5 ms·

Couldn't you just, you know, not purchase those products or services?

fenwick67 9y ago
That's what they did.
wasx 9y ago
What choice do you have once every single provider is doing this? Seriously are we supposed to build our own car? Businesses only care about profits, so if one manufacturer sees other manufacturers doing this and making money, they will follow suit, until all cars are just another data mining machine. What possible motivation would a car manufacturer have not to do this? It's all about $$$
- rangersanger 9y ago
  Not that this is a perfect option, but it's exactly because of this I've been able to justify buying classic/collector vehicles. They have the added benefit of either appreciating, staying put or only very mildly depreciating. Plus I get to drive fun cars and claim a moral high ground.
michrassena 9y ago
Not buying these products is a false affordance. Your friends have them, your spouse carries one every time you go out together, your children clamor for them at Christmas. If I have to keep my lawn well maintained or face a fine, there's no good reason that people should be exempt from laws that regulate behavior that has a greater impact to society than tall weeds.
- anfilt 9y ago
  Sounds like your part of HOA that's your first mistake. Although some cities are picky as can be. Although, I hate ads and, they are just low information propaganda. Honestly, I wish they would go the way of the dodo.
  - michrassena 9y ago
    Yeah, it's a city ordinance.
- closeparen 9y ago
  >there's no good reason that people should be exempt from laws that regulate behavior that has a greater impact to society than tall weeds. Let's re-criminalize marijuana and get alcohol and junk food onto the Schedule I list then. While we're at it, banish low-brow entertainment from the airwaves and pulp fiction from the shelves/Kindle store. Use the full power of the legal system to avenge society's loss of your productivity when you slack off in school or at work. All these behaviors impose a far greater cost on society than an unmowed lawn. Have you considered that it's actually HOAs which are an egregious affront to individual liberty?
  - michrassena 9y ago
    It's not an HOA. It's actually part of the city's code, so it's an actual minor criminal offense we're talking about. But that's not important right now. All of us are required to abide by laws, sometimes over things we consider trivial, like the speed limit. Why should a "person" with far more resources than any individual not be held accountable for their actions?
- crpatino 9y ago
  Well, you can always get better friends, and if you cannot have a serious, honest talk with your spouse about these issues, you might want to reconsider your relationship. Kids are the deal breaker, I guess.
Slansitartop 9y ago
That's what I did, but it may not be much longer until... > Couldn't you just, you know, not purchase those products or services? ...means buying a beater that barely runs, because they stopped making cars that aren't "connected." Or maybe you did buy a connected product, and were really careful to make sure it did nothing you didn't want it to do at the time of purchase... ...but then two years later the manufacturer pushes and update that adds 24/7 tracking and mandatory banner ads. What do you suggest doing in that case? Return your car to the dealer for a refund? Take a time machine back to tell your old self to "not purchase those products or services?" In short, market thinking is not the solution to all problems, because markets can be broken in innumerable ways. And even if the brokenness can be worked around, people usually lack the expertise or time-bandwidth to do it.
- oldcynic 9y ago
  > but then two years later the manufacturer pushes and update that adds 24/7 tracking and mandatory banner ads. What do you suggest doing in that case? Return your car to the dealer for a refund? I expect, well more hope, someone to try exactly that. Then for some interesting case law to develop. I sure hope everyone isn't just going to roll over and accept this shit.
  - tachyoff 9y ago
    Here’s what will happen: Judge: “Well, you signed this contract two years ago, which specifically states that you consent to OTA updates of any kind.” Done. The judicial system is not always the place to fight these things, especially when you have existing case law working against you. It’s important to remember that we have a legislature whose job is to, ostensibly, make laws. Congress could quite easily make a law that no car company can advertise at you in your vehicle, but I’m having a hard time fathoming such sensible legislation with this current administration. But my larger point stands: the courts will be of no use here, and rightfully so, because we already have a branch of government that is supposed to deal with this: the legislature. Not “roll[ing] over and accept[ing] this shit” will involve voting, unfortunately.
FridgeSeal 9y ago
We're still subjected and tracked by them even if you have zero interest in advertising/the product or you don't want to be tracked. Over time this creates significant toll and wears you down. I'd rather we not subject everyone to this for the supposed benefit of a few companies.
Feniks 9y ago
Doesn't work that way. Companies change their privacy policies all the time. No the data industry should have been euthanized years ago.

