Gregory's Server@JohnJBurnsIII @q3k it reads to me as "DRM to ensure that orgs who bought the trains were only using maintenance contractors authorised by the manufacturer" and I'm pretty sure that there's regulation against that kind of thing in other vehicles (cars, say)
|
19 comments
 OH. OK. Yes... I did not pick up it was OEM code. This sounds like HP locking down their printers to only use ORM replacement cartridges. Or Keurig doing similar for coffee pods.  @JohnJBurnsIII @adamw @outie @q3k Except this is like HP printers *pretending* they're out of ink when they're not, while warning you that only HP cartridges will work. ๐ค And given you can't really see into those cartridges - I think I would not be surprised that is not the case. I dumped my not quite 2 year old OfficeJet in 2012 - for repeated error codes no matter how many OEM new cartridges I stuck in there. In the end... >$100 in unused cartridges. Happily using Epson since then... so 11 years of use and no repairs needed. Does what I need (rarely print, but need it when I need it).  @JohnJBurnsIII @adamw @outie @q3k Both of which are also terrible and should be illegal, but definitely not on the same scale of badness as being able to REMOTELY DISABLE A PASSENGER VEHICLE!  @adamw @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k And now let's see what @EU_Commission will do about that. It's good to mention, that for the anticompetitive behaviour (and worse) they can fine the manufacturer up to 10% of their worldwide turnover (not profit, turnover). @adamw @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k checking against a blacklist of the GPS coordinates of third party repair shops is really out there compared to previously known hardware DRM shenanigans. what were the managers who authorised that thinking?! let's hope such examples lead to vigorous change in legislation. never thought we'd need "right to repair" for effing trains! @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k @mral @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k Hold yer horses there buckaroo. Don't try to threaten me with the one GOOD outcome scenario... @apressler @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k @mral @apressler @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k I'm sure there are ways to detect if you was just passing somebody or if you were speeding. @mral @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k Such a method as proposed is frankly stupid since it only punishes after the fact and preventing speeding is the desirable goal. A mandatory geo-gated speed limiter on all motor vehicles would be much more efficient and effective solution. But if fines after the fact are all that are on offer, then yes. Give it to me. But not for you, of course. You are special and deserve to be treated as such. I think you should be given lights and a siren. @SuperMoosie If the 3rd party workshop is unequipped to deal with the safety systems, which might mean loosing safety certification, then that is for actual authorities to decide and enforce  @SuperMoosie @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k this not some random dude servicing the train. It's a train service yard with huge infrastructure and a huge contract. In this story they describe going through the huge maintenance manual and finding no mention of these things. If it's a certification thing then it should clearly state this.  @SuperMoosie @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k Nope. Critical safety / infrastructure systems can only be serviced by authorized service providers - valid concept. Authorized by the manufacturer? Sketchy. Enforced through secret code that locks the train using bogus fault codes? No excuses, that needs to be a heavy financial penalty for the company.  @outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k These trains are owned by governments right? Ohhh I think there will be laws against this soon. |
@outie @JohnJBurnsIII @q3k yeah, I think you're missing the story here, John. It's the train manufacturer doing very sketchy stuff to try and prevent operators from having them maintained anywhere but their shops. Like if your car maker slipped some bogus code in that made your car refuse to start if you had it serviced at the local garage. Or your phone manufacturer doing the same, ahem, Apple.