• lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
    18·
    21 days ago

    Industry “conventional wisdom” often argues that FCC requirements somehow conflict with the software right to repair. SFC has long argued that’s pure FUD.

    i mean, it is at conflict with right to repair. having to accept harmful interference to be certified means that repairability suffers simply because the device needs to be made to break.

    • planish@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      20 days ago

      I don’t think that’s what accepting harmful interference means. It means more like, if there is noise in the channel, the device won’t just up its own power to clobber the noise, even if not doing that will somehow break it or otherwise make it not work right. It doesn’t mean you have to build the device so that some kinds of interference will cause it to break.