6 ms·

Honestly, the ban sounds justified to me. If you know that parking in the garage will lead to a 50% probability of them having to tow the car, repeating this is

by dx034 7y ago

Honestly, the ban sounds justified to me. If you know that parking in the garage will lead to a 50% probability of them having to tow the car, repeating this is just unnecessary. It would obviously be better if they could handle such scenarios but ignoring a known limitation to incur cost to others (since you have no advantage as you also can't use the car in this scenario) sounds wrong to me.

brohee 7y ago
The common man would think a company would try the fix with the utmost priority a mission critical issue...
2rsf 7y ago
> Honestly, the ban sounds justified to me based on the story above I agree, knowingly (and after a few occurrences you should understand there's a problem) damaging the service should lead to a ban or at least a warning.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  No, it should lead to someone fixing the problem. The customer centric thinking in this thread is amazing.
  - greedo 7y ago
    One facet of the problem (the cell coverage) is largely out of Zipcars control, no? I suppose they could add some functionality to their app so that you're alerted when you park at a location without cell coverage?
    - alistairSH 7y ago
      Lack of cell coverage is out of their control, but that doesn't excuse them from designing around the problem. It appears they're aware of the problem, but certain known issues prevent access (cellular unit draining car battery seems to be the common one and sounds like something that should be fixable).
      - moftz 7y ago
        Add a keypad like Ford has had on their vehicles for like 20 years. Have the computer keep a short list of one time pass codes (and maybe some sort of super long master code) that can be updated whenever the car is in cell service. So in the event that you get into the car, Zipcar can provide one of the one time use codes to get you in the door.
        sangnoir 7y ago
        My imagined internal security review to this issue Hard "no", closing WONTFIX. This change would significantly increase the attack surface, risking a lot for very little upside. See "Epic 769 (Offline Support - roadmap Q3 2020)" for blocking & related issues
fenomas 7y ago
> If you know that parking in the garage will lead to a 50% probability of.. 50% is GP's after-the-fact description of how often the car failed to start. It's not an actual failure rate that GP knew about before they parked.
- jellicle 7y ago
  Anyone can make an error once. Commenter talks about how they repeatedly parked the car in an underground garage that they knew had no cell signal, despite multiple towings being required. What's the appropriate number of towings for one customer due to that customer's intentional actions before you kick them off the service?
  - cj 7y ago
    I'm the original poster. I misspoke in the original comment (too late to edit it). Now that I think about it, I believe unlocking does work regardless of cell service (as long as you don't extend the reservation, and try to unlock it after the original reservation time ends). I had the car towed twice: 1) First time, the car wouldn't start because the battery was dead while parked underground with no cell service. 2) Second time, the reservation was about to expire while parked without cell service, and I extended it on the app, but the car couldn't know that since the cellular unit couldn't phone home. EDIT: For what it's worth, I don't blame Zipcar for banning an unprofitable customer. I acknowledge that i was definitely pushing my luck by parking there a 2nd time after the first incident.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
Nextgrid 7y ago
Disagreed about the ban. Since when is shitty technology (which any engineer worth their salt should’ve predicted - this is not rocket science) the fault of the customer? Unless they say in bold in their marketing statements “Only drive within cell coverage” the customer isn’t at fault for trying to use it as a normal car (in fact it’s crazy to think that parking in a place with no reception is no longer normal, at least according to ZipCar).
- xzmmd 7y ago
  You're justifying acting like an asshole.
  - Nextgrid 7y ago
    No I’m trying to justify using the product as it’s advertised. Otherwise it’s too easy to just falsely advertise something and ban the people that manage to figure out the catch.
    - oh_sigh 7y ago
      You said you did it a few times. How often do you have to do something with negative consequences before you learn you shouldn't keep doing it?
      - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
        Other than being told its a signal issue, how do you determine that? IoT crap rarely, if ever, actually communicates with the user about error conditions. You usually find out shit 'no workey' after the fact. There's a lot of articles and twitter feeds. Go look up the "Internet of Shit". There's a reason why it's called that. And Zipcars are no exception, evidently.
        oh_sigh 7y ago
        This isn't internet of shit though...is an iPhone shitty if you can't use cell services when you don't have cell service?
braythwayt 7y ago
“I ordered the tuna salad every time I ate at the restaurant. About half of the time, the manager informed me that they were out of tuna, and had to send a truck to fetch more. After a while of this, they banned me from the restaurant for ordering the tuna salad.”
- muststopmyths 7y ago
  Actually, that analogy would only make sense if "you" refused to order anything but tuna salad and expected them to send the truck out without fail when they were out. And they had to comply with your request for some reason. In that case, yeah, they should ban "you".
  - mcguire 7y ago
    A better analogy would be that ZipCar has a known failure mode that will leave you stranded. And they don't feel the urge to fix it.
  - braythwayt 7y ago
    The fellow is parking the car in his own garage, and ZipCar claims to be in the car business, and it is normal to park cars in garages. I say they have tuna salad on the menu, but they apparently can't always serve it to everyone. Your suggestion that he order something else to eat is like telling a ZipCar customer to move to a different condominium or whatever. They don't "have" to do anything, provided they aren't discriminating against him on the basis of a prohibited factor like race or gender. Just as a restaurant doesn't have to serve you (subject to the same caveat). But the important thing here to note is that the hypothetical restaurant has organized their business in such a way that some customers cannot get what they claim to serve, just as ZipCar has organized their business such that some customers cannot enjoy the service they claim to offer. They don't have to do anything, but I object to blaming the customer for their choice to run their business in such a way that a very ordinary thing that some customers can do, others cannot.
philliphaydon 7y ago
Don’t pretty much all phones have Bluetooth now? Couldn’t it backup the authorisation and allow him to connect via Bluetooth and verify and unlock? How is this absolutely his fault?
mcguire 7y ago
There's at least two ways of handling serious product failings: "Oh, shit, we have to fix that!" or getting rid of the customer exposing the problem and trying to conceal the issue. One is the action of a healthy company, especially one that is trying to grow, while the other maximizes current profit levels.
- merpnderp 7y ago
  Doesn't parking in same place twice, knowing full well the likely cost to the person they're doing business with, seem unethical? Would you want to do business with someone who carelessly took advantage of you?
  - labawi 7y ago
    I'm not sure I would do that, but I would expect them to fix their service it if it is costing them noticeably. AFAIK they did not say you shouldn't park underground nor did they explain their various failure modes and how to avoid them.

