Five minutes of hate news

[Captain X]

... But there isn't government interfering in property rights here.

Yet. Let's see how long that lasts once people figure out how to bypass the lockouts on these features or otherwise hack them.

... This is property rights. Property rights are capable of being complex things though, not just simple ones. For example, take renting. Yes, I as the renter of my apartment do not own it, and the landlord does.

If this was a car that people were just leasing, this would not be an issue. But these are cars people are buying.

The car version is actually a lot less complicated. You buy the car in full, with an effectively broken seat heater that you are informed about prior to purchase. Good news! There's also a way to pay $18 to fix it temporarily. Alternatively, you can swap it with aftermarket parts, jailbreak the car, etc. You still have full property rights!

Riiiiight.... I'm real sure the company that tries to pull this shit will be just fine with you jailbreaking their shit. And if you're having to rent it, you can be damn sure they see it as their shit even if you bought the car it's in.

I think the underlying issue here is the idea that property rights are simple. They can be, but frequently aren't.

And what I'm getting at here is that this will do nothing but erode property rights and should be fought every time it's attempted.

 

[Abhorsen]

Yes, they can be complicated, but this is a situation where they are simple. Cars are personal property, which unless they are renting or leasing from someone else, and provided they have paid for it: they should have 100% ownership over. If I actually own something, unless it is an external service, I should not have to pay to continue to use it. It is literally one of those simple as things. I should have a right to use what I own, and not have to be double-dipped on by greedy assholes.

You do own it. You own an effectively slightly damaged car that you knew was going to be slightly damaged. There's also an optional way to fix it. I'm not seeing the problem here.

Yet. Let's see how long that lasts once people figure out how to bypass the lockouts on these features or otherwise hack them.

Yeah, and when this happens, I'll be very against it. Because that will be the bad thing, not this (although I don't like it, it doesn't outrage me).

If this was a car that people were just leasing, this would not be an issue. But these are cars people are buying.

The whole point of this was just an example of complicated property rights. I mean, there's also that in some states, when you buy property, you don't own the mineral rights to it, which are sold separately. So even if you buy a house, another person might have the right to build an oil rig on your land, and a road to get there. Or even open a mine on your property. They can't mess with your house, but if you have enough land, they can build a lot on it.

Other times, people own a right to travel over specific land that isn't theirs (there's a name for this I'm forgetting). But this is especially useful if you own land surrounded by private property you don't own.

 

[posh-goofiness]

@Abhorsen ...so if it's slightly damaged. Wouldn't it be false advertising that a) it's undamaged at the dealer and b) that it's a new car at all?

 

[Abhorsen]

@Abhorsen ...so if it's slightly damaged. Wouldn't it be false advertising that a) it's undamaged at the dealer and b) that it's a new car at all?

I'm saying it's effectively slightly damaged, not that it actually is. Since they disclosed the 'effective damage' (that the seat heaters don't work, but can for $18/month), it's not false advertising. And it is a new car, maybe slightly defective would have been a better analogy than damaged?

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I'm real sure the company that tries to pull this shit will be just fine with you jailbreaking their shit. And if you're having to rent it, you can be damn sure they see it as their shit even if you bought the car it's in.

People 'jail break' their cars all the time in the states. Straight pipes and all sorts of things are done to take them out of spec and make them unable to pass the state safety/EPA stupidity inspections. Nobody gives a crap until it comes time for warranty and recall work. That's it.

 

[bintananth]

People 'jail break' their cars all the time in the states. Straight pipes and all sorts of things are done to take them out of spec and make them unable to pass the state safety/EPA stupidity inspections. Nobody gives a crap until it comes time for warranty and recall work. That's it.

Heck, a US street legal automoble designed for premium unleaded (93+ octane) can be fed regular (87 octane) in a pinch.

It'll bitch because it's running very lean and just lost a lot of power. It'll also get you to your destinanton, environmental regulations be damned.

 

[Skitzyfrenic]

And it is a new car, maybe slightly defective would have been a better analogy than damaged?

Yeah, but defects tend to get recalls and warranty work. Because defects are bad, and the car company is, by law AFAIK, supposed to fix those.

I mean you aren't wrong with the disclosure, but I wouldn't want to buy a car that I have to subscribe to have all of the functions. Because heated seats are a product, not a service. And this is an attempt to make it a service. Except it's definitely a product, so it's obviously 'renting' or 'leasing.'

(It'll almost certainly get hacked/jailbroken in no time, so buying it used when the warranty expires becomes best. Or post lease. Or several years down the line when they haven't managed to sell all the models. I suppose if you're buying a BMW you probably don't care about $18/month other than principle. I wonder if you have to sub if you're leasing cause that's like double renting.)

The problem we run into, is that if they find any success, it'll spread.

 

[Abhorsen]

I mean you aren't wrong with the disclosure, but I wouldn't want to buy a car that I have to subscribe to have all of the functions. Because heated seats are a product, not a service. And this is an attempt to make it a service. Except it's definitely a product, so it's obviously 'renting' or 'leasing.'

