1970-01-011 hour ago
This is literally evidence of stuff being designed to fail. An extra diode costs less than a cent at production scale. This was a manufacturing choice, not an error.
cogman106 minutes ago
Eh, I don't agree.

LEDs are diodes (Light emitting diode). Certainly this was a cost saving measure, but it's not a bad assumption that the LED wouldn't allow reverse current flow.

HPsquared35 minutes ago
Don't underestimate the appeal of saving one cent per unit. So long as the costs are externalised, anyway...
wat1000027 minutes ago
It’s not exactly designed to fail, they just don’t care. If they could add a one-cent part that made it fail sooner, they wouldn’t do that either.
Atlas66725 minutes ago
Capitalist profit motive strikes again. The invisible hand expands tech and the visible hand keeps making tech worse.

People usually respond to this by saying that it would be absurd to suggest the company did this for its own benefit, when anyone who engineers knows these are often caused by revising design to minimize costs... and increase profits.

bell-cot2 hours ago
168 points and 116 comments at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41480038
rbanffy2 hours ago
Very impressive engineering on the door switches. On the display, not so much.