Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by edmundsauto 1651 days ago
You’re not interested in paying for something that provides you with very clear value? So instead you wil go pay money for a different system to bolt on?

I don’t mean to criticize, but I have to admit that I cannot empathize.
2 comments
ses1984 1651 days ago
If I put a gun to your head and then sell you a service of not shooting, that's a clear value too right?
link
edmundsauto 1647 days ago
In this narrow of a scope, yes - it is absolutely valuable for me to be able to pay to not die. The alternative is to be killed.

But of course the world is larger than this made up example. Context matters, and this context isn’t really relevant except to say that there are different contexts that necessitate different decisions.

But you knew that, even as you posted such a ridiculous comparison. I think your point would have been much more effective and less reactionary if you had actually made your point, instead of resorting to absurdism.

link
kybernetyk 1651 days ago
Said service is called “taxation”
link
Fezzik 1650 days ago
Would you find it appropriate for automakers to charge a monthly fee to be able to simply start an automobile you bought? If no, then why are you okay with a monthly fee to do so remotely? It’s rather straightforward - you’re either for usury or against it, I guess. This is usury.

(usury is not exactly the right word, but it’s the best I could think of at the moment).

link
edmundsauto 1647 days ago
It’s nuanced - I don’t approve when someone changes the terms of a deal that we already agreed upon. At the same time, I think there is a reasonable expectation that companies don’t have to support something into eternity (not that is what happened here, but in general I think support for a feature that requires maintenance is okay to have an expected lifespan).

Another nuance is that starting the car is core to the functionality, remote start is not.

If they were doing this only moving forward, for new sales, I think it would be totally fine. I wouldn’t buy that car if I cared about the feature, but I totally think it’s valid to have premium subscription addons.

In the situation where they have altered the previous deal and the service does not require maintenance by the company, it’s pretty fucked up and i would love to see a class action happen for existing owners.

link