5 ms·
Title is misleading. We are talking about an use case where a mobile phone bought from a bank/creditor on an installment plan can have it's features locked unti
by arkitaip 6y ago
Title is misleading. We are talking about an use case where a mobile phone bought from a bank/creditor on an installment plan can have it's features locked until payments are resumed.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y agoOh wow. That’s even worse than what the title implies.
- ByteJockey 6y agoCan you elaborate a little on what you originally thought the title meant? Because I thought it meant that banks would be able to monitor/lock your phone, which they would presumably use as a prerequisite for installing their banking app. Basically millions of people who have no other way to remotely access banking services being forced to have their most personal details monitored by large financial institutions and allow those institutions to cut them off from their phones. Then it seems that it means that if you buy something on an installment plan and stop paying, you lose the ability to use it to the full extent. We can make an argument about a phone being necessary in the modern world, but the second scenario seems much less Orwellian than the first. This implies to me, that you may have had a very different interpretation of the title, and I'm curious what it was.
- jiofih 6y agoI also interpreted as banking apps having the ability to lock your phone (for security reasons). I don’t know how you think that this is fine - it is not how financing works. You borrow the money to purchase the device, and go into debt with the lender. They don’t own the phone and shouldn’t have any kind of access to it - it is purely a financial dispute the moment you stop paying.
- ByteJockey 6y agoForgive me for not knowing this, I've never financed a phone (I used those $40-80 walmart smartphones until fairly recently). Do phone loans of this sort not function as collateralized loans? In such a loan, ownership reverts to the lender when payments aren't made, or perhaps several payments (depending on the contract).
- jiofih 6y agoEven in that case. Think of a car lease, ownership can be reverted but the lessor has no access to the vehicle on their own.
- efreak 6y agoUnless they installed a gps tracker and remote kill switch. Which they might well have done. With self driving cars, eventually the car may be able to return itself.
- ByteJockey 6y agoThey send a repo-person after you instead. Is that really the model you want here?
- blfr 6y agoNo, it isn't because it limits the damage to devices purchased from a source you can avoid. That you would want to avoid anyway. This device has complete access to your Google account, probably your photos, emails, maybe even credit cards. Smartphone has become such an important piece of personal computing that you want to buy one straight from the manufacturer or their authorized dealer and, since you're on HN, preferably with unlockable bootloader.
- URfejk 6y agoYes, but I couldn't post a title that long ...
- gostsamo 6y agoHonestly, how long until all kinds of shady actors come up with excuses to gain access to the api? My device, my choices. If it is not paid, sue me in a legal court. Everything else is private enforcement.
- crankyoldcrank 6y agoIf it's financed it.. isn't really your device until it's paid off. By your logic repo men should be illegal.
- gostsamo 6y agoNo, the phone is mine, it is a collateral for the loan. If I'm not paying, the court must acknowledge the fact before the lender has the right to private enforcement.
- kshacker 6y agoWell they are changing the perspective. The phone is theirs until the payment is complete. Very likely that's how they write the contract too. They may still sell it like "auto pilot" but the paperwork defines the actual contract.
- p49k 6y agoThey are "changing the perspective" to a behavior which is predatory and stacked against one party. A company cannot just write anything they want into a contract and expect it to be enforceable; there are rules surrounding what is and isn't acceptable in contracts.
- Aeronwen 6y agoRent-to-own has been a thing for ages. While predatory, it's apparently acceptable in contracts.
- gostsamo 6y ago
- goatinaboat 6y agoon an installment plan can have it's features locked until payments are resumed Plot twist: when you finish paying it off you still don’t really own it. You are just permitted to use it be the real owner all along, Google. Until they want paying in cash again, and they cut off your OS updates. “Nice phone you got, shame if it got a virus”.
- rkagerer 6y agoWho the flip would want to buy a phone from their bank? I already avoid buying my phone hardware from my telco service provider, even if it means I have to pay more (for an unlocked product).
- teh_klev 6y agoAny time you're "buying" a phone on a plan then it'll involve a credit agreement and there'll be a bank involved somewhere. So when you walk into your local phone shop pick out a nice shiny handset and decide on a monthly plan (because you can't afford 800 quid plus to buy it outright) you'll be signing a credit agreement. It's the underlying finance company that this app is aimed at, not the retailer or the telco. Until that 24-48 month plan is paid up you don't own the phone, the finance company does. This is why I buy my handsets outright, not locked to a carrier (and also because of recent financial bad luck my credit rating is a total dumpster fire).
- dang 6y agoWe've changed the title (it used to be "Google Launches App That Lets Banks Remotely Lock Your Android Device") since we changed the URL (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25027134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25027134).