this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
1282 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

58689 readers
4041 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Mazda recently surprised customers by requiring them to sign up for a subscription in order to keep certain services. Now, notable right-to-repair advocate Louis Rossmann is calling out the brand.

It’s important to clarify that there are two very different types of remote start we’re talking about here. The first type is the one many people are familiar with where you use the key fob to start the vehicle. The second method involves using another device like a smartphone to start the car. In the latter, connected services do the heavy lifting.

Transition to paid services

What is wild is that Mazda used to offer the first option on the fob. Now, it only offers the second kind, where one starts the car via phone through its connected services for a $10 monthly subscription, which comes to $120 a year. Rossmann points out that one individual, Brandon Rorthweiler, developed a workaround in 2023 to enable remote start without Mazda’s subscription fees.

However, according to Ars Technica, Mazda filed a DMCA takedown notice to kill that open-source project. The company claimed it contained code that violated “[Mazda’s] copyright ownership” and used “certain Mazda information, including proprietary API information.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

We need to get a big group together and make an open source car. The company that bought Fiskers leftover vehicles can't use them because Fiskers supposedly can't transfer the servers to them.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don't want anything smart in my car. I want a(n electric) engine that starts with a goddamned physical key that turns in a physical ignition. I want a volume knob that turns with a 1:1 ratio to the volume, ditto for climate control fan speed and temperature. The only thing I want my phone to do in conjunction with my cLilar is display the GPS.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

I'm very excited for Apreras vehicles and hope they are successful. Their whole philosophy is hyper efficient vehicles and they are committed to open repair and bring consumer friendly.

They seem to be the only company making cars or attempting to make cars that makes a point to say that they will make it as easy as possible for you to control, repair and fix your own vehicle.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So true... for me personally, I'd love to have a battery EV vehicle, but i just want a regular vehicle with a battery powerplant. I don't want a mobile IOT advertising surveillance DRM non-repairable planned-olsolescence mobile which is how so many new vehicles are designed.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I feel like this is what we all signed up for vs what they delivered.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 days ago

Paid subscriptions to use features of the car you bought should be illegal

[–] [email protected] 37 points 3 days ago

Reason number 29474929273 why we should ban internet access on cars

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Reupload on Russian github.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago

We have one?

load more comments
view more: next ›