undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgrandalf8y ago0 comments

> that low cost components

Do you mean devices with RFI-suppression components omitted to save cost? Those devices are subject to FCC part 15 rules just like devices manufactured domestically.

> from off-brand vendors

Again, who is supposed to enforce that these vendors comply with US laws? My point is that those laws are not enforced. The reason that look-alike Apple USB charger costs $3.99 is because it contains no RFI suppression parts and is probably made with toxic plastic.

It is the job of regulators to shut down firms importing this garbage. By failing to do so the regulators harm the people their regulations are supposed to protect. Meanwhile, US firms who comply with the rules can't sell their USB chargers for a competitive price so they go out of business.

0 comments

zwieback8y ago

Got it. Your first post made it sound like big, lazy firms were the problem. Sounds like what you're really talking about is cheap imported stuff and a lack of enforcement.

grandalfOP8y ago

Yes. Some firms like Amazon profit heavily from the sale of counterfeit products and low-quality junk products that are shipped directly from overseas and cannot be inspected.

Most consumers won't realize that the USB charger they purchased for a fraction of the cost of a name brand product is why their phone's battery capacity declined so quickly.

With so many sellers on Amazon doing bait-and-switch, solving the problem is going to be very difficult for Amazon to solve without causing a disruption in the flow of low-cost electronics.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse