3 ms·

What do you find deeply unethical about it? I don't care how it's implemented - if it works as advertised and I decide to buy it for a given cost, seems like an

by tntn 7y ago

What do you find deeply unethical about it? I don't care how it's implemented - if it works as advertised and I decide to buy it for a given cost, seems like an ok deal. Said printer would not be good, I would not buy it. EDIT: FWIW, there is a metric ton of software and firmware that is crucial to achieve the advertised range. So if it makes you feel better you can think of it as not the mechanical product operating differently, just the software product.

AlexandrB 7y ago
It’s at the very least unethical in the environmental sense of wasting natural resources on physical objects that can’t be used and are wasted because of contractual terms. It’s also unethical if you believe in a “right to repair” because it creates financial incentives for the enforcement of laws and contracts that make “right to repair” impossible.
- jzoch 7y ago
  keeping "repair" well-scoped is important in maintaining the right and saying Tesla is in the wrong here seems silly. You aren't repairing your car if you enable features you didnt pay for. You should gladly by this product thats artificially limited since the cost to enable that new feature is theoretically lower and faster with less chance of things going wrong. They are able to offer you a better product with more price points by engaging in software-gating. If they did not do this it would be difficult to maintain so many different SKU's and youd wait longer to get your car. Servicing it would be more work and youd be less satisfied.
  - throwaway2048 7y ago
    The point is that this "feature" is impossible unless you prevent the user from being able to service their machine fully.
  - heelix 7y ago
    Most folks on this thread are focused on the disabled features, but Tesla goes out of its way to prevent salvage of damaged vehicles. It does mean 'potentially poorly restored' cars are mostly nonexistent, but the day to day insurance is much more. (Looked at this for a project car once, and ye gods, what a mess)
xienze 7y ago
> FWIW, there is a metric ton of software and firmware that is crucial to achieve the advertised range. I think what rubs people the wrong was is that _most people_ would assume there is a higher capacity battery in the extended range version as compared to the standard range version. That's the expensive part here, the battery. It would make sense to have to spend more money to get a bigger battery. But to find out that both models have the same battery and there's just a damn software lock differentiating the two? Come on.
- sliken 7y ago
  Generally a larger battery with the same load will last longer. So a 200 mile range on a 240 mile battery with software limits would last longer than an actual 200 mile battery.

by tntn 7y ago

AlexandrB 7y ago

It’s at the very least unethical in the environmental sense of wasting natural resources on physical objects that can’t be used and are wasted because of contractual terms. It’s also unethical if you believe in a “right to repair” because it creates financial incentives for the enforcement of laws and contracts that make “right to repair” impossible.

jzoch 7y ago
keeping "repair" well-scoped is important in maintaining the right and saying Tesla is in the wrong here seems silly. You aren't repairing your car if you enable features you didnt pay for. You should gladly by this product thats artificially limited since the cost to enable that new feature is theoretically lower and faster with less chance of things going wrong. They are able to offer you a better product with more price points by engaging in software-gating. If they did not do this it would be difficult to maintain so many different SKU's and youd wait longer to get your car. Servicing it would be more work and youd be less satisfied.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  The point is that this "feature" is impossible unless you prevent the user from being able to service their machine fully.
- heelix 7y ago
  Most folks on this thread are focused on the disabled features, but Tesla goes out of its way to prevent salvage of damaged vehicles. It does mean 'potentially poorly restored' cars are mostly nonexistent, but the day to day insurance is much more. (Looked at this for a project car once, and ye gods, what a mess)

xienze 7y ago

> FWIW, there is a metric ton of software and firmware that is crucial to achieve the advertised range. I think what rubs people the wrong was is that _most people_ would assume there is a higher capacity battery in the extended range version as compared to the standard range version. That's the expensive part here, the battery. It would make sense to have to spend more money to get a bigger battery. But to find out that both models have the same battery and there's just a damn software lock differentiating the two? Come on.

sliken 7y ago
Generally a larger battery with the same load will last longer. So a 200 mile range on a 240 mile battery with software limits would last longer than an actual 200 mile battery.