8 ms·

This thread is a perfect example of why we need to reign in marketing and its insistence on misleading people. Because and only because i’ve been lingering in

• jokoon 2y ago
  Capitalism doesn't really reward honesty. That's why it matters to properly regulate the market.
  • spacebanana7 2y ago
    That's over simplifying. Sketching out the game theory, in markets with repeated interactions there's a great reward to honesty. A local baker wouldn't do well by giving customers food poisoning by slacking on hygiene. Even absent regulation customers would stop visiting for daily lunches after a while. However in single trade markets, there's a great temptation to be dishonest. A big city realtor selling to overseas buyers has a potentially incredible reward for being dishonest about the value of a property. And absent regulation (and enforcement) it can be very lucrative to be a liar.
    • michaelt 2y ago
      > A local baker wouldn't do well by giving customers food poisoning by slacking on hygiene. Even absent regulation customers would stop visiting for daily lunches after a while. Historically this wasn't really the case, as I understand things. Obviously if your hygiene standards were so low that every customer got ill immediately every time, that would be easily detected. But if you just overlook the occasional rat droppings in the flour sack, or put the occasional handful of sawdust to bulk out the sausage filling? So one or two customers get sick per month? And they were sickly people anyway, people in good health can shrug such things off? And every food vendor is similarly bad, so it's always plausible something else got them sick? It would be pretty hard for that to get traced back to you.
      • spacebanana7 2y ago
        Yeah there're a few embedded assumptions in my example in addition to regular custom. It needs to be clear to the consumer that the baker was the source of the food poising, the baker needs to get enough revenue from regular customers to offset the temptation of cheating occasional customers by making the kitchen low hygiene, and the cost of making the place hygienic needs to be reasonable. > Historically this wasn't really the case, as I understand things A modern counterexample is the street food vendors in New Dehli, where regulatory enforcement is lax and food poising is frequent. I suspect this is because big cities have more occasional customers but other factors probably come into play as well.
    • soulofmischief 2y ago
      Okay, but what happens when you inevitably end up with a conglomerate monopoly or duopoly on the majority of consumer goods in a given sector? That's the natural outcome of an unregulated market, at which point honesty fully goes out the window.
      • spacebanana7 2y ago
        Monopolies with repeated consumer interaction still want people to maintain high levels of consumption in their products. For example a tobacco monopoly wouldn't make cigarettes that are immediately sickening to their consumers because of bad filters. They'd prefer for consumers to happily buy cigarettes for a decade or two before getting unwell so they can have more sales.
        • soulofmischief 2y ago
          That doesn't mean honesty, honor, etc will ever enter the equation.
      • CalRobert 2y ago
        Annoyingly we now seem to get regulation that favours incumbents, entrenching the duopolies you fear
        • FredPret 2y ago
          Almost all regulation favors large entities who can afford the lawyers and consultants to deal with it. The exception is anti-trust regulation.
    • RobotToaster 2y ago
      Historically flour being adulterated with chalk and sugar being adulterated with gypsum were big problems, so I don't think that tracks.
      • red-iron-pine 2y ago
        don't need to look at history, even recent times have lots of this. lead in Chinese produced infant formula, rampant fraud in olive / avacado / sesame oil sales, etc.
    • vortegne 2y ago
      The US FDA literally exists because bread was sold full of sawdust and other garbage.
    • have_faith 2y ago
      A local baker doesn’t have to poison anyone while being dishonest. History is full of examples: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_of_Bread_Act_1757 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_of_Bread_Act_1757
    • consteval 2y ago
      This only works IF you work under the assumption consumers know, or even have the ability to know, if they're being lied to. Well... they don't. Cars are incredibly complex machines, 99% of consumers do not have the knowledge to properly understand how a car works. They have jobs, they have a family, they have better things to do. So they rely on the car manufacturer to be honest. You'll never see a consumer pop the hood and count the pistons to make sure their V6 is actually a V6. They just believe the manufacturer. Your poisoning example only works because it's obvious. Imagine another food analogy. Imagine there is no FDA. How do you know what goes into the food you eat? Could you even find out? If you strived to find out the ingredients and nutritional content of your average grocery haul, how long will it take? A few tens of thousands hours, perhaps. Right after you work like a dog to buy the equipment to burn the food. And then hire private investigators to stake out the factory. And then fly to Mexico to view what pesticides they use.
