as I'd otherwise be. Also, regarding holding producer liable instead of seller - I'd very much rather it would be the other way - the seller is liable for any and all hidden defects directly to customer, and in case the seller isn't the original manufacturer, they can in turn demand compensation from whoever they've got it from in the first place. And so on for every middleman. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's how it works in Poland (for new items, not used). It's much easier to get refund from local shop than international corporation that in some cases might not be even registered as a business in your country.
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
It's much easier to get refund from local shop than international corporation that in some cases might not be even registered as a business in your country.
But you’re not going to have a local shop, because there’s way too much risk and overhead involved in opening one in that environment. Or if you do, they’re have to charge you way more for everything than an equivalent shop in the US.
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Not under current law in Poland and USA (and I'm sure in many other civilized countries as well).
I believe that if you sell a second-hand car with a defect, knowing about it but hiding it from the buyer (and it's not something that the buyer should know about or can check by themselves), you should be held responsible. That's basically false advertising. Of course there will be a lot of judgement in deciding whether you really knew about it, and whether it is something that the buyer should have checked themselves or should have expected from the product, but that's the role of judges.
The idea to me is that if you say "I'm selling you something that does X" while knowing that it doesn't, you are actively lying, and it is not the responsibility of the buyer to check that you don't.
I am pretty sure that this is how the law works here and if we were in the garage I might say that if this is not the case where you are, I might dispute the "civilized country" qualifier...
Also, regarding holding producer liable instead of seller - I'd very much rather it would be the other way - the seller is liable for any and all hidden defects directly to customer, and in case the seller isn't the original manufacturer, they can in turn demand compensation from whoever they've got it from in the first place. And so on for every middleman.
That is probably how it would work in practice, at least for new stuff that is sold by shops (i.e. you would get a refund from the shop, which would in turn go to the producer or their wholesaler etc.) and I am OK with that, as long as the end result is that the producer holds liability for faults in the product. And if there were consequences from the defect (such as someone killed because a defective airbag did not open), they should go back to the producer as well, even if that goes through the chain of intermediaries first to ensure they are not responsible (e.g. they tampered with the device before selling it).
-
@unperverted-vixen it already works that way in Poland. Pretty sure it works the same in USA (if there's a problem with my TV, I'm gonna talk to Walmart about it, not Samsung).
-
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
I am pretty sure that this is how the law works here and if we were in the garage I might say that if this is not the case where you are, I might dispute the "civilized country" qualifier...
Explain this buyers guide thing then.
https://www.designsnprint.com/img/products/large/dnp-10506610-97369916.jpg
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@unperverted-vixen it already works that way in Poland. Pretty sure it works the same in USA (if there's a problem with my TV, I'm gonna talk to Walmart about it, not Samsung).
And unless you're within the 30 day return window, Walmart will tell you it's not their problem and you need to go talk to Samsung.
-
@unperverted-vixen I'll add it to the list of things EU does better than USA.
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Explain this buyers guide thing then.
As far as I am aware, that would be an invalid contract here (i.e. like I said somewhere above, you can sign it if you want, but it won't hold in front of a court). There are some liabilities that are written in the law and that cannot be waived away.
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Explain this buyers guide thing then.
Here in Quebec, you can't sell a car without a warranty, no matter what you write on the contract
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
I'll add it to the list of things EU does better than USA.
What if you buy your TV from some small store, then 2 months later the store goes bankrupt, do you talk to Samsung then ?
-
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Explain this buyers guide thing then.
As far as I am aware, that would be an invalid contract here (i.e. like I said somewhere above, you can sign it if you want, but it won't hold in front of a court). There are some liabilities that are written in the law and that cannot be waived away.
I guess "here" refers to somewhere that isn't US. If it was invalid, you wouldn't see it on literally every used car ever.
@timebandit said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
I'll add it to the list of things EU does better than USA.
What if you buy your TV from some small store, then 2 months later the store goes bankrupt, do you talk to Samsung then ?
Yes, actually. There's this thing called manufacturer's warranty that most big electronic manufacturers practice that works in addition to seller's warranty. Usually the repair takes multiple months and often ends with the thing being returned to you without repair because either "it's working" or "it's physical/water damage and warranty doesn't cover that".
BTW - by "local", I didn't mean small; I meant huge retailer chains (like Best Buy) that have a physical location where you buy the TV at a register and can go back to if something's wrong.
-
@timebandit
Warranty is transferrable. The manufacturer or representative always is responsible. You don't have to go through the store but the manufacturer could refer you to a shop or dealer. Just like I don't claim my car warranty at the HQ but at a dealership
-
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
I guess "here" refers to somewhere that isn't US. If it was invalid, you wouldn't see it on literally every used car ever.
"Here" meant France, yes. I believe part of that is more EU laws than French laws, but if you say this isn't the case in Poland, then I guess it's French only.
