Thanks for the detailed reply. So it seems like your objection has nothing to do with the payment model, right? All of these are just generic engineering concer

Thanks for the detailed reply. So it seems like your objection has nothing to do with the payment model, right? All of these are just generic engineering concerns with any product at all that has the ability to electronically enable or disable a safety feature. Why are you concerned about and this particular product, as opposed to say cars, which affect orders of magnitude more people? Modern cars have many safety systems that can be digitally activated and deactivated, including the steering, brakes, throttle, and airbags, by design. The ECU alone in any vehicle, car or motorcycle, is hackable and could kill you (did in Toyota's case). All vehicles have LED lights to indicate safety critical problems. Nowadays, it's more commonly Android-driven LCD panels with many, many more failure points than an LED. I mean, I hear you that electronic systems have many failure modes. But electronic control is more than routine today, it's utterly ubiquitous, so what's the cause for such extreme concern here that words like "psychopath" are justified? Tesla alone is putting more electronically controllable cars on the road than all highway motorcycles combined in the US per year. Should we even talk about the failure modes possible with a Tesla or other self-driving car? > Would you feel ok entering a building where the fire exit required the building owner pay a subscription service to unlock? If I had to manually power up the entry way, and the building warned me before I entered about the subscription status, it wouldn't bother me that much. Please do at least try to be fair to the perspective of the business Vice has misrepresented here.