Great, now we're going to get country music about how some guy's truck left him.
I thought country music was already about my wife died, my dog won't start, and my truck ran away?
Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
61–70 of 568 posts
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#62There was an episode of Knight Rider where Kitt turned evil and did this to Michael!
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#63I think this is a sign of the times we live in. Innovation today seems to have shifted towards serving the owning class.
And by replacing ownership with either de facto or de jure rental of any and all private property. I have a big enough philosophical objection to the concept where we don't actually own property and may only rent it from the government due to property taxes. Now we "own" phones we can't control, "own" cars that have features dis/en-abled over the air if you pay for them. Product managers are brimming with innovative…
I can easily see the argument for owning personal property like a phone, but how can someone have a true ownership claim over land?
For personal property there is a production chain with labor that went into the item, but for land it's just out there and at some point someone decided they should be able to restrict what other people do in some area. If you see that it's not legitimate for a government to do, then by the same logic it's not legitimate for an individual - a government is just a collection of individuals acting together
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#64[dead]
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#65> The patent also outlines a potential to lock the vehicle out on weekends only so that the driver can still access a job and might be able to come through on those delinquent payments What if you usually work weekends which is common for a lot of the jobs people who are missing payments might be working? In that case you would be out of luck. You would also be out of luck if you are trying to get a side-gig or pick…
>You would also be out of luck if you are trying to get a side-gig or pick up a part time job on weekends to make ends meet.
"Buy a bus pass like the good poors, cash side work is evil"
-the people peddling these things, but using nicer words"
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#66I work in security and anti-fraud is the use case of last resort for terrible ideas. When you finance a car, the vehicle becomes collateral for a loan, but it belongs to you. A technology like this means that the vehicle still belongs to Ford, which means if something goes wrong with it, or if you get sciatica from their shitty seats, you can class action sue them into oblivion. The reason we have laws is so that peo…
Surely they would do this for leases instead of sales? Why would Ford want to do this for sales anyway, in the case of a sale, the financing company pays ford in full. The only exception would be if ford financed the car with its own financing arm. Incentives could be aligned to make leasing the preferred option for most people who are likely to miss payments then. Also I’m not sure you’re correct about the ownership…
> Why would Ford want to do this for sales anyway, in the case of a sale, the financing company pays ford in full. The only exception would be if ford financed the car with its own financing arm.
Ford has a huge financing arm. And it will probably get bigger as interest rates rise, because they have more room to offer lower than market interest rates as a hidden discount without dropping the purchase price.
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#67Thus making payment even less likely... I used to be a big proponent of alcohol/drug test to prevent car starting, ideally I imagined the system would be with an absolute guarantee (mandated) the information stays local (just a hardware switch preventing ignition or startup). But I'm sad to say I don't believe in any more, so much abuse to mark people as 'tries to drive while under the influence' or making you pay hi…
The biggest problem with an ignition interlock device today is that they're extremely unreliable. As implemented they are also very intrusive. Granted, they are currently implemented only as part of a punitive measure, so that behavior is partly intentional, but it would be unacceptable for universal adoption. Probably be better to just make cars do realtime verification of license status before letting someone drive…
>The biggest problem with an ignition interlock device today is that they're extremely unreliable. As implemented they are also very intrusive
Money spent making the device not suck reduces profit. Nobody will care when you abuse your customers because your customers are convicted criminals.
Pretty much every company selling stuff that people need to use to not violate the terms of their sentence is like this.
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
And by replacing ownership with either de facto or de jure rental of any and all private property. I have a big enough philosophical objection to the concept where we don't actually own property and may only rent it from the government due to property taxes. Now we "own" phones we can't control, "own" cars that have features dis/en-abled over the air if you pay for them. Product managers are brimming with innovative…
I can easily see the argument for owning personal property like a phone, but how can someone have a true ownership claim over land? For personal property there is a production chain with labor that went into the item, but for land it's just out there and at some point someone decided they should be able to restrict what other people do in some area. If you see that it's not legitimate for a government to do, then by…
> If you see that it's not legitimate for a government to do, then by the same logic it's not legitimate for an individual
I see the rights of government as secondary by default with exceptions meted out strictly as necessary. There exists a very limited number of jurisdictions where property taxes don't exist and land ownership is therefore real, so there's no philosophical/legal impediment to foregoing property taxes.
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#69I just had an idea: how about a car that makes you stop by the side of the road to watch 2 minutes of ads before being able to continue. And for a certain amount you can unlock adless travel.
Re: Future Fords could repossess themselves and drive away if you miss payments
#70I work in security and anti-fraud is the use case of last resort for terrible ideas. When you finance a car, the vehicle becomes collateral for a loan, but it belongs to you. A technology like this means that the vehicle still belongs to Ford, which means if something goes wrong with it, or if you get sciatica from their shitty seats, you can class action sue them into oblivion. The reason we have laws is so that peo…
Surely they would do this for leases instead of sales? Why would Ford want to do this for sales anyway, in the case of a sale, the financing company pays ford in full. The only exception would be if ford financed the car with its own financing arm. Incentives could be aligned to make leasing the preferred option for most people who are likely to miss payments then. Also I’m not sure you’re correct about the ownership…
The rationale I'm using for Ford owning it is there is a compelling argument that ownership as the effect of two factors, custody and control, as it applies to data today could apply to the car, where if Ford can disable the vehicle, it has control of it, and the custody the driver has is secondary. Leasing companies are different because they license the vehicle to you for a term, whereas loan financing means it's yours.
I'm not a lawyer at all, however much of my work on privacy and security has been about reconciling technology architecture and implementations with privacy and other laws and regulations, and security architecture is about allocating risk between counterparties in a technology solution, so from that view, this could be reasonably interpreted as a predatory technology.