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

Please make a dumb car

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 671 posts

Re: Please make a dumb car

#221

Post by kunai »

otherme123 wrote: post #60
mab122 wrote: post #40

I would recommend checking out Dacia and Lada (coincidentally now both are now under Renault group) https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/our-company/our-brands/dacia... https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/our-company/our-brands/lada/

Lada is known for its low reliability. Dacia seems to be in a more gray area, sometimes scoring well above average, sometimes below. I know someone who had a Lada Niva, and he got stranded because a low quality pipe joint blew. True, the repair was extremely cheap, and it could probably be temporarily repaired with a hose and two zippers. Are you a mechanic that can locate and fix those kind of failures? Then Ladas a…

That's quite interesting, as many of my friends in post-Soviet countries all rave about how you can run Ladas into the dirt and they'll keep running. Luck of the draw perhaps?

Re: Please make a dumb car

#222

Post by BrandoElFollito »

I am in the group of people who think the more electronics, the better (alone in my family). I do not drive much so if the electronics break then never mind (I did not have this happening for 25 years and I was always looking for the most electronics-packed car).

The situation I have today (in France at least) is that I have cars that are full of electronics but the UI is done by the car manufacturer and is horrible.

My dream is to have a car where I would configure my display. In my case that would be a large speed indicator, the distance I can drive with the current gas I have, and a display where bad things would be displayed, as they come.

What I have is a display full of things I completely do not care about. Temperature of the engine? The engine RPM? I completely do not care about these so I would like to get rid of them.

I think however we are very far from that state of bliss.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#223

Post by colejohnson66 »

emptyparadise wrote: post #191
colejohnson66 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because society wants smart TVs. You and a lot of people here don’t, but collectively, people like the idea of having Netflix/Hulu/etc right on their TVs. The cat’s out of the bag now. If you/me want a dumb TV, don’t look at consumer TVs in BestBuy, but expect to be spending over $1000.

Does society really want that or does it not realize that it doesn't have to be this way?

The alternative is a separate box (or something like a Fire Stick). But those became less of a thing once TV manufacturers started implementing them inside the box. And with that, it’s one less thing to buy (which consumers like).

If you tell customers that two TVs are identical except one doesn’t need a dongle for Netflix and is cheaper, they’ll choose the smart one.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#225

Post by kunai »

the_biot wrote: post #192
jve wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some more: > Not to mention the privacy and security concerns. I was dubious the first time I saw a GPS in a car, my mom’s old RX300, about 20 years ago. “Yeah… that’s how they get you,” I thought Well, that reasoning was flawed 20 years ago - GPS means YOU know where you are, not the other way around. There has to be other communication channel for that data to "escape". If your car is data-enabled with SIM card, on…

Yup, and anyone with a heartbeat figured that out at some point in the last 20 years. Yet the article also says > Not having GPS or data (or hidden microphones or cameras) also makes your vehicle feel more private, obviously. I can't exclude the possibility that the author is a moron, but I suspect it's just outrage-bait. Like that whole article.

For vehicles with an inbuilt cellular connection like OnStar or Starlink or any of the myriad of other systems like them, the vehicle will regularly phone home your GPS fix from time to time and there is no way to turn it off. I think this is what the author was trying to get at but phrased it poorly due to it being sort of a technicality.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#226

Post by iso8859-1 »

tpxl wrote: post #211
chakintosh wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a UX designer and I've taken delivery of an XC40 Recharge two months ago, and I've never felt dumber in my life. Don't get me wrong, the car is absolutely wonderful, but the UX is so badly designed it makes me question myself. For starters, I have absolutely no clue how to use the lights, fans and wipers. Just last Saturday, a design oversight (and idiocy from my part) caused me to reverse into another car parked…

> Ø or ⌀ is sometimes also used as a symbol for average value, particularly in German-speaking countries. ("Average" in German is Durchschnitt, directly translated as cut-through.) From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%98 My 2002 VW has the same and it means average over multiple trips. TM probably means this trip? You may have distance of the current trip and average consumption of the current trip (eg 4…

It's not necessarily typeset the same as the letter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diameter#Encodings

Re: Please make a dumb car

#227

Post by causi »

I love having a dumb car. My wife has a modern car and my experience is superior in almost every way. She has to select a temperature and then her AC system blasts her with freezing or burning air until it decides the car is at the desired temperature. Since the selector only goes down to 65, it's impossible to get medium-temperature air on a nippy day. My dash, on the other hand, has a dial that goes from cold to hot, and I can make the air come out at exactly the temperature I want. She has a button to select where the air comes out and has to cycle through the head/foot/defrost/etc options and then wait for a motor to get what she wants. Mine is a mechanical dial I can turn to any setting instantly with no motor to break later on.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#229

Post by kunai »

akeck wrote: post #208
junon wrote: post #5

Same with TVs, please. I can't find a single OLED on the market that doesn't have Android or some shitty Samsung OS installed on it.

Have you looked at NEC commercial displays? For example: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1629170-REG/nec_e438_...

I've considered getting a monitor-style dumb display for my next TV, but the issue is that none of them have an inbuilt TV tuner. I get pretty fantastic reception at my current place in Queens and I'd hate to give up all my OTA channels and switch to something like Sling or YouTube TV, which again just brings back around all of the same pitfalls of a smart TV.

edit: just saw that the one you linked does have a tuner and remote! Brilliant! Might actually end up buying the 32 inch one, it's very reasonably priced.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#230

Post by buscoquadnary »

stillsut wrote: post #179

I went car shopping this year in the new market and found that that if you want more a "dumb" car (UX occurs primarily outside of a touchscreen, no internet, no geolocation) you lose all potential for any nice non-smart features. So no heated/powered seats, no power windows, the material of the interior is refurbished from a spirit airlines airplane, etc. I think manufacturers are hoping that certain aspects of the m…

So I wanted something like this when we were looking for a minivan I don't trust smart devices or vehicles as that's just one more thing that will break.

So we found a van didn't have those things but my wife insisted on BT and a backup cam. So we negotiated with the dealer and they were able to make a deal with us to have their shop install a backup cam and Bluetooth for cost, and we love the van ever since.

My point is that a lot of features can be put in the car after market and you don't have to deal with having to buy the whole upgraded package.

Post reply on HN