  • tomohawk 2y ago
    Lying about everything is a hallmark of societies under the thumb of autocrats or socialists. It's a survival skill.
    • wholinator2 2y ago
      Are you implying Modern society is one of these?
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • consteval 2y ago
      Evidently not, because the US is neither autocratic or socialist
  • FredPret 2y ago
    This notion of regulation is just the desire to offload your duties as a responsible and intelligent market participant to a third party. It’s intellectually lazy, and it should be blindingly obvious that, in a universe with more than one mind in it, the principle of caveat emptor will always be needed regardless of economic system. In fact, you need caveat emptor for daily life, not just economic decisions. Here’s why: who does the regulating? The government? Neither politics nor the civil service rewards honesty. These occupations have feedback loops that stem from popularity with the public or with one’s union and are thus not reality-based. In fact capitalism comes closest to rewarding honesty in that consumers go on forums such as this one and then make informed choices. For example, I once bought an AWD car knowing full well it’s not 4WD. It’s still 100x better than 2WD on snow and gravel. I liked my AWD car - money well spent.
    • immibis 2y ago
      Companies have one responsibility: to make money. This is by design in the system known as capitalism. Giving companies additional responsibilities is either called adding regulations or it's called ending capitalism. Guess which one is easier.
      • FredPret 2y ago
        Companies make their offers and people are free to choose. I’m saying the people should have more power to choose, more options to choose from, more disposable resources to choose with. This will lead to better outcomes than if the regulators try to create a situation with more limited but better-in-their-eyes options.
    • jltsiren 2y ago
      > Here’s why: who does the regulating? The government? The people. Politics is also a market. New regulations arise when there is sufficient demand for them, as determined by the way the society is governed. If businesses don't want more regulations, they can always act in ways that don't create demand for regulations. But they often don't, because the market can reward defection better than cooperation. The market just works the way it works, and regulations are one of the consequences.
• doe_eyes 2y ago
  But is the lingo really misleading? There's nothing incorrect about "all-wheel drive", "four-wheel drive", or "4x4". The engine is turning all four wheels. The behavior of open differentials is somewhat counterintuitive, but that applies to 2WD cars too. People get one wheel buried or up in the air and can't comprehend why the car is not moving. Is that a failure of marketing or consumer education? Probably the latter. For what it's worth, I've seen quite a few "real" 4WD cars with locking differentials getting stuck in silly ways, often because the driver simply had no idea how to lock the diff, or didn't turn off traction control, or just kept flooring it and making the situation worse. To me, the only potential dishonesty isn't the naming, it's the imagery of SUVs traversing rugged terrains. But that's not strictly a lie, more of a missing footnote: "don't try anything more rugged than that".
  • giantg2 2y ago
    "often because the driver simply had no idea how to lock the diff," Most of the locking diffs out there are automatic, like the G80. They're basically a locking limited slip diff. It uses slip between the wheels to throw a cog (for lack of a better term) that locks the diff. It then unlocks (drops the cog) after the torque is unapproved. This is very different to use from the older way of locking diffs via the hubs or the high end electronic switches that enthusiasts use.
• arghwhat 2y ago
  The first step is to stop pretending AWD and 4WD can sensibly mean different things… unless your number of wheels differ from 4. The naming is truly idiotic. Instead, be clear about any locking or torque split requirements, so you don’t take your sports SUV with no locking diffs and a 70/30 Torsen center differential on the trail. E.g., “this is an advanced trail that requires three locking differentials or equivalent”, and for lighter trails “this trail requires at least limited slip differentials”.
