4 ms·
The point is that you can drive the car onto any road, not that it would be any good at it. I can buy a Camry and drive it off a cliff into the ocean. It's my r
by nexuist 5y ago
The point is that you can drive the car onto any road, not that it would be any good at it. I can buy a Camry and drive it off a cliff into the ocean. It's my right as its owner to do that. If Toyota said, nope, even though you paid full price for this car we're still not going to let you drive it off a cliff, I would be upset at that limitation. Even if my intention is not to drive it off a cliff.
It's about allowing the consumer to use the device however they see fit, there's no expectation that the car should be able to do everything outside of its operating range well.
- morganvachon 5y agoYou're moving the goalposts. The original statement was that just as any car can travel any road, any computer can execute any software. Both statements are incorrect, for different reasons. I get the point of the comment as a whole and I agree wholeheartedly with it, I was simply pointing out a bad analogy and an incorrect assertion.
- Terretta 5y agoBy this argument, automatic braking systems should be disallowed since they attempt to limit your freedom to rear-end other cars or drive into barriers (“however you see fit”). And that’s a great analogy to Apple’s approach: “It’s for your own safety and that of others.”
- nexuist 5y agoABS can be disabled by pulling a circuit breaker in the car's electronics box, usually installed somewhere near the wheel or in the glovebox. I would be upset if my car started demonstrating problems consistent with faulty ABS and I or my mechanic would have no way to troubleshoot it.