And that's fine. No one is forcing you to buy the car. The question isn't whether you should or would buy it, it's whether BMW have the right to sell it in such a state. And they should, IMO.

 

[Bassoe]

No one is forcing you to buy the car.

The car companies will inevitably conspire to form a monopoly and refuse to sell any other kind of car.

 

[Abhorsen]

The car companies will inevitably conspire to form a monopoly and refuse to sell any other kind of car.

And that would be wrong, and already illegal. Also, they probably won't. The issue with a cartel is that every member of the cartel is incentivized to cheat it. They aren't doing a cartel now, why would this be the thing that changes it?

Also, the used car market makes this nigh on impossible.

 

[Bacle]

The abortionists/mother listed the rapist as a minor; smells more and more like this is the mom's boyfriend and the whole family are illegals, which is why teh mom tried to hide/defend the rapist.

 

[bintananth]

The abortionists/mother listed the rapist as a minor; smells more and more like this is the mom's boyfriend and the whole family are illegals, which is why teh mom tried to hide/defend the rapist.

I've seen that on the news and you've sorta got it right and wrong.

The 10yr old rape victom was taken to Indiana to get an abortion that she couldn't get in Ohio.

No one comes out of that smelling like roses.

 

[Bear Ribs]

And that would be wrong, and already illegal. Also, they probably won't. The issue with a cartel is that every member of the cartel is incentivized to cheat it. They aren't doing a cartel now, why would this be the thing that changes it?

Also, the used car market makes this nigh on impossible.

They... are doing a Cartel now though? And they've been a cartel for at least 30 years now. This is pretty well known, Car companies are used as the textbook examples of Oligopolies and Cartels in multiple beginner Economics books.

Wake Forest Journal of Business and Intellectual Property Law

The Wake Forest Journal of Business & Intellectual Property Law publishes four issues annually, pertaining to a wide variety of topics within the fields of intellectual property law and business law, while attempting to focus specifically on the intersection between the two.

ipjournal.law.wfu.edu

Cartel fines against car manufacturers for the restriction of innovation competition - Deutscher AnwaltSpiegel

New challenges for technical cooperation and the birth of green antitrust?

www.deutscheranwaltspiegel.de

https://news.yahoo.com/eu-raids-automaker-bmw-massive-cartel-case-145302563.html

German automakers formed a secret cartel in the ‘90s to collude on diesel emissions: report

The car cartel tells us a lot

www.theverge.com

You'll note these cases basically cover all the stuff you claim isn't happening that the free market should prevent; the companies colluded with each other. They've engaged in price-fixing and cooperated against private citizens and government alike. They literally designed software specifically to lie and cheat their way past emissions tests while telling customers and government alike these were low-emissions "green" cars. They deliberately stifled innovation and worked to prevent any new competition from forming to protect their oligopoly. All this was happening in spite of government intervention to try to avoid it, not the government causing the problems in the first place. This was the successful destroying the free market to profit and the government stepping in and trying to correct things back to a more free market.

The abortionists/mother listed the rapist as a minor; smells more and more like this is the mom's boyfriend and the whole family are illegals, which is why teh mom tried to hide/defend the rapist.

Well I have to eat crow on this one, as I was one of the people who believed the rape never happened due to lack of any filing or evidence, but it turns out the rape was real, they just hid the filing and evidence to protect an illegal immigrant.

 

[Sobek]

OPPOSE the New Federal "Assault Weapons" Ban (H.R. 1808) TODAY!

Tyrants in DC are pushing through a new federal "assault weapons" ban that is even more draconian than the original 1994 ban. HR 1808 - which would ban nearly all ARs, AKs, AR pistols (and eve...

oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net

The 90's called, they want their retarded gun grabbing shit back

 

[Bacle]

I've seen that on the news and you've sorta got it right and wrong.

The 10yr old rape victom was taken to Indiana to get an abortion that she couldn't get in Ohio.

No one comes out of that smelling like roses.

Except she could get the abortion in Ohio due to it being rape and the victim being a minor, AFAIK.

Going across states lines for this abortion was more about trying to hide the ID of the rapist, as said rapist was likely the mother's BF, while acting like it was about Ohio's laws.

 

[Sobek]

Oh and also the mom is on record downplaying the rape and defending the rapist

Ohio mom defends SUSPECT who confessed to raping her young daughter

The mother of a 10-year-old Ohio girl who was raped and impregnated by an illegal immigrant has denied the charges, despite the suspect admitting to the crime.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Abhorsen]

They... are doing a Cartel now though? And they've been a cartel for at least 30 years now. This is pretty well known, Car companies are used as the textbook examples of Oligopolies and Cartels in multiple beginner Economics books.

Ah, this, however, makes sense. When defrauding government regulators, all the companies incentives would align. But I'm not seeing much evidence of them colluding against customers here, only as a by product of colluding against government. That's not just a detailed difference, that dramatically changes the incentive structure. A company doesn't make more money if another company gets fined (unless that fine somehow dramatically hits market share, is anti trust stuff, etc). So they have no incentive to defect, and in the process, they save themselves a fair bit of money in compliance costs.

