Reminder that those who bought it, voted for it.
In economics, wallet is voting power - what you buy you feed and endorse.
I truly loathe this argument. I've seen it for cars, seen it for laptops, seen it for mobile devices. For years. People like you really think not purchasing the bad will fix stuff like this?
Purchasing decisions let you pick between competitors. That is all. You can't pick the open-source car that does not exist, unless you want to start your own car company just to build one. If you don't buy any car at all, then you simply don't exist to them, and they don't care about you.
Nobody is going to quit locking down their software just because a rounding error doesn't like it that way. They don't do it because they need people's votes, they do it because the company simply wants the software locked down, they don't care what customers think about it. Even if nobody bought the car, and everybody told them directly to offer open access, they'd probably still refuse to provide it, until and unless something like a regulation is passed that mandates it.
Cars aren't spying on you because people are voting for the spying. Nobody who buys the car is voting for it to spy on them, unless I guess their hypothetical dystopian future insurance gives them a bonus/discount for allowing them to view the data from the vehicle and they're actually okay with that.
Just look, you have a limited number of choices. You can "vote" for anything that is currently on the market. That is all the choice you have. If you want a car from the current market, you're going to have to pick one to vote for. Odds are they're all going to have some sort of surveillance-state bullshit, or the ones that don't have it are just going to be less-nice vehicles in general.
Similar to how, before Framework, everyone concerned about open-source system firmware was most likely rocking a speedy 2004 ThinkPad with a couple gigabytes of RAM. They were unable to simply vote for an actually fast, modern machine, as all of them had proprietary blobs doing who-knows-what. So someone had to come out and actually build one, and now we have Framework.
I believe that for phones, we might have Purism sometime in the 2030s, once they work out the most basic issues with their software stack, probably caused by trying to use existing Linux userland.
For cars... I haven't heard anything yet. Nobody's come out and built an open-source car company yet. So we're currently in the phase where you simply can't vote for an open-source car. Now, do you still need a car anyway? Then I guess you vote in favor of a locked-down vehicle. Even if you're not actually trying to vote, and you just need a car right now.
So that's why I hate this argument. Just because you bought a car doesn't mean you should be on the hook for "voting" for every feature the car has. You voted for the car. Doesn't mean it's perfect.
Well yes, certainly. A market exists because it has buyers - without them, it withers. And a market exists because there is a need, that producers will ride. «if nobody bought the car», they would not produce it.
> If you don't buy any car at all, then you simply don't exist to them
So you misunderstood the proposed idea. It is not the individual that changes the market: a critical mass does. But the responsibility is individual.
> Cars aren't spying on you because people are voting for the spying
The statement is, "if people did not accept it it would not happen, and by financing it they accept it".
> If you want a car from the current market
If the «current market» only contained traps ("and you will give us rights to your grandson" etc.), why would one «want [an item] from the current market».
> Odds are they're all going to have some sort of surveillance-state bullshit, or the ones that don't have it are just going to be less-nice vehicles in general
This makes it sound like "some people will trade decency for items that they see as nicer". That is plain sinister.
> before Framework
There is a difference between suboptimal products - "optimal is not available yet" - and unacceptable products - "this service comes with jus primae noctis".
> do you still need a car anyway? Then I guess you vote in favor of a locked-down vehicle
Let us hope you won't, and find other solutions. But the problem is not about open-source: it is about reliability, security and privacy.
> for "voting" for every feature the car has. You voted for the car
By financing and simply purchasing a product you endorsed it, and with it all its implications. You are responsible. Sweatshop shoes? Responsible. You are given a faculty of awareness and an obligation to use it. Some implications are good, some are minor, some are immoral, some are bringer of dire social consequences.
There is plenty of blame to go around. From corporate owners, through captured regulators to end users. Between all those parties I think the ones that have to choose between grades of shit are the least to blame. This does not absolve consumers, but it does put into question the framing you presented.
I don't see how it's sinister at all to say that. I hate Windows, but I use it because I no longer have access to macOS, and nothing works on Linux. Am I sinister for "voting" for Windows even though it lacks decency? It is currently the least bad option for me, that is all. The value in having a working computer is greater than the value in perpetually stressing myself out over whether things are free and libre or not.
Ensuring the absolute purity of my personal supply chain is too much of a pathetic chore for me to want to care about. I really, really do not care if that nice Tesla I may buy in 10 years tracks my every move, receives random OTA updates, makes me pay a subscription fee to use the hardware that's already installed in the vehicle, and so on. What if I just wanted a nice EV and nobody else does it right?? What am I going to do, buy a Rivian instead?
This is not the future, it is today.
https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/
https://www.geico.com/driveeasy/
https://www.allstate.com/drivewise
https://www.amica.com/content/microsites/streetsmart.html
https://www.statefarm.com/customer-care/download-mobile-apps...
Also, almost nobody cares that their car manufacturer can track their car’s location. They already accept that they have a mobile device on them that tracks them everywhere, and at least the mobile networks plus government knows where they are.
And they also use electronic payments everywhere with “loyalty” discounts so all the banks/payment networks know where they are, and so do merchants.
Those are mobile apps that don't integrate with the actual vehicle.