Also, and while I don't dispute that this is how it works in the US, note that the fact that you see it on contracts does not mean it is legal. We have a lot of shrinkwrap licenses, or at least had some years ago (haven't checked recently), even after they had been ruled invalid. The fact that you cannot waive a right does not mean that the seller cannot try to make you believe so.
-
@timebandit said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@gąska said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Explain this buyers guide thing then.
Here in Quebec, you can't sell a car without a warranty, no matter what you write on the contract
Warranty: Covers some things. Expires 24hrs after purchase.
There.
-
@dcon said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Warranty: Covers some things. Expires 24hrs after purchase.
There.Ah ah ah, no.
From https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/legal-warranty-automatic-protection-consumers
The length of time a product lasts, also called the "life expectancy", should be reasonable given the price paid, the terms of the contract and any conditions that apply to the use of the product.
In other words, you are protected against defects in a product that appear after you buy it if you use the goods properly.
Of course, an expensive high-end product will be under the legal warranty for a longer time than a cheaper low-quality product.
Since consumers and merchants don’t always agree on what is a reasonable length of time, this question is often debated in the courts. Here are a few examples of life expectancy considered to be too short:
two years for a refrigerator
three years for heat pump
five years for a washerThese examples give you a general idea of reasonable life expectancy.
So when I buy a TV, and BestBuy say the warranty is only 2 years, before trying to sell me an extended warranty, they actually have to read me this (taken from https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/help/notice-concerning-the-quebec-legal-warranty/hc96.aspx)
Trust me, when I contact Samsung and tell them my 2.5 yo TV doesn't work anymore, as soon as I mention I'm from Quebec, they gladly fix it for free.
They don't want me to file a complain to Quebec's OPC
Edit: fixed a typo
-
@marczellm said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@dreikin "Don't let Soros have the last laugh." "99% opposes illegal immigration". "National Consultation about the Soros Plan".
Also we've got TV and radio ads saying
"Soros is the most influential billionaire in the world. He wants to settle millions of immigrants in Europe. THIS IS DANGEROUS."
etc.
Thanks! Is this stuff paranoid conspiracy theories like some of the American right have about Soros funding everything they don't like, or is it a real thing?
-
@dreikin both. Soros really owns everything, but we've yet to see the effects.
-
-
@timebandit said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
five years for a washer
That seems a little excessive
-
@luhmann said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@timebandit
Warranty is transferrable. The manufacturer or representative always is responsible. You don't have to go through the store but the manufacturer could refer you to a shop or dealer. Just like I don't claim my car warranty at the HQ but at a dealershipThat depends very much on the country. E.g. in the EU warranty is a voluntary offer from the manufacturer. The more important and compulsory legal path is that a sale is a legal agreement to exchange money for a product with certain properties; if the product breaks too early, the salesperson didn't fulfill their part of the agreement. Hence, if the store goes bankrupt it's your bad luck, but if the manufacturer goes bankrupt (or is uncooperative) it's the store's bad luck.
-
@dreikin said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
Thanks! Is this stuff paranoid conspiracy theories like some of the American right have about Soros funding everything they don't like, or is it a real thing?
http://ad.adverticum.net/banners/5056251/STOP_SOROS_3_uzenet_970x250.jpg
"The Soros Plan endangers the Christian culture of Europe!"
Just came in my face as a popup ad on the Hungarian email provider I'm using.
-
@polygeekery said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
For many years Rolls Royce listed the horsepower output of the engines in their vehicles as "Sufficient".
Was it when they were still made by the Rolls Royce Ltd., or when they were already made by VW (or when they were finally taken over by BMW)?
I am also pretty sure they never ever did that with the engines that are their main business.
-
@remi the “I don’t want to support XP” is not a brainworm. Supporting XP significantly increases costs of both development and testing. If it doesn’t provide a business value, because enough users already migrated, there’s no real reason to do that. There’s a lot not to, though.
-
As far as Maker vs. Seller.. (This is USA). I recently bought a new device from a reputable vendor. It did not work (basically DOA). Seller could not accept the product back (for either repair or refund), it had to go back to Manufacturer. Manufacturer could only treat it as a RMA / Warranty Repair (NOT Replace).
Been waiting to get the device back [the above happened in December]. It is "still in their queue", perhaps I will get it sometime in March.
-
@kt_ said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@remi the “I don’t want to support XP” is not a brainworm. Supporting XP significantly increases costs of both development and testing. If it doesn’t provide a business value, because enough users already migrated, there’s no real reason to do that. There’s a lot not to, though.
Or you might just stop changing technology every two years (months?), or at least stay with a technology that doesn't matter to the client (change server version only and keep serving stuff that still works).
