"...the street finds its own uses for things"
Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
91–100 of 213 posts
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it does mean that. I can't deny it. But there's no law of physics stating that grandparents are necessarily wrong about everything. I think there's a strong argument to be made that the world really is better when consumers own instead of rent.
I just don't see how this is not ownership. You aren't renting, you're paying a standard purchase price for a good which has some restrictions on its use. Do you think that Tesla should have to make sure that its self-driving software is compatible with every ridesharing app that any random person comes up with? How will that work with liability if somebody sends their self-driving Tesla out to work under a rideshari…
Oh it's not about Tesla building compatibility into their software. If that was necessary, then they wouldn't need to issue a warning to Teslas owners telling them not to drive for Uber/Lyft. What matters is how Tesla will respond when someone inevitably figures out a way to automate Uber/Lyft rides without needing any help from Tesla.
If their response is merely, "Okay, but we're not responsible for damages," then that's great, who cares. But if they take any sort of measure to remotely disable your car or to hamstring your car's software, that would be a very slippery slope to start down.
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just don't see how this is not ownership. You aren't renting, you're paying a standard purchase price for a good which has some restrictions on its use. Do you think that Tesla should have to make sure that its self-driving software is compatible with every ridesharing app that any random person comes up with? How will that work with liability if somebody sends their self-driving Tesla out to work under a rideshari…
I think this really gets to the crux of the conditions that motivate and lead to this sort of product culture: a litigious society. If people feel its desirable to combat this trend, they need to be willing to take more legal responsibility for how they choose to use their products. Otherwise, compromising on full unrestricted ownership is the price paid to cover manufacturers' insurance costs. Note: this isn't absol…
Of course it would be nice if Tesla could just release some sort of API for giving inputs to their cars, coupled with a cast-iron waiver that makes clear that they are not responsible for any consequences or damages.
However, they know that won't hold up in the court of public awareness/opinion, and that if people messing with their Teslas end up causing lots of problems, that legislatures and regulators are more likely to clamp down on self-driving cars generally. Which is the opposite of what they want.
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this really gets to the crux of the conditions that motivate and lead to this sort of product culture: a litigious society. If people feel its desirable to combat this trend, they need to be willing to take more legal responsibility for how they choose to use their products. Otherwise, compromising on full unrestricted ownership is the price paid to cover manufacturers' insurance costs. Note: this isn't absol…
Of course it would be nice if Tesla could just release some sort of API for giving inputs to their cars, coupled with a cast-iron waiver that makes clear that they are not responsible for any consequences or damages. However, they know that won't hold up in the court of public awareness/opinion, and that if people messing with their Teslas end up causing lots of problems, that legislatures and regulators are more lik…
Exactly. This is not something that is solvable by Tesla. It's a deeply rooted societal/legislative/legal-precedence problem.
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just don't see how this is not ownership. You aren't renting, you're paying a standard purchase price for a good which has some restrictions on its use. Do you think that Tesla should have to make sure that its self-driving software is compatible with every ridesharing app that any random person comes up with? How will that work with liability if somebody sends their self-driving Tesla out to work under a rideshari…
Oh it's not about Tesla building compatibility into their software. If that was necessary, then they wouldn't need to issue a warning to Teslas owners telling them not to drive for Uber/Lyft. What matters is how Tesla will respond when someone inevitably figures out a way to automate Uber/Lyft rides without needing any help from Tesla. If their response is merely, "Okay, but we're not responsible for damages," then t…
But saying "Okay, but we're not responsible for damages" will not fly with regulators, legislators, public opinion or the integrity of their brand. If someone modifies their Tesla to accept input from Uber, and Tesla does nothing to stop them, and it causes a crash or other problems, then there'll be headlines ("Tesla self-driving car stops in middle of highway!"), technology-ignorant bureaucrats will clamp down on self-driving cars rather than the modder who caused the problem, and Tesla will have to spend their time and resources dealing with the problems of unapproved inputs, rather than their core tasks. Easier to say, "just don't do it."
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#96You can't do what you want, with a car you buy - even though this does not mean that it will be a lot cheaper :/
I'm more than willing to agree to this concept, if for example, Tesla sends me a new top of the line model 3/s/x every year for around 5k-ish/yr - At that price point, I feel that they can tell me what I can / can't do with "their" car.
However, now, they expect people to pay the full price of the car (anywhere between 31k to almost 150k) and then they get to dictate how I use the car.
Given time, this sort of concept will be applied to everything "we" own. I mean, it's just getting started...
In a few decades, you'd not really own anything - the house you live in, the devices that you use, everything will be a subscription service.
While I look at it as a bleak / weird future, I love SaaS products in general over IaaS products, because it means, I don't have to put effort into stuff. And if that means, I'd never have to fix my car, or my house for example...is that a future the general population will have an issue with?
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#97The 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…
2 weeks ago ACLU organized some actions to change this bill, looks like they failed.
Two weeks is the blink of an eye as far as politics goes. This is going to be years, if not decades, in the making.
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#98The 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 very important to realize that this is a problem that our generation will have to fix, or it will never be fixed. To us, this seems completely unnatural, because we've spent so many years in a world where this type of tech could be truly "owned." However, future generations born in the world of today will be totally accustomed to renting/licensing everything. They won't have the same fiery indignation that we do…
[deleted]
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's our responsibility to choose and support products that respect our rights and empower us. Vote with your feet.
I don't think voting with dollars will do much on its own, for two reasons. 1) Goods powered by software are frequently much better than goods without. I mean, compare a phone with software vs. without. Compare a car with software vs. without. Which one would you rather have? 2) Entire industries are converting to software-based capability. Speaking of phones and cars, try to find a new one these days without softwar…
This is whole reason GNU and Open Source was started. When you have source, you are getting back control of your hardware.
Re: Revenue from self-driving Teslas only allowed through the Tesla Network
#100The 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…
I agree and slightly point out a difference: John Deere tells you what you can't do to your tractor; Tesla Motors tells you what you can't do with your car, which is way worse as the forbidden use is not even diverting the primary use of the car in a way that would cause damages they wouldn't be willing to fix or something. Basically, it's a car manufacturer telling you you can't drive certain people for a certain re…
>John Deere tells you what you can't do to your tractor; Tesla Motors tells you what you can't do with your car
I don't think there's any difference. In order to make your Tesla able to drive for Uber, you're going to need to do something to it. That's what they're prohibiting. If you yourself want to drive for Uber, they are fine with that. But they don't want you modifying the car to drive for Uber by itself.