This should basically be a legal requirement:
If you sell a piece of hardware that requires a cloud service to run you need to also provide a replacement that users can use when your company fails/shuts down/pivots whatever. It doesn't need all the fancy features but should keep the object in question's basic functionality working
https://eupolicy.social/@mattis/112478169421125235
@tante I'm totally up for hating on enshittification and "cloud just because", but that's completely unrealistic as a general requirement.
What I *do* think should be required is a prominent labeling *that end users understand* that they're about to buy a product that has such core dependencies. (And which functions will remain if these are unavailable.)
And a warranty-like guarantee that these services will remain available for X years.
@larsmb @tante
Most smartphones would have to ba labelled then, because almost all of them rely on Google or Apple infrastructure at least for notifications — when and if those go offline, their users would be in serious trouble.
Of course, there is UnifiedPush, but I'm not even sure installing something like ntfy is possible on Android that comes preinstalled on most phones.
@Hyolobrika
That's debatable! Claiming that receiving notifications (and they will stop working in absolute most applications) isn't basic functionality for a smartphone is like claiming that basic functionality for electric kettle is holding liquids 😂
@larsmb @tante
@m0xee Yes, they would have to be.
@tante