@OlafOlafsson @orbifx ben t'es pas forcé de racheter des outils à chaque fois :p

@Technowix @orbifx on tombe sur un paradoxe : pour rentabiliser tes outils, il faut tomber en panne plusieurs fois, ce que tu as plutôt envie d'éviter par ailleurs ;)

Ou alors mutualiser les outils, bcp mieux !

@OlafOlafsson @orbifx ou alors quand t'es le mécano du coin, tu les rentabilisent vite

@delores
Indeed it does.

@nepfag you can't _fix_ that 😅 Let it pass.

@ronane #Democracy is not a machine, we shouldn't apply mechanistic thinking to it, but I get your point.

Democracies are in dire need just now, but it might just be part of their nature to move between instabilities to find new norms.

@orbifx still, maybe it's better that nobody "own" democracy ^^

@LPS regulation here would be nice, but kinda hard to implement. As far as ideals go, I prefer aiming for people's awakened thinking.

@orbifx I'm not quite so optimistic ... I think most people operate on a more instinctual level and behaviour changes due to external factors. Basically if it's cold you put on a coat, too warm take it off. By passing local bylaws that prohibit the use of or taxing single use products, businesses will simply go the next available/cheaper option. Which if you do it right would be reusables or recycled products.

@Vamp898 not it's not about that. The point is about _most_ users, maybe not always everyone, being able to repair it themselves and for the repair to be cost effective.

@orbifx
Well yes and no. It can be a security risk if you, for example, replace the battery yourself, especially when you use a cheap 3rd party battery (and its hard to get official ones).

Also the technology is getting more and more complex, for example its almost impossible to repair an Xperia without destroying the water sealing. And thats not because Sony hates you, its just because it is a complex thing.

@clacke
If you want to create an high end waterproof smartphone that's 5mm thick, it will result in an extremely complex design, there is no way around that.

@clacke
But why not? It's very useful. You can't just not invent something because it would be to complex to repair it at home. That way, most things would not exist

@clacke
Because most people can't do it. No matter how easy it might be, most people just are not capable in doing so.

I'd say that at least 90% can not replace an Harddisk in an simple, standard desktop tower.

So they do not care how easy it is to repair, they can't do it anyway.

I can replace synchros in transmissions, changing breaks is something I do with eye closed.

The majority of people don't even know how to check the oil level.

@clacke
Richard Stallman himself clearly draws a line between software and hardware, as Linus Torvalds do.

You can't just built you own smartphone in your garage, but you can build an kernel in your garage.

Do you think it will ever be possible to repair broken CPUs? Or that CPUs should be simple (slow) enough that people can repair it.

Do you think nature cares if you can do an bypass on your heart by yourself?

But you can freely build your mind, as you can freely build software

@orbifx
If you are not a trained, certified, expert in that field, a self repair can go horribly wrong up to the part where someone gets hurt.

That doesn't mean that some very easy/simple things, especially in Apple products, are made in a way you can't repair it, but if you are not an expert, you should not really repair it.

That doesn't imply that you don't really own it just because you can't repair it.

@orbifx
That's just plain impossible. Fairphone tried that and failed, others tried that and failed. It's not that simple.

@Vamp898 how did it fail?

@orbifx
By not succeeding.

@clacke
When my phone broke, I sent it to Sony. It came back almost as new with new warranty and everything and the repair was way cheaper than the price of the phone