by dx034 7y ago

brohee 7y ago

The common man would think a company would try the fix with the utmost priority a mission critical issue...

2rsf 7y ago

> Honestly, the ban sounds justified to me based on the story above I agree, knowingly (and after a few occurrences you should understand there's a problem) damaging the service should lead to a ban or at least a warning.

jacquesm 7y ago
No, it should lead to someone fixing the problem. The customer centric thinking in this thread is amazing.
- greedo 7y ago
  One facet of the problem (the cell coverage) is largely out of Zipcars control, no? I suppose they could add some functionality to their app so that you're alerted when you park at a location without cell coverage?
  - alistairSH 7y ago
    Lack of cell coverage is out of their control, but that doesn't excuse them from designing around the problem. It appears they're aware of the problem, but certain known issues prevent access (cellular unit draining car battery seems to be the common one and sounds like something that should be fixable).
    - moftz 7y ago
      Add a keypad like Ford has had on their vehicles for like 20 years. Have the computer keep a short list of one time pass codes (and maybe some sort of super long master code) that can be updated whenever the car is in cell service. So in the event that you get into the car, Zipcar can provide one of the one time use codes to get you in the door.
      - sangnoir 7y ago
        My imagined internal security review to this issue Hard "no", closing WONTFIX. This change would significantly increase the attack surface, risking a lot for very little upside. See "Epic 769 (Offline Support - roadmap Q3 2020)" for blocking & related issues

fenomas 7y ago

> If you know that parking in the garage will lead to a 50% probability of.. 50% is GP's after-the-fact description of how often the car failed to start. It's not an actual failure rate that GP knew about before they parked.

