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

New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 175 posts

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#161

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

frumper wrote: post #140
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Super Cruise, which is arguably better than what Tesla has, costs $25/mo. Tesla’s $200 monthly price is probably there to make the $15k upfront price look like a better value, for people who don’t compare to the competition. Tesla seems to have a lot of pricing power because people really want a Tesla in particular.

Super cruise requires a very high end trim to even purchase the super cruise package. You can get FSD on the lowest model 3 specs. FSD is ridiculously priced though, it’s just not a reasonable comparison on the monthly fee.

Model 3 with Enhanced Autopilot: 53k

Model 3 with FSD: 62k

Bolt EUV with Super Cruise: 38k

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#162

Post by YeBanKo »

jasonsb wrote: post #86
mission_failed wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I challenge you to find a single example of introducing subscriptions reducing costs

Driver assistance systems for example. I don't want to pay for those features, but if I don't get them when I configure the car it's going to be much harder to sell the car a few years later. If those features can be activated later on, I won't lose money when I'll sell my car. So it reduces the initial cost of the car and then I also get a better resale value.

You enable them as an upgrade, for additional fee. Just like you update maps on rarely used in-car navigation system.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#163

Post by YeBanKo »

paxys wrote: post #110
travisporter wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first sentence is interesting. If government represents the will of the people then it would not be overreach.

If a government is acting beyond its constitutionally-mandated boundaries then it is absolutely overreach, regardless of whether 1% or 99% of people support its decisions.

Constitutionally mandated boundaries are coming from the people. So if 99% support it, then it is not an overreach.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#165

Post by diebeforei485 »

lamontcg wrote: post #160
alistairSH wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Road sign designs don't change very often. No way consumers should be forced into a perpetual monthly subscription for something that probably needs updates every 5 years or so. Not sure how it should work long-term, but a monthly subscription for a mature system sounds wrong to me. If the FSD relies on published maps to work, it's already doomed. Road layouts change way too frequently (sometimes temporary, for const…

It also shouldn't really matter what kind of vehicle are out there. If I see some weird looking car I've never seen before, I just treat it like every other car.

Except a driver assistance system might think it's a plastic bag or a mirage and not a car at all.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#166

Post by diebeforei485 »

fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #134
celestialcheese wrote: post #80

This is a great step. Subscriptions errode first sale protections by subscription-gating physical objects, allowing OEMs a work-around to first-sale doctrine. If you buy something, you should own it, and be able to fix it, scrap it, re-sell it, whatever you want. It's interesting NJ included self-driving in the subscription ban. These require significant overhead in compute, engineering resources and greatly impact s…

Super Cruise, which is arguably better than what Tesla has, costs $25/mo. Tesla’s $200 monthly price is probably there to make the $15k upfront price look like a better value, for people who don’t compare to the competition. Tesla seems to have a lot of pricing power because people really want a Tesla in particular.

Paying monthly is also a good option for people who want to try it out, or for people who only want it when they have long road trips planned.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#167

Post by diebeforei485 »

dahdum wrote: post #97
leetcrew wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The heated seats example is a great one. There is no reason for this not be a one-time charge. if you're referring to BMW, the heated seats are still available as a one time charge. they're just also available as a subscription if you didn't option then upfront. heated seats seem like a weird fit for the subscription model, but as long as the upfront purchase option is reasonably priced, I don't really see the issu…

The issue is you already paid for the heating element in the seats when you bought the car, and you are driving it around as dead weight (however small). You own the heater outright, they are gatekeeping your ability to use it.

This is also true of CPU's, GPU's, etc etc that have cores disabled.

Sometimes they are are disabled because they failed tests, but other times they are disabled to fulfill demand in a different segment.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#168

Post by diebeforei485 »

neogodless wrote: post #10

> if an automaker or other associated party can prove that it costs money to maintain the feature and/or service in question, then it'd be legally allowed. This would include services like OnStar and such. While I don't disagree with the exception here, I think they should outlaw mandatory subscriptions... like OnStar, which GM has started to add to most of their cars. It's not in the MSRP, but it's a required cost a…

> if an automaker [...] can prove

What is the standard of proof? And how is maintenance defined? If you haven't released an update in over a year, is that acceptable?

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#169

Post by imglorp »

teruakohatu wrote: post #137
alistairSH wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assistance systems like Honda, Subaru, Toyota and others offer have no ongoing costs. The systems are static - the only updates would be TSBs or recalls. An actual self-drove system should eventually get to that point. We only see frequent software updates today because the systems are barely more then public betas.

> The systems are static ... We only see frequent software updates today because the systems are barely more then public betas. No absolutely not. FSD models are going to need continuous updates. All real-world models exhibit "model drift". Over time most models perform less well. Real world models are monitored and retrained when needed. Example would be when a city, state or country changes a road sign or introduce…

Nobody's FSD can depend on map data for road signs since those can change by the hour; eg road out, construction, etc. Vision for signs is probably fine when fused with map data. But more generally, there are all kinds of road situations that need a general solution and not a map one.

Re: New Jersey legislators aim to ban most in-car subscriptions

#170

Post by BFLpL0QNek »

This is fantastic, I only hope it actually happens and other jurisdictions follow.

KTM motorcycles owned by Pierer mobility, a 1.7 billion dollar company have just started pulling this nonsense.

Their latest motorcycle has “Demo mode”. Demo mode means when you purchase the motorcycle it works for 1500km then you get locked out of functionality that is built in and worked at time of purchase. You only get the previous built in functionality back if you pay KTM more money for a software key to unlock it again.

https://www.motorcyclenews.com/news/new-bikes/ktm-890-advent...

Post reply on HN