3 ms·

Default Opted Out Opt In should NOT be required to enable features. Features should not be rented, and should be delivered as purchased with the car. Shipped

Default Opted Out Opt In should NOT be required to enable features. Features should not be rented, and should be delivered as purchased with the car. Shipped but disabled features that take up additional vehicle weight (relative to lacking the feature) should not be allowed. (This phrasing is precise, to allow for silicon and software enhancements which are not a material change to vehicle manufacturing / design.) Setup processes should always empower the user. If there are multiple choices or paths a default may be indicated, but alternatives MUST NOT be in other locations, and MUST be displayed with equal prominence in a logically adjacent section of the dialog. Example from a website: 'Paperless' should not be force enabled by default; the ability to have paper or paperless billing should be radio boxes next to each other. Additional benefits (E.G. higher account interest rates) should not be tied to either selection.

IanCal 2y ago
Devils advocate here If this made it more expensive, because having cars that are physically different is harder, would you prefer that? Why can't I simply not care that I don't get something I've not paid for and there's a doodad in the car that's capable of it? If the alternative is having to buy that feature or pay more for a car that doesn't have it, that sounds like a bad outcome.
- shakna 2y ago
  It's a question of ownership. If I see fit to modify something I own, as has always been done, why am I not free to utilise a particular piece of my purchase? If I'm not free to do so - then do I actually still own my own product? Or is it now a lease? Why should the era of rebuilding your car simply end? There are already safety regs you need to comply with. The average hotrod modifies a considerable proportion of the car. Reusing the majority of the structure in ways the manufacturer did not intend.
  - IanCal 2y ago
    I think you're talking about something related but not discussed here, which would be making car modifications illegal. Let's say BMW make heated seats an optional extra, which it already is. What if they also install them in every car because it's cheaper to have one build, and subsequently are able to sell them more competitively - none of that would require making it illegal for you to get the seats working yourself.
    - shakna 2y ago
      Not illegal, in so far as I don't believe it's been tested in court - but it is an explicit breach of the giant terms and conditions contract that they require you to sign, when purchasing the vehicle. There is an attempt to prevent you from doing so.
flir 2y ago
Although I'm generally pro coming down hard on dark patterns, I'm uncomfortable with that last example. To me, it's just differentiation. You can have the bare-bones service (digital only) with a higher interest rate, or the deluxe service (paper statements, in-country phone support, etc) with a lower interest rate. That doesn't seem inherently bad to me, it seems like a company offering two different products.

IanCal 2y ago

Devils advocate here If this made it more expensive, because having cars that are physically different is harder, would you prefer that? Why can't I simply not care that I don't get something I've not paid for and there's a doodad in the car that's capable of it? If the alternative is having to buy that feature or pay more for a car that doesn't have it, that sounds like a bad outcome.

shakna 2y ago
It's a question of ownership. If I see fit to modify something I own, as has always been done, why am I not free to utilise a particular piece of my purchase? If I'm not free to do so - then do I actually still own my own product? Or is it now a lease? Why should the era of rebuilding your car simply end? There are already safety regs you need to comply with. The average hotrod modifies a considerable proportion of the car. Reusing the majority of the structure in ways the manufacturer did not intend.
- IanCal 2y ago
  I think you're talking about something related but not discussed here, which would be making car modifications illegal. Let's say BMW make heated seats an optional extra, which it already is. What if they also install them in every car because it's cheaper to have one build, and subsequently are able to sell them more competitively - none of that would require making it illegal for you to get the seats working yourself.
  - shakna 2y ago
    Not illegal, in so far as I don't believe it's been tested in court - but it is an explicit breach of the giant terms and conditions contract that they require you to sign, when purchasing the vehicle. There is an attempt to prevent you from doing so.

flir 2y ago

Although I'm generally pro coming down hard on dark patterns, I'm uncomfortable with that last example. To me, it's just differentiation. You can have the bare-bones service (digital only) with a higher interest rate, or the deluxe service (paper statements, in-country phone support, etc) with a lower interest rate. That doesn't seem inherently bad to me, it seems like a company offering two different products.