this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2026
482 points (99.0% liked)

Open Source

48669 readers
628 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
482
submitted 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) by inari@piefed.zip to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] the_strange@feddit.org 13 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I'm sorry to say this, but this is survivorship bias. We produced plenty of crap that broke a few months after use even 50 years ago, it's just that you don't notice the crap because it was thrown away after it broke and all you see now is the stuff that surprisingly made it for decades. That's not to say that enshittification and planned obsolescence is not a thing, it's just not as extreme and "we used to build things that lasted" as people would like to believe.

[–] vas@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It is true that merely from the observation of old things, you cannot conclude that all things lasted long.

But as a matter of fact, from different observations by many people and areas, mid- to high- end stuff really lasted much, much longer. It was as an average rule more simple, less compact, and it lasted and still lasts really long without degradation.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

There's also maintenance blindness. It is easy to see how something lasted forever, when you weren't the one doing the maintenance and repair work everyday. Also, many "good ol' immortal appliances" neglect to mention how most of the parts are actually brand new or it wouldn't be functional otherwise.

[–] magnue@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago