Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 213 posts

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#31

Post by RUG3Y »

snowwrestler wrote: post #20

The erosion of the concept of "ownership" continues. Traditionally, goods are subject to the first sale doctrine--once I buy a shirt, it's my property, and if I want to sell or rent it, I can. It's mine. But software is licensed. When I buy a piece of software, I'm actually paying for a limited and revokable right to use someone else's property. And now companies are putting software into more and more goods. As soft…

It's our responsibility to choose and support products that respect our rights and empower us. Vote with your feet.

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#33

Post by moon_of_moon »

How would this work?

"Dear Customer - your usage patterns shows that you are using your car for ride sharing revenue. Please stop it."

"Dear Customer - Second warning."

"Dear Customer - we have disabled important safety updates for your car, because it looks like you are ride sharing for profit. You might be a real estate agent with irregular driving patterns for legitimate reasons but we cannot confirm that. Sucks to be you."

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#34

Post by hood_syntax »

RUG3Y wrote: post #31
snowwrestler wrote: post #20

The erosion of the concept of "ownership" continues. Traditionally, goods are subject to the first sale doctrine--once I buy a shirt, it's my property, and if I want to sell or rent it, I can. It's mine. But software is licensed. When I buy a piece of software, I'm actually paying for a limited and revokable right to use someone else's property. And now companies are putting software into more and more goods. As soft…

It's our responsibility to choose and support products that respect our rights and empower us. Vote with your feet.

I agree with this, and I try to follow it as much as possible, but it can be hard to find companies that produce those products.

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#35

Post by MatthewMcDonald »

simonlc wrote: post #22
MatthewMcDonald wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more appropriate to model: "Can afford a Tesla" "Wants to monetize Tesla when not using it"

I doubt driving for Uber will earn you a net profit, considering the millage on your car.

I'm not familiar enough with the pricing details to disagree with you, but it's worth mentioning that a Model S can be used for the UberLux service (~3x more expensive than UberX).

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#36

Post by sokoloff »

simonlc wrote: post #22
MatthewMcDonald wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more appropriate to model: "Can afford a Tesla" "Wants to monetize Tesla when not using it"

I doubt driving for Uber will earn you a net profit, considering the millage on your car.

Uber pays over a dollar per mile for UberX. The GSA rate for autos now is $0.54/mile, which is intended to be an "all-in" figure for operating costs.

I think there's room for profiting from driving Uber. (I also agree that it's a good bit less than it appears based on the cash-in and cash-out every week.)

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#37

Post by fucking_tragedy »

RUG3Y wrote: post #31
snowwrestler wrote: post #20

The erosion of the concept of "ownership" continues. Traditionally, goods are subject to the first sale doctrine--once I buy a shirt, it's my property, and if I want to sell or rent it, I can. It's mine. But software is licensed. When I buy a piece of software, I'm actually paying for a limited and revokable right to use someone else's property. And now companies are putting software into more and more goods. As soft…

It's our responsibility to choose and support products that respect our rights and empower us. Vote with your feet.

Voting with your feet/dollar is hardly an option when everyone else in town is doing the same thing. Voting for representatives that will enact legislation to change the situation is still an option.

Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network

#38

Post by elros »

RUG3Y wrote: post #31
snowwrestler wrote: post #20

The erosion of the concept of "ownership" continues. Traditionally, goods are subject to the first sale doctrine--once I buy a shirt, it's my property, and if I want to sell or rent it, I can. It's mine. But software is licensed. When I buy a piece of software, I'm actually paying for a limited and revokable right to use someone else's property. And now companies are putting software into more and more goods. As soft…

It's our responsibility to choose and support products that respect our rights and empower us. Vote with your feet.

Sure, granted, and I'm sure GP agrees. However this major subtlety between licensed and purchased goods could not be clear to the layman, so it's also arguably our responsibility as technical types to elucidate the difference.
Post reply on HN