assholes
this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
782 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
58613 readers
4140 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"you wouldn't download a car" was prophetic
these car companies oh my god 🤦
So...who is making the open source car?
Someone very rich who doesn't feel the need to get arbitrarily richer.
So no one.
There is no need for the internet to use remote start
I use mine all the time. I have about a 1/4 mile walk to get to my car, I like to start it in winter to heat up, or summer to cool down before I get to it.
It’s a luxury, but one I enjoy.
Some people live in these tall things that are called, "not a single family house" and so starting the car from up there you would need some way to communicate to the car, keyfob ranges are limited.
Do you usually start the car from your bedroom?
In the winter I would, yes, if my car had it, sitting into a cold car in the morning fucking sucks, starting it 10 minutes before take off and have it defrost, and turn on seat/steering wheel heating would be the fucking tits, and I don't live in a house so might not even have a line of sight on my car so keyfob wouldn't be enough
It's a good thing we invented remote start at the same time as the car itself, I can't imagine the horror of only operating a motor vehicle I'm next to (let alone touching)
What are you talking about?
Remote start of any kind is a luxury and it's wild to me that someone would defend internet car controls as any way important or even desirable. That's what I'm talking about. Physical keys work totally fine and add like two seconds of time to the process.
Remote start of any kind is a luxury
Who said it was not?
Physical keys work totally fine and add like two seconds of time to the process.
YOu know except for the fucking case I described where you don't live in a house so the keyfob might not reach so you need some other way to connect to the car to be able to remote start it.
it’s wild to me that someone would defend internet car controls as any way important or even desirable.
not my fault you struggle with social skills and can't relate to other people
Having a car without internet connectivity would be a feature for privacy minded consumers
Usually this stuff is aftermarket. Sounds like a good business plan
Why does the car need an internet connection? Rather get a car from 2005-2010 that doesn't connect to the internet, more have a stupid subscription.
Yep, I got a very basic trim 2010-2015 car. I think it's about as new as you can get without really bad enshitification. The upper trims even had some of the gimmicks and techy stuff. I loath to think if the day this car dies. I may only ride my bike from that point on.
Preach. Got a benz from 2009 that has all the features I want (heated seats, automatic climate control, rain sensor, etc) and none of the things I don't want (remote connectivity, spyware, subscriptions).
Beginnt dein Name mit p?
Nein?
Well, crap! Was seriously looking at the CX50. I’m not paying monthly to use stuff that’s already equipped in the car. Just madness.
Love the CX-50..
I acknowledge the cell connectivity in the car costs Mazda money to keep running. Most cars with that kind of connectivity charge for it. But, I think 10/month is too much.
Car manufacturers are being so blatant about this stuff. It goes to show that they know how slow regulation is and they can milk it for all its worth.
nope nope nope.
An API is not copyrightable 🤔
it seems everything is copyrightable if you are rich enough
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_Inc.
When two very rich entities argued about it it was determined you can't copyright API.
You're assuming the law matters when a company can hire a team of lawyers and a solo dev can't
Sure, but if you're not rich and they sue you, you loose. No matter what, you'll run out of money before successfully using that case.
And if they want to attack car owners for doing what they want with their own car let's go to court and see how fast their bullshit holds up.
Can't wait for the inevitable "You don't actually own the car, you just have a lifetime licence/lease to use the car"
Frankly, for a lot of places, I don't know that would be such a bad idea.
Now doing the same for land, that would be bad...
That's being normalized right now with video games. It'll happen with other things soon enough too.
Doesn't stop companies from sending bogus DMCA takedowns to sites like GitHub.
There are no penalties for filling a bogus DMCA takedown and the legal cost for restoring the content falls on the victim of such a takedown: the DMCA legislation was designed exactly for it to be used as Mazda and many other use it against individuals and small companies who can't spend thousands of dollars fighting bogus takedowns.
There are penalties. They require proof of intent, however. So there are no penalties.
Why is there no big alternative hosted outside of the US where your DMCA does not apply?
There are other centralised code hosting services, for example Codeberg, but they are equally scared of any legal action even when it doesn't directly apply.
Subscription services or software restricted features for cars should just be outlawed entirely.
Nobody likes these, if someone is willing to deal with a subscription product then they can do that aftermarket. The car itself should never come with something that will require recurring payments.
load more comments
(24 replies)
view more: next ›