  • dotancohen 2y ago
    How about the AWD Teslas? They have independent front and rear motors, but I don't know if the rear and/or front diffs limit slip. Even if they don't, the ABS could hold a caliper to prevent wheelslip (Some Mercedes 4WD or AWD had an open differential and used independent brake control to limit slip, it was excellent for mud and sand, I don't know about other conditions).
    • gambiting 2y ago
      I was going to say - my Volvo T8 is technically "AWD" but the rear and front axles are completely independent with two different power sources - so there is no need for a locking diff in between them(in fact one isn't possible as there is no driveshaft linking them). Ditto for electric vehicles with modern slip control where one wheel can be locked at any time on any axle.
      • arghwhat 2y ago
        Assuming at least one of the axles is driven by an electric motor, you can lock them in software. That's also what you'd need to do for rock crawling - you don't just want to avoid losing power to a lifted wheel, you want all wheels to rotate with the same steady velocity regardless of conditions so that all wheels remain in static friction (zero slip, which is not possible with e.g. brake-driven soft locking). An electric vehicle with a motor per wheel can do this. Your vehicle would need lockers on front and rear diff, and appropriate software to soft-lock front and rear.
    • 2y ago
• ssss11 2y ago
  Thank you. So well articulated. This trash you speak of is absolutely everywhere. There’s no honesty in marketing any more.
  • switch007 2y ago
    When was there honesty in marketing? Isn't looking for honesty in marketing like looking for a nutritious meal in a spoon of sugar?
  • remedan 2y ago
    Are you implying there used to be honesty in marketing?
    • red-iron-pine 2y ago
      e.g. they used to sell literal snake oil, or that pumping tobacco smoke up your behind is a good idea. "Venter's Cure-all Laudanum Tonic", etc. etc.
• itsoktocry 2y ago
  >vehicle really really shouldn’t leave the suburban pavement This is also nonsense. I'm an avid fisherman and (former) hunter. I grew up in Northern Ontario. I had an Subaru Forrester and took it everywhere. Yes, there's a big difference between AWD and 4WD. Yes, you can get in trouble without a locking diff. Yes, ground clearance will be an issue. But the idea that these vehicles can't leave the pavement is simply not true. They are surprisingly capable. And as someone who now owns a half ton pickup for the same usage, their small stature on the trail is an advantage. >we see this misleading trash across the entire board. Where are all of these misleading ads? Maybe I'm out of the loop, but where are these cars being advertised as "off-road"?
  • deelowe 2y ago
    Subarus are probably the most capable awd vehicles. Imagine a cr-v or even worse the bronco “sport” which is pretty terrible compare to the non-“sport” version.
    • itsoktocry 2y ago
      >Subarus are probably the most capable awd vehicles They are. I guess I take offense to the "don't leave the pavement" bit. 90% of trails around the world are not technical in any way. Why discourage some adventure? I think some people would be surprised by how capable their vehicle is, even 2WD. Maybe that's it? Most people are over or under confident, and reality is in the middle (as it often is).
    • sciurus 2y ago
      As the owner of both a Subaru and a Bronco Sport Badlands I feel compelled to defend the latter! They both have very capable AWD systems. If anyone wants a deep-dive on how the different types of 4WD and AWD systems actually work and their different pros and cons, this video from Alex on Autos is worth your 20 minutes- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD4dNv-jBOY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD4dNv-jBOY Should you take either vehicle on roads where the NPS says not to? Of course not! But there's a wide range of conditions between "gravel road" and "rock crawling in Moab", and a properly-equipped AWD vehicle will handle most of them. Know your vehicle, know your skill level, know the conditions you're going into, bring appropriate supplies in case you run into trouble, travel with a group and/or have a reliable way to call for help, etc.
