▲First you have the advocates that want technology to make things "safer", then you have the people who want to use the technologies as luxuries thus being able to charge more. Now you have the people who want to use the technologies to monitor you and use that to sell your driving data to whomever is willing to pay. Everyone wants this except drivers.
reply▲Some cars and trucks from the last 40 years were built incredibly well and when a specific vehicle was maintained well and not abused can provide very good options vs new super tech heavy vehicles. I have a Ford OBS truck from the 90s and I adore it. The only thing automatic on it is the transmission. Manual everything including windows. Considering a 2016 AMG GT as my next purchase for the same reason (different scale obviously). Just remove the GPS / cellular antenna and its pretty disconnected.
reply▲digimon_monday1 month ago
[-] The goal is to proliferate DRM to all consumer products and to all economic exchanges. Just like Content-Centric Networking (CCN) will replace TCP/IP the digitalization of our lives will make it easy for banks to forecast liquidity.
reply▲Because the primary beneficiary of “smart” devices is the company, not the users
reply▲BMW had a heated seat subscription. This example is enough to explain why we have “smart cars”
reply▲expedition321 month ago
[-] Most people in my country buy used cars and they drive them for 10 years. Gotta wonder if they will still be getting software updates or if it will be like the infamous smart TV.
reply▲It was a slow progression. The screen was put there for sat-nav. That was a big seller. Then you wanted backup cameras. That was a big seller. And then you wanted hands-free Bluetooth. That was important, too. And then you wanted voice navigation (which never worked) to accompany the hands-free Bluetooth. And then you wanted CarPlay to listen to audiobooks. And then you wanted bigger screens to show all of this. Finally, you're complaining that all this technology is too much? Why did you ask for it?
reply▲I was alright with the backup cameras and an AUX cable (Bluetooth sucked for at least a decade and not owning your media will forever suck)
Now I can stream video from my phone to my car's screen, but can't have the phone ask the car to warm-up, that'll be 30 bucks a month. Things took a drastic corporate turn.
I have listened to audio books since car radios with cassette slots exist, predating CarPlay in decades.
Still no CarPlay here.
The machine has to expand.
reply▲maybe if we keep buying them, they'll change their mind and roll it back
reply▲I loath my smart car * , it goes....away, and the funds will build a pure mechanical do the thing mobile...unless(Canada here) the Chinese electrics are truely simple and clean, then one of those.
* honda crv, easy to see why honda is in trouble
if we dont want it we need to vote with your wallet then, buy a slate truck when they come out. if you dont want a pickup thing buy it anyway so they eventually make a car in the shape you like when they learn there is a huge market for simple cars.
(yes i know its not as dumb a 90s toyota or whatever, but its the dumbest you can probaby get that is ev* and complies with modern regulations)
*not from some ecovangalist pov but because by almost every measure of what a car needs to do for most people ev is better at that, but thats an argument for another thread.
We are getting them because someone else asked. Someone whose opinion, unlike ours matters. The politicians.
reply▲I'd also toss in that it feels like the consumer demand for smart cars is just as manufactured as the demand for "smart" components (not limited to but including AI features) in everything. It makes products less reliable over time, and pushes upgrades / replacement faster (and opens the door to subscriptions being added on already-overpriced products).
Not everything needs a touchscreen.
this is what happens when corpos pander to shareholders.
reply▲The politicians are the people being asked, and secondarily a convenient scapegoat for the blowback. As long as they're the ones being blamed, nothing will change despite the politicians being replaced over the years.
reply▲It's definitely not because it's a conspiracy. Like, we use that word to shut down any criticism and thought that is unliked and against the social norms/times. It's not a conspiracy that this monitoring and surveillance has been said to be not because we don't want them, because the unaccountable leaders at the top want them.
reply▲Number goes up. Business is self interest. Opposite of government. Its almost pure narcissism if not sociopathy.
reply