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

Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 555 posts

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#121

Post by BanazirGalbasi »

ajross wrote: post #108
GiorgioG wrote: post #2

It won’t be my interest in saving the planet that stops me from buying cars, it’ll be bullshit like this. I want to own my car. I don’t want it to be connected (beyond acting as a hotspot) to the internet or to some central service. Have we not learned anything?

> I don’t want [my car] to be connected [...] to the internet Really? No remote access, security notifications, navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes? No open source location analytic API? I mean, I'm sure there's some bad stuff that happens too. But this is very much throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I won't t…

Why would I want remote access to my car? Why should my car need security notifications? And if I'm charging, I can use that as an opportunity to get out of the car, or catch up on notifications I've ignored for the last several hours. Every routine fix that I've seen on a car has been something mechanical, which either I can do myself (e.g. oil and bulb changes) or I have to take into a shop anyway.

The only semi-valid reason for connectivity here is navigation, but even then I'm already paying for a connection for my phone so I'll use that instead. I don't even want a big screen on the dashboard anyway, which means having navigation software built-in would be a worse experience than using what I already have.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#122

Post by MisterBastahrd »

atlantic wrote: post #111
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

If you don't like it, just don't buy cars whose performance is artificially limited. Let the market decide the issue.

That's nice, until the entire industry decides that this needs to happen. This is why the mystical "free market" is only "free" for corporations.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#123

Post by iainmerrick »

ajross wrote: post #108
GiorgioG wrote: post #2

It won’t be my interest in saving the planet that stops me from buying cars, it’ll be bullshit like this. I want to own my car. I don’t want it to be connected (beyond acting as a hotspot) to the internet or to some central service. Have we not learned anything?

> I don’t want [my car] to be connected [...] to the internet Really? No remote access, security notifications, navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes? No open source location analytic API? I mean, I'm sure there's some bad stuff that happens too. But this is very much throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I won't t…

Most of that you get better with your phone; the rest, I don't have, don't feel the lack, and wouldn't think to look for in a new car.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#124

Post by fwungy »

barbazoo wrote: post #50
userbinator wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have we not learned anything? The "you will own nothing" advocates will continue to keep pushing for stuff like this.

> The "you will own nothing" advocates will continue to keep pushing for stuff like this. Who are these "advocates"?

The original phrase was coined by the World Economic Forum. What the critics leave out is that the WEF was saying that people would be happier not owning anything.

>You will own nothing and you will be happy.

Alternatively it could have a darker interpretation: you will be a slave and you will be happy, because that's all you're going to get.

I suppose it depends if you look at the WEF as a benevolent institution looking to benefit humanity or very rich people looking to solidify their own position at any cost.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#125

Post by yamtaddle »

windowshopping wrote: post #91
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

It's interesting how it takes reading someone else's writing to realize how little profanity adds to the substance of a comment. You never realize it when it's your own comment.

It adds the substance of communicating to me that the poster's about as fed up as I am with treating the "dickfucks" with respect. On this and several other market-regulation topics.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#126

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

beerpls wrote: post #118
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

Thank you for being a voice of righteousness in a sea of simps. It’s hard to tell on this site, are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills? Even with what you said there are still so many people defending this behavior. The world is full of weak and/or deceitful people.

>are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills?

I think a lot of people defend this because they themselves work for tech companies who's products or services are also profitable due to some for of rent-seeking which ensure great profits and wages that wouldn't be possible otherwise because let's face it, the most profitable SW companies where the HN audience most likely works at, don't sell you a lifetime license to their product on a CD for a flat fee anymore like it's the '90s but are most likely subscription-ware.

It is indeed a bit hypocritical to criticize automakers for doing the same thing that beloved tech companies are doing which is what makes them so profitable and yet nobody bats an eye.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#127

Post by ernesth »

rrgok wrote: post #77

The next logical step is for CPU, in hardware you physically own, to have subscription that will unlock more cores. Imagine owning an Apple M2 device that requires an extra 30$ a month subscription to unlock 2 more cores. I hope I'm joking....

IBM has been doing it for years: they sell you a multi-core machine but you only can use 1 core. You can pay to use more than one as you need: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/power9?topic=environment-capacit...

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#129

Post by yamtaddle »

ajross wrote: post #104
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…

> RENT FUCKING SEEKING. That's not rent seeking. Rent seeking is when an entity has control of something that can't be traded in a liquid/efficient way (this part is important!) and tries to leverage this uncompetetive situation into revenue that isn't subject to market forces. Cars are pretty liquid. Subscription products are very liquid. If people don't want this they won't buy it. If they don't want cars with this…

They're charging extra for something that would cost them nothing, deny them the use of nothing, require none of their resources, if you could use it without paying them. I can see an angle for calling that rent-seeking.

Re: Mercedes EVs can go faster for $60 a month

#130

Post by bentcorner »

ajross wrote: post #108
GiorgioG wrote: post #2

It won’t be my interest in saving the planet that stops me from buying cars, it’ll be bullshit like this. I want to own my car. I don’t want it to be connected (beyond acting as a hotspot) to the internet or to some central service. Have we not learned anything?

> I don’t want [my car] to be connected [...] to the internet Really? No remote access, security notifications, navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes? No open source location analytic API? I mean, I'm sure there's some bad stuff that happens too. But this is very much throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I won't t…

Security notifications is probably the only thing on that list that actually requires internet (or some kind of connectivity). Even remote start doesn't need to be internet connected.

Everything else can be solved using your phone/tablet.

And yes, it undoubtedly would be a nicer experience to have navigation done entirely on the in-car display. But IMO in-car displays and interfaces are universally terrible.

Post reply on HN