undefined | Better HN

0 pointskstrauser3mo ago0 comments

While I sympathize with the intent of the law, this is a great example of why it's dumb. There's no possible way you could make that ring, in a reasonably ring-sized form factor, with today's manufacturing processes in such a way that an end user could replace it.

0 comments

lemming3mo ago

If this law pushes back against the idea that it's ok to make endless tech products which are essentially future rubbish as soon as you buy them, then I think that's a good thing. Perhaps products like this just shouldn't exist until we have better ways of dealing with the remains.

kstrauserOP3mo ago

The problem is that it makes it impossible to have a version 0 to iterate on until a whole lot of other industries have advanced. Imagine the situation of in-ear hearing aids: they shouldn't be allowed to exist until they're perfect, unless we're happy telling deaf people they have to wear much larger than necessary devices and advertise their disability.

I'm glad we're reducing e-waste. I'm not thrilled about the idea of saying you can't make a thing until 100% of the bugs are worked out, meaning you can't have a beta version for research and fundraising, meaning, you can't conjure the perfect version into existence.

numpad03mo ago

"Invisible In-the-Canal" hearing aids are battery replaceable. That argument just won't fly.

1: https://assets-ae.rt.demant.com/-/media/project/retail/audik...

wing-_-nuts3mo ago

That's hyperbole and I think you know it. I'm pretty sure they explicitly exclude medical devices.

1 more reply

i_cannot_hack3mo ago

If you want more freedom to design medical devices for people where there is an actual need, it would easily be done by expanding the exception for medical devices that already exists in the law.

If you think people to be able to sell unsustainable and mostly superfluous electronics because any improvements there might eventually trickle down to hearing aids, your argument is basically "we should accept the millions of tonnes of unnecessary e-waste in order to get slighly smaller hearing aids", which think many reasonable people would disagree with.

jeremyjh3mo ago

If the battery lasts for two years its exceeding the useful life of many other products already, some of which of have higher environment cost for manufacturing and disposal.

The law has chosen poor proxies for lifespan and impact.

jfindper3mo ago

Yes, other things cause e-waste. Sometimes worse.

That's not a good justification for more e-waste.

1 more reply

Fnoord3mo ago

Products are supposed to last two years at the very least in EU (local laws may be more strict, but not less). If your product dies before that time, the customer will cite warranty, and there you go. This device is likely one of the many 'designed to last a little bit more than two years', with the emphasis on 'little bit'. It appears to be a perfect example of planned obsolescence.

cortesoft3mo ago

Who gets to choose what products are future rubbish?

Even if you think this product is a waste of resources, why is THIS waste of resources something we should stop, but not other, bigger wastes? Should we outlaw flying somewhere when you could take a train? The fuel spent on a short flight wastes way more resources and damages the environment much more than this smart ring does. If we are willing to ban this piece of tech because it is a waste, couldn't the same arguments be made about a short range flight?

abdullahkhalids3mo ago

There are already several existing and proposed bans on short haul flights when train routes exist. [1, 2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-haul_flight_ban

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexledsom/2024/03/18/spain-sho...

mxkopy3mo ago

Sure, thanks for bringing it up. Short-range flights should have a higher higher threshold for permitted use in service of the environment.

Please, ask more questions.

maest3mo ago

You may find this a useful read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

GolfPopper3mo ago

Yep. There's some strong "How dare they interfere with Thneed production!" energy.

numpad03mo ago

If their official sizing kit 3D models are accurate(better be!), there's exact amount of space for an SR721W watch/hearing aid silver oxide coin cell. And these are not even the tiniest of standardized replaceable batteries.

1: https://imgur.com/a/yupC9lN

montag3mo ago

You're too generous. I feel like the entire production run of this ring could be equivalent to a single discarded washing machine. This law is hamfisted.

hamdingers3mo ago

Perhaps the ring need not exist.

kentiko3mo ago

Maybe it's the ring that is dumb?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

lemming3mo ago

kstrauserOP3mo ago

numpad03mo ago

"Invisible In-the-Canal" hearing aids are battery replaceable. That argument just won't fly.

1: https://assets-ae.rt.demant.com/-/media/project/retail/audik...

wing-_-nuts3mo ago

That's hyperbole and I think you know it. I'm pretty sure they explicitly exclude medical devices.

1 more reply

i_cannot_hack3mo ago

If you want more freedom to design medical devices for people where there is an actual need, it would easily be done by expanding the exception for medical devices that already exists in the law.

jeremyjh3mo ago

If the battery lasts for two years its exceeding the useful life of many other products already, some of which of have higher environment cost for manufacturing and disposal.

The law has chosen poor proxies for lifespan and impact.

jfindper3mo ago

Yes, other things cause e-waste. Sometimes worse.

That's not a good justification for more e-waste.

1 more reply

Fnoord3mo ago

cortesoft3mo ago

Who gets to choose what products are future rubbish?

abdullahkhalids3mo ago

There are already several existing and proposed bans on short haul flights when train routes exist. [1, 2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-haul_flight_ban

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexledsom/2024/03/18/spain-sho...

mxkopy3mo ago

Sure, thanks for bringing it up. Short-range flights should have a higher higher threshold for permitted use in service of the environment.

Please, ask more questions.

maest3mo ago

You may find this a useful read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

GolfPopper3mo ago

Yep. There's some strong "How dare they interfere with Thneed production!" energy.

numpad03mo ago

1: https://imgur.com/a/yupC9lN

montag3mo ago

You're too generous. I feel like the entire production run of this ring could be equivalent to a single discarded washing machine. This law is hamfisted.

hamdingers3mo ago

Perhaps the ring need not exist.

kentiko3mo ago

Maybe it's the ring that is dumb?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse