• etbe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Reprogramming the 1000 other devices won’t be as hard as the first one but it won’t be trivial as they may be all on different versions of the software and there may be hardware variations too.

      Just to triage the devices and determine which ones are good enough is going to be non trivial.

      • mcSlibinas@river.group.lt
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        @etbe definitely. That’s why ve have internet - to connect many users of given devices. Like entuziasts of retro gaming consoles: some dudes spend time of reprogramming others help with sharing - fixing - adapting.

        • AJ Sadauskas@aus.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          @mcSlibinas @etbe Worth noting that in the six months after Apple releases the thinnest, best iPhone ever each year, it would receive several million two-year-old iPhones as trade-ins.

          So you could theoretically reflash several million units of nearly identical hardware with embedded Linux (or QNX), remove the batteries (and screens?).

          You would then have several million near-identical motherboards ready for second life embedded in appliances or sensors.

    • AJ Sadauskas@aus.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      @mcSlibinas @etbe Really good point.

      The development time and cost is an overhead. That’s divided between the number of units you produce.

      If the programming costs are $100k and you produce one unit, then that unit costs $100k.

      But if you flash the same software on to 1 million units, then it’s just 10 cents per unit.

      Worth remembering that millions of people junking their two-year-old iPhones and Samsung Galaxies at roughly the same time.

      I think the broader underlying issue is that our economy is optimised for labour productivity, rather than making the most out of finite environmental resources.

      It really should be the other way around.