this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2026
111 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

186 readers
197 users here now

Blacklisted SitesList inspired by other community rules.

  • Mac Rumors;
  • Al Jazeera;
  • NBC;
  • CNBC;
  • Tom’s Hardware;
  • ZDNet;
  • TechSpot;
  • Ars Technica;
  • Engadget;
  • TechCrunch;
  • Gizmodo;
  • Futurism;
  • PCWorld;
  • ComputerWorld;
  • Mashable;
  • Fortune;
  • Hackaday;
  • WCCFTECH;
  • Neowin;
  • Jacobin;
  • Yahoo;
  • Freethink;
  • Big Think;
  • Newsweek.

Technology news, blogs and articles.

Forbidden:

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] freshcow@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This is the most correct take here in my opinion. Planned obsolescence is indeed bullshit. At a bare minimum the devices need to be able to support third party services and software if the primary source is going to be remotely or artificially disabled. Someone who purchases a device OWNS it, and should therefore be able to use it as they see fit.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 1 points 3 days ago

They do. You can still load books onto them manually from a PC, you just can't access the store from the device itself.

Planned obsolescence does suck, I'm with you on that. But these devices were supported for 14 years, and they do still remain usable even past this expiration date. If the goal is to fight against planned obsolescence, this just seems like the worst possible battle to pick for that fight.