this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
1292 points (98.8% liked)
People Twitter
6996 readers
2398 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not even just software. Fucking everything. They are making car options a subscription.
They're making money on this too, regardless of if you subscribe.
BMW announces that heated seats will be available in their cars with a subscription model. That's to say, you buy your car "without" heated seats, and then for when you need it, you can just pay a subscription to "unlock" it for as long as you need. Once summer comes, you can stop.
Caveats:
This is my fear with dish and clothes washers manufacturers wanting to have wifi built into them. They've already gotten people used to using clothes and dish detergent in the form of little pods. I think appliance manufacturers look at printer companies and their ink prices and want a piece of that action. They want to play the same game. I'm sure Whirlpool would love it if you could only buy laundry detergent from them.
But in order to do that, they need to have their devices be internet-enabled. The printer companies figured this out. Third party ink manufacturers figure out ways to get past manufacturer lock-outs. So printers need to be internet enabled to allow patches that will disable new third party ink cartridges.
In my opinion, this is the real reason we see so many manufacturers trying to shove IoT and wifi connections into home appliances. Sure, selling your data to data brokers is a nice minor revenue stream. But the real prize is using that wifi to lock you in to buying obscenely expensive consumables for your dish washer, clothes washer, etc. Even fridges are at risk of this due to the water filters that many fridges have built in to them. Same with dryers.
The manufacturers of major appliances are pushing like crazy to connect these things to the net. Their official line is that they want this for consumer-friendly reasons. Most cynics say it's just a way to sell your data. I however think the real goal is to turn every home appliance into a vendor-locked piece of garbage that requires consumables priced like printer ink.
If I ever end up in a situation where I can only get 'smart' appliances, I'll just start washing my laundry at a lake or something.
Fuck it, if they do this I'll go stinky as a protest. I'll stink so bad that the politicians will be forced to regulate.
Go stand in front of a government building and spread your disgusting armpits. Use a fan to direct the smell there, or even better, go inside.
Reminds me of how British politicians were forced to act on pollution of the river Thames because the Parliament building got unbearably stinky.
Of course they'd act first when it inconveniences them. Ugh!
Here in Sweden there's one thing all our parties agree on; drugs are bad and anyone who takes them are morally bankrupt. According to sewage water tests in parliament, plenty of our parliamentarians are coked up on the job.
Our drug policies are super strict, to the point that people are dying because of them. Our ministry of health has recommended that we relax them a little, and for some reason this is the hill all our parties are willing to die on.
You're nearly there already! 🤢
Only nearly? Shit, I really gotta put my back into it, then!
If they make a washing machine that requires a subscription to their pods, I will switch to washing my clothes in a bucket using the cheapest detergent Aldi have.
Great point of view and yet another strong reason not to just allow internet connections on every damn thing. One other huge reason - being forced to accept brand new (legally binding!) licensing agreements, long after the device has been paid for and installed.
Roku was in the news somewhat recently for auto-installing an update that required users to accept a new license agreement to continue to use the device they'd paid for and had been using up until that point. And that license wasn't a trivial change, it required the user to agree to forced arbitration!
In other words, in a very real sense, they came into the house and modified the TV (not just the cheap little streaming devices), then turned around and said "Want to keep using this thing you've made a part of your daily life? That you already paid us for? Well, fine you can, but - we don't want any of you to ever sue us, so agree not to or fuck you. Don't think too hard about it, it's your TV, just say yes and get on with it".
Wild stuff! And I guarantee it gets worse before it gets better. We need high quality FOSS hardware badly, I really hope we see that start to take off in a bigger way. I'm not super optimistic though, hardware being just a lot harder to iterate on.
Cory Doctorow wrote a fantastic story about this. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wandyezj/reference/master/unauthorized-bread.pdf
I buy things that are a one-time purchase sometimes entirely because I was given the option.
And there are people who just pay for it, which blows my mind. Companies wouldn't do it if there wasn't money to be had. So now we get nickel and dimed so these corporations can get a steady stream of income rather than providing good quality products.
Apps are really notorious for it. What used to be a 10$ app now they expect subscriptions that amount to 60$ or more a year with no real noteworthy changes in service.
Calorie counting apps, for example, have been doing the same thing for over a decade now with little change besides cosmetic upgrades and "AI".
Want to heat your car seats? That's a suspension. Want to use your car's radio? Another subscription. Get a higher mileage count to the gallon? Subscription.
This model should be straight-up illegal on environmental grounds alone. It's particularly egregious for electric car batteries.
Some manufacturers will make models with nominally different batteries, but in reality the same batteries are used throughout. There might be a model with three different battery options; 400, 300, and 200 mile range options. But the 200 mile range one doesn't actually have a battery half the size. It has a 400 mile battery with half of its capacity locked out by software controls. That means the 200 mile range option vehicles are hauling around hundreds of pounds of extra weight for literally no reason at all. Such cars are pointlessly burning energy every mile they drive, hauling around extra battery that serves them no purpose.
This stuff should be straight-up illegal. It should not be legal to sell a vehicle with software-locked equipment. Want to sell trim levels with different features? Fine. Quit being a cheap bastard and actually build vehicles with different equipment levels. Don't build them all with the high-end options and then force those who buy the cheaper trims to burn money for the rest of that vehicle's hauling around equipment they'll never use.
If only we lived in a country that didn't have exploitative plutocrats running the government.