8 ms·

That's all motherhood and apple pie, but I'm sorry: the reality that we live in and incentives at play are such that if a capability can be exploited, then it w

That's all motherhood and apple pie, but I'm sorry: the reality that we live in and incentives at play are such that if a capability can be exploited, then it will be exploited to the detriment of the consumer. Full stop.

shnock 7mo ago
This is a classic example of slippery slope fallacy, and not in the spirit of intellectual curiosity for which this forum exists
- hnav 7mo ago
  But it's true? How does an automaker that doesn't engage in those tactics compete when the rest of the market does?
  - uniq7 7mo ago
    Like sugar-free, gluten-free, dairy-free, nut-free food, where the lack of something is sold as something positive. I'd love to buy an ad-free, subscription-free, tracking-free, touchscreen-free car.
    - beeflet 7mo ago
      In the future, no one will be rich enough to buy a free car
    - tirant 7mo ago
      Those cars exist but don’t do well in the market. And only when sold by very little money and cheap parts. People demand connectivity, big screens and lots of software.
slg 7mo ago
It's interesting how many complaints I see on HN that are framed as if they're complaints about a specific piece of technology when they are really complaints about capitalism. I'm all ears if you want to criticize our entire economic system, but I think it's silly to have that conversation specifically in the context of car software rather than at a societal level.
- fcatalan 7mo ago
  I'll raise the flag of "Don't nickel and dime me" in every battlefield.
- MiiMe19 7mo ago
  Because we don't care about capitalism, we don't want over the air updates to our cars.
  - slg 7mo ago
    Then don't frame the argument as "over-the-air updates are bad because of capitalism".
  - achierius 7mo ago
    When you're fighting the same enemy on a dozen battlefields, you won't stand a chance of winning until you understand that fact and go after the root cause.
    - dalmo3 7mo ago
      Because enshittification wouldn't happen in a centrally-planned economy? What's the basis of this?
      - sham1 7mo ago
        This feels to me like a false dichotomy. The only alternative to the current way of doing things isn't a planned command economy, no matter what "libertarians" or tankies might argue.
        panick21_ 7mo ago
        Then explain how it would work exactly. Anything other then capitalism with slightly more regulation is just going from the US to Germany. Great, but they have software updates on cars too. If you want to change anything more fundamental, you are going to have to do a planned economy. At best you can say, maybe could be slightly better Germany by having a better political process or something. But even then, software updates in your car are going to be a reality because it solves are problem for manufactures, saves consumers lots of time in many cases and generally the positives outway the negatives. I bet you 100% that in any planned economy OTA updates would still happen. At best we can argue for some better practice about OTA Updates in regards to security and functionality. Maybe forcing manufactures to have a 'security only' feed an a 'feature feed'.

shnock 7mo ago

This is a classic example of slippery slope fallacy, and not in the spirit of intellectual curiosity for which this forum exists

hnav 7mo ago
But it's true? How does an automaker that doesn't engage in those tactics compete when the rest of the market does?
- uniq7 7mo ago
  Like sugar-free, gluten-free, dairy-free, nut-free food, where the lack of something is sold as something positive. I'd love to buy an ad-free, subscription-free, tracking-free, touchscreen-free car.
  - beeflet 7mo ago
    In the future, no one will be rich enough to buy a free car
  - tirant 7mo ago
    Those cars exist but don’t do well in the market. And only when sold by very little money and cheap parts. People demand connectivity, big screens and lots of software.

slg 7mo ago

It's interesting how many complaints I see on HN that are framed as if they're complaints about a specific piece of technology when they are really complaints about capitalism. I'm all ears if you want to criticize our entire economic system, but I think it's silly to have that conversation specifically in the context of car software rather than at a societal level.

fcatalan 7mo ago
I'll raise the flag of "Don't nickel and dime me" in every battlefield.
MiiMe19 7mo ago
Because we don't care about capitalism, we don't want over the air updates to our cars.
- slg 7mo ago
  Then don't frame the argument as "over-the-air updates are bad because of capitalism".
- achierius 7mo ago
  When you're fighting the same enemy on a dozen battlefields, you won't stand a chance of winning until you understand that fact and go after the root cause.
  - dalmo3 7mo ago
    Because enshittification wouldn't happen in a centrally-planned economy? What's the basis of this?
    - sham1 7mo ago
      This feels to me like a false dichotomy. The only alternative to the current way of doing things isn't a planned command economy, no matter what "libertarians" or tankies might argue.
      - panick21_ 7mo ago
        Then explain how it would work exactly. Anything other then capitalism with slightly more regulation is just going from the US to Germany. Great, but they have software updates on cars too. If you want to change anything more fundamental, you are going to have to do a planned economy. At best you can say, maybe could be slightly better Germany by having a better political process or something. But even then, software updates in your car are going to be a reality because it solves are problem for manufactures, saves consumers lots of time in many cases and generally the positives outway the negatives. I bet you 100% that in any planned economy OTA updates would still happen. At best we can argue for some better practice about OTA Updates in regards to security and functionality. Maybe forcing manufactures to have a 'security only' feed an a 'feature feed'.