We have some code in my company which was compiled for the last time somewhere around 2006, maybe even earlier than that. Since then, that program has officially been deprecated so we're not supposed to use it (and it's not compiled any more in internal releases etc.), but of course since the replacements never covered everything some people still use the old binaries. So it's more than 10 years old. On every new system version we have to copy a couple more system libraries to bundle with it, but the old thing still works.
Why is that considered an exceptional thing rather than the norm?
-
@pleegwat said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@remi I don't think you'll be able to gather any warranty repairs on an empty alkaline battery.
An empty one(1), for sure. A depleted or exhausted one, no chance.
(1) Immediately obvious because the air inside is much less dense than the electrolyte-and-core mixture that's normally inside.(2)
(2) I used to know a guy whose dad kept around a can of beer that had never been opened / punctured / anything like that, but nevertheless contained no liquid.(3)
(3) It was an American mass-market product, so I refuse to be drawn into a debate on whether it counts as actual beer, but it doesn't matter, since, beer or not, there wasn't any in the can.
-
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@kt_ said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
@remi the “I don’t want to support XP” is not a brainworm. Supporting XP significantly increases costs of both development and testing. If it doesn’t provide a business value, because enough users already migrated, there’s no real reason to do that. There’s a lot not to, though.
Or you might just stop changing technology every two years (months?), or at least stay with a technology that doesn't matter to the client (change server version only and keep serving stuff that still works).
We have some code in my company which was compiled for the last time somewhere around 2006, maybe even earlier than that. Since then, that program has officially been deprecated so we're not supposed to use it (and it's not compiled any more in internal releases etc.), but of course since the replacements never covered everything some people still use the old binaries. So it's more than 10 years old. On every new system version we have to copy a couple more system libraries to bundle with it, but the old thing still works.
Why is that considered an exceptional thing rather than the norm?
That’s a completely different example. You have old code that you keep bundling up. There isn’t much additional maintenance for you, it seems.
But if you have a .NET app which is still under active development, why not upgrade to 4.7? You get new APIs which will increase productivity of your developers, which is a huge gain. If the cost is that some people who didn’t yet move from XP can’t use the app and there’s no business reason for keeping them happy, why?
Seriously why, apart from the idealistic view that it’s the right thing to keep supporting them?
-
I wonder if it would be possible to write a nontrivial application using only APIs available on Windows 3.1
-
@kt_ said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
That’s a completely different example. You have old code that you keep bundling up. There isn’t much additional maintenance for you, it seems.
I agree, but it shows that changing the core system does not necessarily means that you have to change stuff that runs on it. The mentality nowadays is that unless you are running the latest version of everything, then you have no right to expect stuff to work. That's wrong to me.
But if you have a .NET app which is still under active development, why not upgrade to 4.7? You get new APIs which will increase productivity of your developers, which is a huge gain. If the cost is that some people who didn’t yet move from XP can’t use the app and there’s no business reason for keeping them happy, why?
If you release that as a new version and keep the old one available for the other guys, fine. If you just wipe out the old version and tell those on XP to get fucked, that's not fine. It does not cost you anything to keep the old stuff (and mark it as deprecated).
Seriously why, apart from the idealistic view that it’s the right thing to keep supporting them?
Because as a consumer, I don't want to be at the mercy of things (updates and changes of functionalities) that may or may not happen years after I bought the initial stuff.
When I buy a washing machine, I know that I will be able to use it to wash my clothes until it breaks down. All it needs is a plug and a water supply. The electricity company is guaranteeing me that the current it supplies will not suddenly change because they found a new spiffy way to deliver moar kittens within the same electrons, and the same goes for the water supply. I also have the guarantee that the machine washer maker will not, 5 years from now, suddenly decide that cotton and silk cannot be put into the same batch and force that on me (even if it is a good thing and I might actually want that, but the point is that I know the features at the time I spend money to buy the thing, and those features don't change without any control on it).
When we started having ubiquitous internet and computers, all the talk was about how wonderful it was to be able to store everything, every version of every book, and be able to access it from anywhere. That software was wonderful as it did not cost anything to duplicate, contrary to physical stuff. And from that idea that we could have kept stuff that worked on any support for as long as we would have liked, we fell into the infinite-update-loop and stuff like the initial topic of this thread, which is the exact opposite.
-
@remi said in Sonos bricking devices intentionally:
It does not cost you anything to keep the old stuff (and mark it as deprecated).
Sure it does.
You've gotta pay for support calls just to tell them "sorry, not supported in this version"
You've gotta deal with "$company told me that because I'm on XP, I have to pay more for another copy of the software/pay for a copy of Windows" style bad PR.
If it's popular enough, you've gotta pay for download costs.
-
@sloosecannon By the same token, not having those versions also costs you, in terms of lost clients.
Either you believe that these XP clients are a tiny fraction, and keeping stuff for them does not have a significant cost, or you believe that they are a significant market, and not catering to them is a lost opportunity.
