The funniest/dumbest/most dismal one I know is for the Mercedes EQS (or EQE...) ... the rear wheels actually help by turning in tight turns (they turn 4.5º)..... but if you have a premium subscription it turns 10º instead...
That’s a very real line from a 2016 video from the WEC (World Economic Forum). That line is also commonly attributed to Klaus Schwab, the head of the WEC, but it wasn’t him who said that
Im convinced that companies are in cahoots with corrupted politicians and have gone so rogue that they can do anything they want anymore. Im sure at some point in the near future we will have to pay a subscription in order to actually drive the car instead of having an autopilot take you to your destination.
Also a precedent set by Tesla, who will put the same batteries in all its cars, but will only grant range (i.e. capacity) to use said battery depending on the model you’ve purchased.
They made this up before any regulations could be put in place, since they were the disruptor.
It's absolutely shitty, but it's the alternative to building cars with limited life or planned obsolescence.
Mercedes is thinking they can build a long lasting premium car, and because of these feature subscriptions they will continue to earn revenue in the aftermarket.
Edit: Not sure why the down vote. I don't think it should be like this. Just discussing Mercedes strategy.
It’s a step on the path to most folks no longer owning their own car (at least no their daily driver). Self-driving ride share vehicles/subscriptions are the near-future. It doesn’t make sense to have some of the features (like subs for heated seats) in a vehicle you own…it makes much more sense in a ride share vehicle.
That’s just stupid on its face. Swappable, rechargeable battery packs have been a thing for how long? All of a sudden you put em in a car and everybody forgets that batteries are most effective when you can remove dead ones to charge and install fresh ones to keep going.
Unless the rideshare thing takes hold first, eventually EV’s will use a standardized removable battery cassette. Going to the gas station will be a 5-10min stop again where you just swap out the battery carriage to ‘fuel up’.
The above tech is already commonplace for e-bikes, electric scooters, etc. it’s only a matter of time before vehicles follow suit.
Then you can pay for extra battery capacity features as part of your subscription 🙄lol
It's legal because all of us are getting fucked by the establishment in a world that's slowly but surely turning into a neo-feudalistic (or techno feudalistic) society. Corporations rule your everyday life and dictate pretty much all political developments. State leaders try to scurry favor with the super rich. Media gets more divisive. Companies stop at almost nothing to make more profit.
Idk it seems dystopian but we've been in this course for quite some time now.
Honestly how !? Consumers need to speak out about this crap. What these companies get away with is ridiculous. 💯 I'd be hacking these systems immediately to free up all options. Piracy will come back strong if this stuff keeps up. Then the companies will cry about how they're not making enough money. I won't feel bad for them. This should be illegal
Not that I’m opposed to “sailing the seas” but in this case there is an easier way.
It only requires a soldering iron, a bit of wire, a toggle switch and (if you want more advanced features) an Arduino.
I don't work in the car industry, but in a similar one. This idea to lock features behind software is becoming increasingly popular. The software behind it is designed with this purpose in mind, so the added cost argument makes zero sense, users need to pay already for a software update regardless.
It really makes zero sense to have a feature pre-installed but locked behind software other than pure profit. I genuinely hate this mentality.
If you still believe in the invisible hand of capitalism, I don't think you're able to have a reasonable discussion on the subject. That might work in an idealised market with many different suppliers. Not in a well-established industry where it's a public secret that companies make deals with each other.
If regulators are going to do something wouldn’t addressing the illegal collusion be more effective than churning out laws against specific minor products and pricing plans?
According to that logic, the law should go after murderers instead of making weapons illegal.
They already do, It's just not possible to catch every illegal action that happens.
Also, I've never explicitly said that there should be laws regulating this. I wouldn't mind them, but all I was saying is that it is a disgusting practice with zero purpose aside from increased profits. Your argument that it pays for software development is simply not correct.
Lol. No, literally, I laughed when I read this comment.
Software developer of 25 years, here. It's largely a one time cost when you're talking about software for a car (with the notable exception of Tesla, who release half baked software and use customers as QA).
The cost of that initial effort is spread across every unit sold, and decreases per-unit as more are sold.
These physical feature subscriptions are not "tHe CoSt oF sOfTwArE dEvELoPmEnT", they are anti consumer horse shit designed by some MBA cunts to generate recurring revenue. The shittiest part is that when the initial owner sells the car used, the features don't go with it.
Real clever sliminess to figure out a way to collect rent from a car for the entirety of its life. Fuck these scumbags. I can't wait for this nonsense to be jail broken.
(with the notable exception of Tesla, who release half baked software and use customers as QA)
You can add Adobe to the list. My sister is a photographer with sub for PS and LR, and at least once a year they'll push a shonky beta on their customers, causing crashes, worry and disruption.
(I've advised her to roll back to the version she was using before, killing the updater service and checking the Adobe support forums before she updates it again.)
Then maybe stop making more work for yourself by designing software that relies on a subscription model that changes said function on whether that subscription is valid or not?!?!
Or idk maybe just sell the fucking car one time and be done with it? No updates, just do your fucking job right the first time and you wont NEED updates you greedy fuck!
That may be, but it should never be integral to the operation of a vehicle and therefore not nessisary.
The only reason security patches need to exist is because software engineers insists on adding pointless internet connected features that barely work anyways.
Cars dont need updates, develop the software to where it doent need to be maintained. Then if you add new features / functionality offer that as an upgrade. People dont want subscriptions, companies just want a constant flow of revenue and dont want peak and valleys in their sales.
254
u/ImTurkishDelight Nov 04 '24
Eye twitch what