Do you believe appliances should stay purely electromechanical when possible? Ie no active electronics/chips...

>>105772038 (OP)
I prefer anything with a timer be a digital timer, and I don't mind it if they do something important with a more complicated controller, for example I'd prefer it if my thermostat could talk to an external set of sensors so that it can regulate the room temp better, or if the air conditioning could be controlled so that it's not just on and off. But I also don't want reliance on display controls, I like buttons, switches, knobs, I don't want it to connect to the internet or a separate app in order to work. I don't mind if there are some special features that use an app, but if so I would want that interface to be open sourced for future proofing.

>>105772038 (OP)
We need an appliance singularity. A singular device that can perform multiple function and even adapt itself to non conventional purposes.
Imagine buying an appliance that can 3d print and machine new parts for any purpose, while managing your entire household.

I personally prefer 1980-2010 electromechanical stuff because usually:
>1. Cheaper and easier to fix when something breaks.
>2 Can be hacked into working differently or doing things it wasn't designed for at all.
>3 Better build quality because it wasn't from a Chinese sweatshop.
Maybe one day when everything runs off the equivalent of a raspberry pi we'll get all that back.

>>105772083
That appliance exists and it's called a boyfriend. Women can't figure out 3d printing or machining.

dehydrators are the next big thing

>>105772038 (OP)
Those knobs and clicky buttons are a likelier breaking point compared to a digital display with capacitive buttons.

>>105772038 (OP)
It just needs to be repairable, with parts available. Do whatever you want with the design. I agree simpler is better. Nothing should have wifi or phone home to the manufacturer or require an account to set up.

>>105772038 (OP)
I look at it in a case by case basis, a lot of the time it's possible and I find it desirable, like in a kettle, because electronics would make it genuinely gimmicky. Other times, the features added by simple, dumb electronics, are really nice to have, like in an oven, where dialing in temperature and time digitally is a lot more convenient. I sometimes even like smart shit, I'll turn on heating/AC when I get off work and while I get home, it's already warm/cool

>>105772361
Homos have been living in the future all along.

>>105772083
If AI ever ever gets good enough to stand on our shoulder or be put into AR glasses and walk us through tasks based on what it sees then that's exactly what's going to happen.
Households are going to have 3d printers that can do PCB boards, CNC machines and with cheap micro controllers like esp32 devices we'll just make our own shit.
Everybody scared that we're losing our jobs to AI but soon we won't need them.

>>105772038 (OP)
Almost always yes
There's very few legitimate, user-benefiting reasons why an appliance would need a computer built in (and especially internet connectivity), since everyone who would be using smart garbage already has a phone that they keep on them 24/7.
The main reason why there's computers in everything is just to enforce planned obsolescence and harvest user data to sell.

>>105773283
There's a large gap between "Purely electromechanical" and "has embedded computer"

>>105772038 (OP)
Ideally my waifubot should prepare meals for me manually. I will never trust appliances that are too advanced/automatized.

>>105772038 (OP)
yes

>>105772633
Capacitive buttons are ass, I'll happily take an easily fixable weakness

>>105772633
True, absolutely true, however, I still would rather have the buttons.

>>105772978
If you knew what kind of creepy shit is possible to exfiltrate data from any cheapo micro-controller without any visible RF transmitter (duckduckgo LoLRa for details) you would want your appliances to be purely mechanical with only rudimentary electrics (motors/heater and shit) to be sure that things that should remain private are indeed private and are not fed into a surveillance data-stream that's monitored with AI to suppress thought crimes.

>>105772038 (OP)
Yes. every component is a point of failure. Electronics add a lot of components and a lot of points of failure.

Grandma's fridge lasted half a century and any technician could fix it for a few bucks. Now fridges have motherboards, pray that none of its thousands of chips give out.

>>105772038 (OP)
This is my very favorite air fryer. It was $60 from Walmart, 100% electro-mechanical. I fucked with several $200+ models and the computer always did something I didn't want. This probably has more to do with the 'people' in charge of designing meme appliances than the merit of computers, but that's where we're at as a society.

>>105773283
>The main reason why there's computers in everything is just to enforce planned obsolescence and harvest user data to sell.
nah. microcontrolers and capacitive touch surfaces are just cheaper than the mechanical equivalents, and often more reliable too

>>105777502
Board failures are rare on modern appliances. The problem is usually a combination of legally mandated mechanical complexity and lower real BoM cost. If you run the purchase price of grandma's fridge through shadowstats it probably cost as much as a good commercial model today.