3 ms·

> No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. Yes. But safety is a spectrum, and is denominated in inconvenience against perceived expected loss - p

> No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. Yes. But safety is a spectrum, and is denominated in inconvenience against perceived expected loss - perceived, because people round the loss down to 0 when they feel like it won't happen to them. See: how many people don't fasten their seat belts, or hold a phone in their hand while driving, despite both being highly dangerous to life, limb and wallet, and against huge social and regulatory pressure. See also: how many people ignore or tape over error lights on the dashboard; how many people don't repair stuff until absolutely necessary. See also: how many people try to bribe their way through yearly inspections, and would happily skip them entirely if the law didn't force them. So it's like GP said: people mostly care about how much time and money they're going to waste on the newly discovered problem. A recall involving the car being physically taken to manufacturer is hugely disturbing, possibly very costly (it's not like most people drive for fun). A recall involving an OTA update? That's "just another auto-update ¯\_(ツ)_/¯". Most people won't even notice it happening. Putting the two types of "recall" in the same class is, from regular person's POV, deception through equivocation.

lapcat 2y ago
The people who won't wear seatbelts, who tape over dashboard lights, who would skip inspections, will also ignore recall notices, so for them, for those who don't care much about safety, dealership recalls are not an inconvenience. And they probably don't care one way or the other about OTA recalls either. The people who bring their vehicles in for dealership recalls do care about safety, otherwise they would have ignored the recall notice, like the people who don't care. You can compare the vehicle software updates to non-vehicle software updates. Those who don't care about security will happily ignore security updates and continue to use old versions of the software on their computers forever. And those who do care about security will update, even if the updates tend to cause other problems, such as removing features or otherwise making the UI worse.
egeozcan 2y ago
Some people do not care about safety so we should change the definition of what a recall is and blame an article for being deceptive? You gave a bunch of examples of some people not caring about safety then generalized to everyone. You may be in a bubble, or you may not be, but you're presenting zero evidence to call the article deceptive.

lapcat 2y ago

The people who won't wear seatbelts, who tape over dashboard lights, who would skip inspections, will also ignore recall notices, so for them, for those who don't care much about safety, dealership recalls are not an inconvenience. And they probably don't care one way or the other about OTA recalls either. The people who bring their vehicles in for dealership recalls do care about safety, otherwise they would have ignored the recall notice, like the people who don't care. You can compare the vehicle software updates to non-vehicle software updates. Those who don't care about security will happily ignore security updates and continue to use old versions of the software on their computers forever. And those who do care about security will update, even if the updates tend to cause other problems, such as removing features or otherwise making the UI worse.

egeozcan 2y ago

Some people do not care about safety so we should change the definition of what a recall is and blame an article for being deceptive? You gave a bunch of examples of some people not caring about safety then generalized to everyone. You may be in a bubble, or you may not be, but you're presenting zero evidence to call the article deceptive.