• deejay4am@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    2 years ago

    Heated seats you have to pay to unlock (but regardless have to pay to haul around) is the most late stage capitalist brainworm bullshit.

    It should be illegal, and/or it should NOT be illegal to hack around the paywall if you purchase the car.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    2 years ago

    The feature isn’t worth $15,000. They charge you that much to send a small, very specific sequence of bits to your car. That’s what you’re paying for because the feature’s already built in.

    • realbaconator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah anyone who’s familiar with the “software upgrade” know’s it’s just overpaying to be a beta tester for their self-driving. What’s more; people who don’t buy it still get auto-steer (lane maintain, car pacing & cruise control) which is what most would use self-driving for anyways. Aside from that, if it runs on code there will always be a way to beat it. People have been ripping .DLL files for enterprise software for decades that cost as much or more than this overpriced “feature.”

    • Bigmouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 years ago

      Good luck on that. The EU has an incredibly powerful Automobile lobby. Many companies, particularly in germany, are eyeing “DLC cars” hungrily.

  • billbasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    2 years ago

    If you buy the hardware you should be able to turn it on. Jail breaking is fully moral in that situation.

    The self driving is software that uses the hardware so should be paid for IMO. You should also be able to use your own software that’s open source on the hardware you own

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      Running your own software to control the automotive part of a car is probably not legal, since I assume the process of making a car street legal should requires an audit of said system.

      Hmm, well, I hope it is the case, anyway.

      • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 years ago

        Any software that passes whatever local safety standard should be installable (or software that doesn’t pass if the car is not being used on public roads).

        Otherwise the car is not being sold, it’s being rented, and all the advertising that says anything about buying is fraud.

        • induna_crewneck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          Good luck getting a homebrew OS for tesla cars to pass those tests. I don’t even know how that would work. I’d be curious to know what would happen if you would try to register and get a car through the TÜV for example that runs on custom firmware.

          • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            It’s similarly hard to make an airbag or seat belt, but you can still undo the bolt without the manufacturer in another country bricking your car without any considerations of your local laws.

          • Mindlight@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Does Teslas still have a disclaimer that the self-driving features aren’t self-driving and that if the driver is using the self driving features and there is an accident Tesla can’t be held liable?

              • Mindlight@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                So it doesn’t matter whatever you’re using Teslas or a 3rd party software since you, as the driver, are responsible for the outcome.

                • Jilanico@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  If it was a matter of installing software on a laptop or phone, I’d agree with you, but installing software on a vehicle that can run over people is another matter, disclaimer or not.

                  Just like some cars are street legal and some cars are not, some software should be street legal and some software not. If the 3rd party software has been cleared by regulators for your Tesla, I’d be fine with it.

  • Burninator05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 years ago

    … paying or subscribing to a service are becoming increasingly popular in the auto industry.

    No paying or subscribing to a service (of which I would argue none of the thing paywalled in a car are a sevice) are becoming increasingly popular for auto makers. I don’t know of anyone who is interested in paying for features forever.

  • (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    While I dislike this model I understand it, in the past sometimes you needed to pay more for that brand new stereo or AC. What I find it annoying is that you bought the car with the upgrades already on it, just need to open the paywall.

    And at the end of the day they won’t put it from their pocket, or you already paid for them or the people that bought the upgrades are financing the unused ones from others.

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 years ago

      It really fucks with the resale market, too. As is the intention. People will be getting used cars and being told they need to pay full, new price to unlock features.

      More reasons to want right to repair and adversarial interoperability. So that if Tesla refuses to reasonable implement features that the hardware fully supports, a third-party can do it instead.

  • Tygr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Wouldn’t software tampering the full self-driving package give deniability to Tesla for your accident that killed someone?

  • Ertebolle@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I dunno, this is great but it’s also entirely possible Tesla retaliates by making your car ‘accidentally’ crash or something like that.

      • _haha_oh_wow_@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Are you talking about the toddler targeting vehicular assault package? That is some top notch programming, if we ever go to war with little kids, you can bet the DOD will buy up a fleet of Teslas in a heartbeat!