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

There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 263 posts

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#191

Post by Eelongate »

djbusby wrote: post #170
Eelongate wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is it better to unbundle them? Better... for who? I don't know if it's better for either business or society, but it's better for me because I walk to the grocery store and never take my car. If the price of parking is unbundled from the price of food, then I don't have to pay for something I'm not using.

You hardly do anyway - these costs are aggregated in with existing costs (labor being the largest) across 1000s of products and 10000s of transactions.

If my share of the cost is insignificant, then car drivers shouldn't be too bent out of shape about me not having to pay it.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#192

Post by errcorrectcode »

jandrese wrote: post #76

One of my local shopping complexes had their landlord add tolls to the previously free parking. It was all done via an incredibly shitty app that required you to set up an account and link a credit card to pay. It was slow, hard to use, and crashed a couple of times on me while I was trying to set up the account forcing me to start from scratch. They also had kiosks, but they were not working. I used to go to that sh…

Gotcha! capitalism monetizing everything possible.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#193

Post by userbinator »

Waterluvian wrote: post #15
unicornporn wrote: post #13

Oh, great timing. Just ended a conversation with some friends who had bought a dishwasher. The display for these new machines had been removed, so the only way to tell when the machine was really finished was to... Guess what? Download an app! I suppose I don't need to tell you all the permissions it asked for...

Someone can make an absolute killing by creating an entire brand of “dumb” appliances that Just Work. Make them sensible quality, modern, entirely offline.

There's actually a pretty large market in used appliances that have been refurbished with all-new wear parts (seals, bushings, etc.) I don't think the manufacturers want to create dishwashers and other appliances that last decades anymore.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#194

Post by evenw »

unicornporn wrote: post #13

Oh, great timing. Just ended a conversation with some friends who had bought a dishwasher. The display for these new machines had been removed, so the only way to tell when the machine was really finished was to... Guess what? Download an app! I suppose I don't need to tell you all the permissions it asked for...

The default "happy path" for new Samsung televisions is to be set up through an app. A mandatory step is to allow background location tracking permissions.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#196

Post by errcorrectcode »

dheera wrote: post #116

Just say you don't own a mobile phone and that you're willing to pay parking with cash or credit card. The ball is now in their court to figure out what to do.

I wonder if they'll say "Sorry, we don't accept cash." like some airport curbside baggage services.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#197

Post by taneq »

CircleSpokes wrote: post #154
jdavis703 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of “free” parking is added to the prices the store charges. It’s better to unbundle these costs — an urban parking space can cost over $50,000 to build. That’s not cheap, and will materially impact rents and the price consumers have to pay.

Why is it better to unbundle them? I don't see why a business or person would want the extra hassle of paying for parking separately. Like paying for event parking is one thing but paying to shop at a store is beyond silly. What is next paying to use the drive through?

Because when we unbundle prices like this, the base ‘unbundled’ cost is mysteriously never quite low enough to compensate for the extra costs and everyone ends up paying more in both money and convenience.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#198

Post by errcorrectcode »

rzz3 wrote: post #91
aeharding wrote: post #69

It’s a Trader Joe’s. Why do you need to drive to it in the first place?

Because you don’t want to carry a bunch of groceries for 30 blocks in your hands…?

Even with a large backpack, it's more efficient to drive because 4-5 bags is about the limit of carrying without a vehicle. And when you don't have time to fo 2x/week, either drive or Instacart.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#199

Post by mindslight »

userbinator wrote: post #193
Waterluvian wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone can make an absolute killing by creating an entire brand of “dumb” appliances that Just Work. Make them sensible quality, modern, entirely offline.

There's actually a pretty large market in used appliances that have been refurbished with all-new wear parts (seals, bushings, etc.) I don't think the manufacturers want to create dishwashers and other appliances that last decades anymore.

Care to elaborate? I've got a dream of someday making an aftermarket appliance control board that could be retrofitted into different types of appliances, offering smart features - Free firmware, Free app, automation, etc (obviously without all the surveillance/lockin bullshit). I'd love to hear what else is already out there.

Re: There may be a steep privacy cost if you park here

#200

Post by throwaway55421 »

Ma8ee wrote: post #187
throwaway55421 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's walkable then the car drivers are paying more than they should because rent is bundled in to the prices. There's no free lunch either way here.

That argument doesn't make sense. The car drivers choose themselves to drive to this particular store where you have to pay a premium for the store's location. If they feel punished by having to pay more for a centrally located store even though they have a car and could drive to a less centrally located store, then by all means, they should do that. It's somewhat amazing how entitled many car drivers feel to be able…

I agree that the better solution would be to just scrap the parking.

I don't think urban parking makes sense (other than parking in/outside of homes).

Post reply on HN