Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
From your link
acknowledges a right for a natural or legal person to "peaceful enjoyment of his possessions
1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
No repair mention anywhere so idk what youre on about, also by your logic you dont own your 1950 fridge anymore because theres no one left to repair it, your argument is so stupid
He's talking about the right to repair you're own stuff or have someone look at it. Not the right to a competent repairman. Those are two different things. I am not sure if you're arguing in bad faith or if this is just a mistake to be honest.
Does someone forbid you from repairing it? I am not sure if you're arguing in bad faith or if this is just a mistake to be honest.>>>
No answer, evil government took him out after taking away his repair rights >.< (which rights arent even mentioned anywhere so idk what the fuck u feel entitled to that is allegedly being taken away here)
They sign and lock hardware to prevent you from swapping parts. How do you not see this as bad and anti-consumer? Like they are actively preventing you from repairing something for no reason.
Your argument was this, not anti-consumer, so even though none of his sources mentioned a right to repair by government, only a right to own, a private entity making their parts hard to swap would not necessarily infringe on that repair right, as far as we are concerned it could only cover being allowed to attempt whatever repairs you want. Now, if you manage to find a source about that right to repair that ALSO mentions easy repairs by third parties, we can argue further
Right to repair isn't a law yet in most places. You seem have have missed that whole debacle.
Edit: my country actually has right to repair laws: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57665593
It is not a law in most places yet and yet you defended the other guy when you said he was claiming apple is violating his repair rights and that I was arguing in bad faith??
And since when do I care about the law? Also there are laws about repair in my country.
You dont care about law after debating its definition for 10 comments and defending others mentioning it nice
That message wasnt a reply to any comment of yours? I even copied a part of his reply to mine
✌️
That obviously means government recognizing you have the right to own it and not arbitrarily depriving you of your property, maybe the other declaration below should have given you a clue 🤠. Now if u wanna claim the "peace" is referring to your mental state, then I can also claim I'm not at peace if my stuff cant give me a blowjob. Be reasonable and stop grasping at straws.
No, if your property breaks you still own property, broken property. The company is only responsible for a certain lifespan, it is called guarantee, dont like it, dont buy it.
They dont you are allowed to do whatever you want to it
Theyre only responsible for guarantee
He is responsible for guarantee
Dont know which comments belong to your inbox but you instantly found block button what a quick learner, now you only have to achieve your government-backed peaceful state of mind 🤠
He never said the government guarantees a peaceful state of mine. Stop misinterpreting other people's arguments just because you can't make a valid one yourself.
Lmao he said that according to government he should be able to not only own but also enjoy his property peacefully so yeah literally a government sponsored peaceful state of mind.
It means you can use the property in any way that isn't violent. Completely the wrong meaning of peace you are using. They have go say peacefully so that hitting someone with a hammer isn't covered by property rights.
One guy interprets enjoying property peacefully as in repair rights, you interpret it as dont hit your neighbour with it and I'm the one trolling, amazing. Enjoying peacefully means you have the recognized right to own shit. Here is an example of violating that right and stealing someone's shit in wikipedia right under the property article
In the case of Mifsud and others v Malta (38770/17) the Maltese state was found to have violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the convention. The case involved a plot of land owned by the Mifsud family and their heirs which was expropriated twice (in 1984 and in 2012)
Expropriate definition: (especially of the state) take away (property) from its owner.
As in a company cannot disallow you from doing anything you want with you're device, because you own it! I guess they can try and make it more difficult by the way they design the product, but that's actually illegal in some countries and states. For example my country has right to repair legislation for certain types of applicances.