That's what they did.

wasx 9y ago

What choice do you have once every single provider is doing this? Seriously are we supposed to build our own car? Businesses only care about profits, so if one manufacturer sees other manufacturers doing this and making money, they will follow suit, until all cars are just another data mining machine. What possible motivation would a car manufacturer have not to do this? It's all about $$$

rangersanger 9y ago
Not that this is a perfect option, but it's exactly because of this I've been able to justify buying classic/collector vehicles. They have the added benefit of either appreciating, staying put or only very mildly depreciating. Plus I get to drive fun cars and claim a moral high ground.

michrassena 9y ago

Not buying these products is a false affordance. Your friends have them, your spouse carries one every time you go out together, your children clamor for them at Christmas. If I have to keep my lawn well maintained or face a fine, there's no good reason that people should be exempt from laws that regulate behavior that has a greater impact to society than tall weeds.

anfilt 9y ago
Sounds like your part of HOA that's your first mistake. Although some cities are picky as can be. Although, I hate ads and, they are just low information propaganda. Honestly, I wish they would go the way of the dodo.
- michrassena 9y ago
  Yeah, it's a city ordinance.
closeparen 9y ago
>there's no good reason that people should be exempt from laws that regulate behavior that has a greater impact to society than tall weeds. Let's re-criminalize marijuana and get alcohol and junk food onto the Schedule I list then. While we're at it, banish low-brow entertainment from the airwaves and pulp fiction from the shelves/Kindle store. Use the full power of the legal system to avenge society's loss of your productivity when you slack off in school or at work. All these behaviors impose a far greater cost on society than an unmowed lawn. Have you considered that it's actually HOAs which are an egregious affront to individual liberty?
- michrassena 9y ago
  It's not an HOA. It's actually part of the city's code, so it's an actual minor criminal offense we're talking about. But that's not important right now. All of us are required to abide by laws, sometimes over things we consider trivial, like the speed limit. Why should a "person" with far more resources than any individual not be held accountable for their actions?
crpatino 9y ago
Well, you can always get better friends, and if you cannot have a serious, honest talk with your spouse about these issues, you might want to reconsider your relationship. Kids are the deal breaker, I guess.

Slansitartop 9y ago

That's what I did, but it may not be much longer until... > Couldn't you just, you know, not purchase those products or services? ...means buying a beater that barely runs, because they stopped making cars that aren't "connected." Or maybe you did buy a connected product, and were really careful to make sure it did nothing you didn't want it to do at the time of purchase... ...but then two years later the manufacturer pushes and update that adds 24/7 tracking and mandatory banner ads. What do you suggest doing in that case? Return your car to the dealer for a refund? Take a time machine back to tell your old self to "not purchase those products or services?" In short, market thinking is not the solution to all problems, because markets can be broken in innumerable ways. And even if the brokenness can be worked around, people usually lack the expertise or time-bandwidth to do it.

oldcynic 9y ago
> but then two years later the manufacturer pushes and update that adds 24/7 tracking and mandatory banner ads. What do you suggest doing in that case? Return your car to the dealer for a refund? I expect, well more hope, someone to try exactly that. Then for some interesting case law to develop. I sure hope everyone isn't just going to roll over and accept this shit.
- tachyoff 9y ago
  Here’s what will happen: Judge: “Well, you signed this contract two years ago, which specifically states that you consent to OTA updates of any kind.” Done. The judicial system is not always the place to fight these things, especially when you have existing case law working against you. It’s important to remember that we have a legislature whose job is to, ostensibly, make laws. Congress could quite easily make a law that no car company can advertise at you in your vehicle, but I’m having a hard time fathoming such sensible legislation with this current administration. But my larger point stands: the courts will be of no use here, and rightfully so, because we already have a branch of government that is supposed to deal with this: the legislature. Not “roll[ing] over and accept[ing] this shit” will involve voting, unfortunately.

FridgeSeal 9y ago

We're still subjected and tracked by them even if you have zero interest in advertising/the product or you don't want to be tracked. Over time this creates significant toll and wears you down. I'd rather we not subject everyone to this for the supposed benefit of a few companies.

Feniks 9y ago

Doesn't work that way. Companies change their privacy policies all the time. No the data industry should have been euthanized years ago.