Whereas when being a cartel and screwing over the customer, there's all the incentive in the world to 'cheat' and lower prices (especially if you can sell under the table). This too, is econ 101. A Cartel's high prices are done, knowing that they will sell less product. Each cartel member agrees to not sell too much of the product, even though each company individually would make more profit by selling more at cheaper. This is the incentive that can lead to cartels collapsing.

Obviously, it didn't apply here, and I also support laws against being a monopoly or doing cartel stuff. But one company offering a $18/month seat heaters does not a cartel make. And I'm not going to play the what if game either. "But what if they did X" when they haven't done X yet (here, X is some weird cartel which only allows for rented car features or some such) means we'd ban practically everything.

What you are proposing wi

 

[Zyobot]

What you are proposing wi

Don't mean to be Mr. Smartass, but it looks like you had more to say here?

 

[Bear Ribs]

Ah, this, however, makes sense. When defrauding government regulators, all the companies incentives would align. But I'm not seeing much evidence of them colluding against customers here, only as a by product of colluding against government. That's not just a detailed difference, that dramatically changes the incentive structure. A company doesn't make more money if another company gets fined (unless that fine somehow dramatically hits market share, is anti trust stuff, etc). So they have no incentive to defect, and in the process, they save themselves a fair bit of money in compliance costs.

Whereas when being a cartel and screwing over the customer, there's all the incentive in the world to 'cheat' and lower prices (especially if you can sell under the table). This too, is econ 101. A Cartel's high prices are done, knowing that they will sell less product. Each cartel member agrees to not sell too much of the product, even though each company individually would make more profit by selling more at cheaper. This is the incentive that can lead to cartels collapsing.

Obviously, it didn't apply here, and I also support laws against being a monopoly or doing cartel stuff. But one company offering a $18/month seat heaters does not a cartel make. And I'm not going to play the what if game either. "But what if they did X" when they haven't done X yet (here, X is some weird cartel which only allows for rented car features or some such) means we'd ban practically everything.

What you are proposing wi

Wow. You never cease finding some way to nitpick exact words or quibble about minor details instead of addressing the argument.

Nine Automobile Parts Manufacturers and Two Executives Agree to Plead Guilty to Fixing Prices on Automobile Parts Sold to U.S. Car Manufacturers and Installed in U.S. Cars

Nine Japan-based companies and two executives have agreed to plead guilty and to pay a total of more than $740 million in criminal fines for their roles in separate conspiracies to fix the prices of more than 30 different products sold to U.S. car manufacturers and installed in cars sold in the...

www.justice.gov

Cartel Fined For Price-Fixing Volkswagen Cars

The seven cartel members had fixed the prices of new Volkswagen cars for years Keystone / Filip Singer </span> A group of Volkswagen dealers in s

menafn.com

Car buyers could get compensation after claims of price fixing by shipping companies | Auto Express

Class-action lawsuit claims dealers and buyers were overcharged due to price-fixing cartel of five car-shipping companies

www.autoexpress.co.uk

VW's truckmaker Scania fined 880 mln euros for price fixing

Swedish truckmaker Scania was hit with an 880 million euro ($1 billion) fine by the EU on Wednesday for taking part in a 14-year price fixing cartel, boosting the total fine for the firms involved to a record 3.8 billion euros.

www.reuters.com

Yes, they cooperated to cheat customers by price fixing as well. That should really go without saying, the notion that a cartel is going to cooperate to defraud the government and lie to customers for decades while scrupulously protecting prices and the free market is wishful thinking on an unbelievable scale. I cannot imagine the kind of logical leap and ideological blinders required to think that would be the case.

Cartels never behave the way you're suggesting. They have no incentive to cheat and every incentive to cooperate. And they came up with a logical counter to the antiquated idea that they will cheat each other a long time ago. They own each other.

But that infographic is only the tip of the iceberg. Ford and GM aren't shown as connected, f'rex. And on paper, they aren't.

Who owns Ford?

Ford Motor Co Stock Ownership - Who Owns Ford Motor Co in 2024? | WallStreetZen

www.wallstreetzen.com

Who owns General Motors?

General Motors Co Stock Ownership - Who Owns General Motors Co in 2024? | WallStreetZen

www.wallstreetzen.com

Holy smokes, the lists are nearly identical. There's some variation to be sure but the number of names on both lists is huge and they thus have a powerful incentive to cooperate because even beyond that infographic, the big companies at the top of the pyramid are mostly owned by the same people.

 

[Agent23]

Holy smokes, the lists are nearly identical. There's some variation to be sure but the number of names on both lists is huge and they thus have a powerful incentive to cooperate because even beyond that infographic, the big companies at the top of the pyramid are mostly owned by the same people.

They are index funds, they just track an index and sell that as an ETF.