Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

386
Planned obsooescence is a time bomb in products, particularly electronics by [Apple](/s/crApple). It means deliberately making a device become defunct sooner and components last for a shorter time. It is a tactic to make people purchase their next product sooner (after the deliberately shortened lifespan of their previous product expired). # Should planned obsolescence be **outlawed?**

Planned obsooescence is a time bomb in products, particularly electronics by .

It means deliberately making a device become defunct sooner and components last for a shorter time.

It is a tactic to make people purchase their next product sooner (after the deliberately shortened lifespan of their previous product expired).

Should planned obsolescence be outlawed?

No.
Yes, it should be outlawed.

(post is archived)

[–] • 12 pts

Companies should have the right to do what they want with their products. We also have the right to not buy their shitty products.

[–] • 9 pts

You're right, but they should at least declare planned obsolescence, so that users do not fall into a trap.

[–] • 2 pts

This, I can get behind

But still, there's a problem

[–] • 3 pts

Yes, lets give free reign to jews so we can weimar again

And let's pretend markets can't be cornered while we are at it

Also, big pharma, same deal, they can do whatever they want with their product including the worst, because like that, it's simple

...

[–] [deleted] • 11 pts

Too many laws and regulations already. Stop expecting the government to fix shit. We’ve become a people of non-responsibly and unable to do anything for ourselves. It’s pathetic.

[–] • 3 pts

What costumers should be worried about are planned obsolescence traps.

Of course, nobody is obligated to purchase a product of a specific brand, but one can not be so sure who conducts planned oboslescence, and who doesn't.

But in some cases it is more apparent.
Example: If one purchases Apple products, one should expect planned obsolescence, because Apple is notorious for such things (see Louis Rossman).

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

>Too many laws and regulations already.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4742712/Why-chickens-washed-chlorine.html

>Now whistleblower farmers have revealed the full horror of the suffering to The Mail on Sunday, including how: Tens of thousands of super-sized 'Frankenstein' birds are crammed in vast warehouses. The chickens, which weigh up to 9lb, often buckle under their weight and must live without natural sunlight. Chickens frequently die before they reach maturity and many are left covered in their own faeces, turning warehouses into vile breeding grounds for disease. Unlike in the UK and Europe, there are no minimum space requirements for breeding chickens in the US. America also does not have any rules governing lighting levels in the sheds and, crucially, its farms have no maximum allowed level of ammonia, which indicates how much urine and faecal matter is present. This means there is no limit on how much can fester inside the sheds.

There

No regulation

happy bleached chicken

[–] • 1 pt

Shitty chicken tastes shitty. Free-range chicken, if available on the free market, will outcompete because it tastes better. It may have to cost more to the consumer, so when the consumer asks, why is your chicken so expensive, the answer is because it did not spend its life swimming in shit, and just like that the consumer has done his research, it's not that hard.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

False

Again that's magic thinking, that's whishful thinking, it's not true

It's not always the best product that dominates the market, far from it

That idea that in a "free market" the best product will necessarily prevail is flat wrong

https://www.inc.com/erik-sherman/best-products-dont-always-win.html

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/05/magazine/why-the-best-doesn-t-always-win.html

https://www.walkersands.com/martech-2018-we-have-nearly-7000-solutions-and-more-challenges-than-ever/

>So when the consumer asks, why is your chicken so expensive

You simply tell him whatever the fuck you want there are no rules preventing you from doing so, no trust pal

Free market, and sheeeit

No gov intervention, no regulation, crooks get an autobahn

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

As vile and wrong as this is, as a consumer, it’s my duty to investigate the practices of the farmers and vendors and make my choices accordingly. It is my responsibility, not the government’s.

[–] • 1 pt

And if you just can't for whatever reason?

Too bad?

Never occured to you that the chicken market can very well end up cornered like any given market?

...

It's ridiculous, that "free market" cult, it's too often bordering on magic thinking and intellectual lazyness

If hitler went full free market he would have given an autobahn to the international jewry

[–] [deleted] • 8 pts

By choosing "Yes" you're really saying..

I want the government to control any business they want

[–] • 3 pts

I have not seen it from that perspective yet.

Interesting.

[–] • 2 pts

By voting no you ask for more of the same

lol

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

How?

[–] • 1 pt

Because planned obsolescence is alive and well

[–] • 3 pts

No; it is already illegal as it is a form of theft, fraud or contract breaching.

[–] • 3 pts

As long as its marked with its shelf life why not

[–] • 3 pts

The problem with passing such a law is that regulatory capture effectively results in loopholes and a never ending legal game of cat and mouse. That's one way you get government backed monopolies, because only existing companies in their respective industries have the legal personnel to navigate the sluggish and bloated bureaucracy that in theory is supposed to regulate them. Neither Apple or its competitors will stop because the annual product cycle is very lucrative for quarterly reports and the annual 10-K, and because corporations are legally obligated to maximize shareholder wealth thanks to the government ().

[–] • 2 pts

If they don't declare their planned obsolescence in the info packets that come with the product, then it is fraud under our existing laws. No new law needed. They just need to be held accountable.

Imagine if I sold you a house with a paint that would suddenly decay the infrastructure of the house after five years. It would take a few weeks and give obvious warning so that this isn't a murder debate. Would that be legal, or obvious fraud?

[–] • 1 pt

Would that be legal, or obvious fraud?

Obvious fraud, obviously.

[–] • 2 pts

Must buy product.

[–] • 2 pts

It's literally fraud, so Natural Law already covers it. We don't need the State to "outlaw" anything.

[–] • 1 pt

absolutely. there are many simple people like me who want to drive the same pickup forever and just keep it running. we don't need anything fancy. we just want to be left alone. I was taught to buy good and mend as needed. everything I own is repaired junk. we cant do that if the only trucks out there are plastic shitboxes that are impossible for us to fix without proprietary tools, software, and procedures?

[–] • 1 pt

That is strange because I still have an iphone 4 that have never been "updated" and it still works perfectly fine. Every person I've talked to had to get an new iphone after they updated their perfectly good working iphone 4 & 5s. It's the updates that kill the phones and force people to buy the newer versions each year.

[–] • 1 pt

I still have an iphone 4 [2010] that have never been "updated" and it still works perfectly fine.

Respect.

But has the battery never been replaced by some repair shop?

[–] • 1 pt

The battery have never been replaced at all because I know they will actually take the fucking time to update it, turning it into a brick.

[–] • 1 pt

Which iOS version are you running?

[–] • 0 pt

Do all websites work well on your iPhone 4? (especially since the new HTTPS TLS 1.2 encryption enforcement)

Load more (5 replies)