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

Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

image-ppubs.uspto.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 93 posts

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#31

Post by dmitrygr »

selcuka wrote: post #22

From Ubik [1], by Philip K. Dick: The door refused to open. It said, "Five cents, please." He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. "I'll pay you tomorrow," he told the door. Again it remained locked tight. "What I pay you," he informed it, "is in the nature of a gratuity; I don't have to pay you." "I think otherwise," the door said. "Look in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt." ...h…

I read the book because I saw this quote. This quote is at best tangential to the story in the book. The book is much better than this quote would let on.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#32

Post by mberning »

Financing is a cancer upon many industries, and cars are no exception. If we really cared about poor people we would seriously reform the dealer system, outlaw predatory sales and lending tactics, and seriously curtail the parameters on auto loans. I think limiting the term on loans for new cars to 5 years would be a good start. It would eliminate a lot of foolish purchases and auto makers would be forced to offer more affordable vehicles.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#33

Post by Nextgrid »

vuln wrote: post #23
bobthebuilders wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have that though, it's called repossession. This feature just removes the human barrier and makes it vulnerable to hacking.

It removes the risk of a human getting hurt or injured. I can't be the only one that's seen repos gone bad. I'm not talking about that dumb, scripted _reality_ show either

The human getting hurt or injured is a necessary evil against abuse and puts a limit on how unreasonable or petty the lender can be (as the risk of repos is ultimately baked into the commission charged by the goons, thus not making it profitable to repo for minor things).

Same reason why people are generally much more civil in real life than online - the risk of being punched in the face keeps everyone in check and assigns a real cost to assholic behavior.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#35

Post by JohnFen »

SoftTalker wrote: post #27
xphos wrote: post #15

The problem with this is that I think it plays on good nature of people. Ford right now says it's for leased cars but it feels like a step to normalize restricting and milking people later on. It also open a whole new attack vector these companies are not ready to secure

Yep. Like software, car manufacturers want a car to be something you subscribe to rather than buy. Also lets them continue to receive income from secondhand sales or ownership changes.

This is the biggest reason why I have zero interest in owning a new car.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#36

Post by incompatible »

steponlego wrote: post #19

Buying a new car's pretty dumb, but leasing? LOL get outta here.

Sounds like if you buy a used car in future, you'll have to worry about which of the previous owners can still tamper with it.

Edit: previous owners and script kiddies, since it probably stopped getting security updates 5 years ago.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#38

Post by flangola7 »

bumby wrote: post #5
gleenn wrote: post #2

One more disgusting show of corporations doing the wrong thing in the name of profits.

I know this is going to be an unpopular take, but why should a person be allowed to maintain use of an item they don’t own and are delinquent on? The unpopular part is that this just removes some friction from an already existing process. This is assuming there are the appropriate regulations in place to notify and give a reasonable option to rectify the payment issue, but isn’t this exactly how we deal with stuff fr…

There's an inherent fundamental creepy grossness to punishing someone for misbehavior by pushing a button from afar.

If we had an all pervasive surveillance system that instantly reported any crime it would be bad for the same reason. A world where power is wielded opaquely by distant controllers in a unilateral and instantaneous manner is not a world we want to live in, and it cultivates an even worse world the longer it exists.

Rules and laws that might be fair and just when they were first written can become very unjust and dystopian when the ability to enforce them dramatically increases.

Your argument is the same one made for justifying credit systems, especially ones like the social credit system enforced by the CCP. "If you wanted to have access to the tram you should have just been a better person and earned it."

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#39

Post by steponlego »

incompatible wrote: post #36
steponlego wrote: post #19

Buying a new car's pretty dumb, but leasing? LOL get outta here.

Sounds like if you buy a used car in future, you'll have to worry about which of the previous owners can still tamper with it. Edit: previous owners and script kiddies, since it probably stopped getting security updates 5 years ago.

I've already decided my next car will be something built before 1984.

Re: Ford's new patent proposes a way for banks to disable features on leased cars

#40

Post by JohnFen »

Nextgrid wrote: post #25
legitster wrote: post #14

So given that they have the legal right to come to your house and forcibly take a leased car from you if you miss payments, a few nag features honestly seem like an improvement. I would just want to be sure as hell that a car I own outright wouldn't even have the hardware available to do such a thing.

Problem is that it makes it so easy that eventually we'll end up in a world where you can't outright own a car and everyone is stuck in perpetual leases. This already happened with the software industry with most stuff nowadays being a subscription.

> This already happened with the software industry with most stuff nowadays being a subscription.

It hasn't really happened yet. There is still plenty of software you can own. None of the software I use is subscription-based, and there no software that I lack.

But yes, this is clearly the direction that software companies want to go, and I think it's important that we reject this.

Post reply on HN