jellicle 7y ago
Anyone can make an error once. Commenter talks about how they repeatedly parked the car in an underground garage that they knew had no cell signal, despite multiple towings being required. What's the appropriate number of towings for one customer due to that customer's intentional actions before you kick them off the service?
- cj 7y ago
  I'm the original poster. I misspoke in the original comment (too late to edit it). Now that I think about it, I believe unlocking does work regardless of cell service (as long as you don't extend the reservation, and try to unlock it after the original reservation time ends). I had the car towed twice: 1) First time, the car wouldn't start because the battery was dead while parked underground with no cell service. 2) Second time, the reservation was about to expire while parked without cell service, and I extended it on the app, but the car couldn't know that since the cellular unit couldn't phone home. EDIT: For what it's worth, I don't blame Zipcar for banning an unprofitable customer. I acknowledge that i was definitely pushing my luck by parking there a 2nd time after the first incident.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

Nextgrid 7y ago

Disagreed about the ban. Since when is shitty technology (which any engineer worth their salt should’ve predicted - this is not rocket science) the fault of the customer? Unless they say in bold in their marketing statements “Only drive within cell coverage” the customer isn’t at fault for trying to use it as a normal car (in fact it’s crazy to think that parking in a place with no reception is no longer normal, at least according to ZipCar).

xzmmd 7y ago
You're justifying acting like an asshole.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  No I’m trying to justify using the product as it’s advertised. Otherwise it’s too easy to just falsely advertise something and ban the people that manage to figure out the catch.
  - oh_sigh 7y ago
    You said you did it a few times. How often do you have to do something with negative consequences before you learn you shouldn't keep doing it?
    - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
      Other than being told its a signal issue, how do you determine that? IoT crap rarely, if ever, actually communicates with the user about error conditions. You usually find out shit 'no workey' after the fact. There's a lot of articles and twitter feeds. Go look up the "Internet of Shit". There's a reason why it's called that. And Zipcars are no exception, evidently.
      - oh_sigh 7y ago
        This isn't internet of shit though...is an iPhone shitty if you can't use cell services when you don't have cell service?

braythwayt 7y ago

“I ordered the tuna salad every time I ate at the restaurant. About half of the time, the manager informed me that they were out of tuna, and had to send a truck to fetch more. After a while of this, they banned me from the restaurant for ordering the tuna salad.”

muststopmyths 7y ago
Actually, that analogy would only make sense if "you" refused to order anything but tuna salad and expected them to send the truck out without fail when they were out. And they had to comply with your request for some reason. In that case, yeah, they should ban "you".
- mcguire 7y ago
  A better analogy would be that ZipCar has a known failure mode that will leave you stranded. And they don't feel the urge to fix it.
- braythwayt 7y ago
  The fellow is parking the car in his own garage, and ZipCar claims to be in the car business, and it is normal to park cars in garages. I say they have tuna salad on the menu, but they apparently can't always serve it to everyone. Your suggestion that he order something else to eat is like telling a ZipCar customer to move to a different condominium or whatever. They don't "have" to do anything, provided they aren't discriminating against him on the basis of a prohibited factor like race or gender. Just as a restaurant doesn't have to serve you (subject to the same caveat). But the important thing here to note is that the hypothetical restaurant has organized their business in such a way that some customers cannot get what they claim to serve, just as ZipCar has organized their business such that some customers cannot enjoy the service they claim to offer. They don't have to do anything, but I object to blaming the customer for their choice to run their business in such a way that a very ordinary thing that some customers can do, others cannot.

philliphaydon 7y ago

Don’t pretty much all phones have Bluetooth now? Couldn’t it backup the authorisation and allow him to connect via Bluetooth and verify and unlock? How is this absolutely his fault?

mcguire 7y ago

There's at least two ways of handling serious product failings: "Oh, shit, we have to fix that!" or getting rid of the customer exposing the problem and trying to conceal the issue. One is the action of a healthy company, especially one that is trying to grow, while the other maximizes current profit levels.

merpnderp 7y ago
Doesn't parking in same place twice, knowing full well the likely cost to the person they're doing business with, seem unethical? Would you want to do business with someone who carelessly took advantage of you?
- labawi 7y ago
  I'm not sure I would do that, but I would expect them to fix their service it if it is costing them noticeably. AFAIK they did not say you shouldn't park underground nor did they explain their various failure modes and how to avoid them.