• TheCondor 2y ago
  There sure are a lot of actual 4WD trucks without lockers when they are sold. I have to wonder what the difference is between a Tacoma sport and an AWD vehicle, I think it’s 2WD mode and maybe clearance. I think there are even jeep gladiators without lockers… is that a jeep or like a cool looking suburban pavement car? “Off-roading” is a big thing that means different things. I live in Colorado, in the front range area (Boulder) and the popular guides sort of divide trails in to three: green easy, blue moderate and red hard. Most of the blue trails you can do in a bone stock 4WD road truck, probably most AWDs with clearance. You’d want to take it easy and think through a couple sections but it’s doable. We’ve gone to multiple 10th mountain division huts in Subarus, made it with no scraping or problems. This is most trails. Now there are the reds and the hard reds, you basically need a modified vehicle for them. There are some “trail ready” trucks coming from the factory now, I’m under the impression that the “off-roading community” usually feels that even those need modification. Modifying the vehicle and the technical trail challenge is the idea for them. The difference is driving on technical obstacles for that specific challenge, the driving and the building of the vehicle versus driving on rougher terrain to get to a location. NPS probably also frowns on rock stacking and other “recovery” techniques when a vehicle cannot clear an object.
  • dakna 2y ago
    > I have to wonder what the difference is between a Tacoma sport and an AWD vehicle, I think it’s 2WD mode and maybe clearance As a long-time AWD driver who entertains the idea of getting an offroad vehicle at one point, this is my current understanding: AWD: If one wheel slips and starts spinning, all other wheels stop turning. You are stuck. Clever electronics applying the brakes on the spinning wheel can help to redistribute the torque to other wheels, you might get unstuck. 4WD: If one wheel starts spinning, only the other wheel on the same axle stops turning. The transfer case is locked, and the other axle still receives torque. If both axles have one spinning wheel, you are stuck. 4WD with one locker: If one wheel on the axle with a locker starts spinning, the other wheel on the same axle still receives torque. If both axles each have one spinning wheel, you can still move the vehicle with one wheel still receiving torque. 4WD with locker on both axles: If you manage to get stuck with all 4 wheels spinning you should reflect on how the heck you ended up in that situation.
• l1tany11 2y ago
  As someone who has spent a lot of time building and racing cars… yeah the marketing is nuts. A few years ago Porsche came out with the Taycan. One of their big marketing pushes was that it was better on track than a Tesla model S, because on paper it was worse in many ways (more expensive, less range, less power, worse charging network, etc). The sad thing was all the magazines and journalists seemed to be happy to parrot this position. Porsche bragged about their ring time. Internet commentators agreed. The Taycan Turbo S was a track weapon! The reality? The car is heavy, it’ll eat tires. I’ve seen guys in cars like that (noobs mind you) cord a set of tires in 1 session. Tracks eat fuel like crazy, I normally brought 4-5 5gallon fuel cans, and a full tank. I could do half a tank in like 8 laps. Electric? What track has super chargers? And the ring time? $200k+ Taycan turbo s matched the $38k civic type R. But marketing. And the journalists who really do know better were happy to play the game. Every car seems to be marketed on track now. For most cars, even seemingly performance oriented cars, tracking the car voids the warranty. Really the brands know that they are selling a fantasy, and very few people will actually even try that stuff. They just want the aura of it. Especially Americans want to buy 120% of the car they need. Need to take a freeway on ramp? Good thing this car has a ring time of X! Should be no problem! Thinking about getting a boat? Better buy an F-250, just to be safe!
• OptionOfT 2y ago
  In general we should put a stop on marketing claims unless they are proven. Walk into a store and read the ridiculous claims left and right. Why is it allowed to print something on a label that you can just make up? Water is sold as if it has some kind of magical properties. It's just water. It disgusts me. And when you buy a car you literally sign a piece of paper stating that you cannot derive any value off the claims that the sales person made to you.