We would end up with more cyber fuck-ups being deemed Too Big To Fail at taxpayer expense, along with Government-mandated corporate cyber-insurance, taken right out of your paycheck in taxes if we follow your illegal lead.
Be careful what you ask for. Not like we’re suddenly going to start punishing Greed N. Corruption, CEO.
Let apple revel in their current iVision failure, and in many years apple will make a pair just like Google Glass
The reason that Google Glass turned consumers into Glassholes and ultimately became a failure, isn’t lost on me. Maybe you should remember the success of a similar product now, isn’t something to brag about. It’s actually quite fucked up. Like going to a book signing for Orwells 1984 and finding Government cheerleaders working the audience handing out flyers touting the benefits of a Ministry of Truth.
Society doesn’t care about privacy at all anymore. They’ll trade their digital soul for a free price tag, and don’t even realize what that ultimately costs them in real dollars. Not every future product is something to cheer about no matter who makes it.
Not really defending Apple here, but from a design standpoint you should remember that glassholes are part of ancient tech history now. Go figure no one was in a hurry to copy that failure.
I hope they get burned for as much as allowed by law in these lawsuits.
Lawsuits were a pre-calculated risk when the abuse started. And even by aggressive standards they probably didn’t figure they would get away with it for THIS long, even with adding consumer ignorance into the math. No penalty will even come close to the profits.
On top of all that, this is GM. Those that are Too Big To Fail don’t worry about stupid shit like being “profitable” anymore. Wouldn’t be surprised if taxpayers end up paying for all this. Again.
...discovered that her own driving data had been shared with data brokers working with the insurance industry, despite not being enrolled in the program. GM has since discontinued the Smart Driver product and stopped sharing data with LexisNexis and Verisk
Can we safely replace "sharing" with "selling" ?
Sure, but when do you want to replace “credible” with “bullshit”?
Ill believe Nissan “stopped” selling that data when the next class-action lawsuit or two validates it with a nine-figure penalty. Until then, the amount of consumers who don’t read a EULA, remains the same. And therefore so does Nissans capability to abuse.
I expect Nissan USA has quite different conditions than Nissan Europe.
I more expect Nissan to have different car models entirely outside of the US. As many makers do.
Car companies are notorious for not spending for an extra screw on the assembly line if they can prove that penny savings per unit is cheaper than any lawsuit that could come from not having that extra screw. They’re not just gonna install all that fancy-yet-legal American tech on their GDPR-certified cars and simply leave it disabled while eating all the cost.
This was before everyone was putting a tracking device in their pocket.
This was before a planet stopped associating the concept of addiction, with technology.
It’s different now. When everyone is an addict, no one technically is.
You can get away with fucking anything when lawmakers are junkies too.
Nobody seems to be paying attention, so
I find it quite funny that you chose Nissan as your example of can’t-touch-this corporate arrogance, since there’s a valid reason they were forced to add “usa” to the end of “nissan” in their domain name. Mr. Uzi Nissan made quite the effort to ultimately prove what ownership means to corporations who assume.
Toyota has only ever used hydrogen tech as spoiler and FUD to counter the uptake of battery electric vehicles. It never stood a chance of taking off for a variety of reasons and was never intended to.
Never intended to? Do you think a near-century old Japanese company intended for this to take a steaming shit on their reputation too? Not many car manufacturers enjoy dealing with class-action sized failures. To say this was intentional, is quite the stretch. Good thing for them they actually DO still care about making a reliable product outside of the FUD line.
I would assume only the largest tax breaks and green credit incentives from Government would define failure as intentionally acceptable. No mega-corp does anything if it’s not worth it in some way to them in the end. Even if merely a write off.
I did end up getting a whole house battery, mostly as a backup. The math doesn't work out where it's going to save money in my situation. While the utility bill is lower with a battery than without. The amount doesn't actually cover the cost of the battery for the life of the battery. As for the "life" of a battery, I'm going by the manufacturer's 12 year warranty.
If your cost is 40-50 cents per kWh, I’m assuming you are running on that whole house battery every single day/night and allowing the solar to recharge it?
At those rates, I wouldn’t merely be using a 12-year warranty. I’d be proving it.
And it's a good thing that we're finally concerned about it. Smart phones are always-on Skinner Boxes, sapping people's motivation to take part in life itself.
Finally concerned, is an excuse reserved for the race of intelligent beings who had NO fucking clue about the concept of addiction before creating that always-on Skinner Box. Clearly I’m not talking about us humans.
A Skinner Box also implies experimentation. There is no more experimenting with addiction because there is little to debate anymore when it comes to the harm. We sure as hell aren’t wondering about the motivation to create addiction either. Let’s call this what it is. We allowed Big Tobacco to bullshit their way through decades of harm denial killing millions by trying to call cigarettes anything BUT harmful or addictive. Screw allowing that to happen again, because profits and stock price.
Social media? Addictive? Looking at the world today, who the hell is gonna define “addiction” now? An addict?
Not sure why we’re so very suddenly concerned a decade late and a few billion dollars worth of mental health profit later. Maybe the only thing someone was Lite on, was campaign contributions.
They only give the product away for free forever. Of course customers can quit anytime.
Every driver should have to pass the driver's test every other year at a minimum, regardless of age.
To prove what? Even the alcoholic knows not to show up to DUI court drunk. The smartphone junkie will put their phone down and actually pay attention for a 10-minute driving test once a year, doesn’t mean they’re cured or you have proven roads safer.
It ain’t drunk or drugged drivers I fear on a two-lane road. It’s now every driver who can’t put their phone down and fucking drive responsibly. Only a handful (if any) of people you know drive drunk. Damn near everyone you know drives distracted to some degree. Daily.
No. Physics does not keep track of "eras" like it's a game of Civilization, even if humans and clickbait headlines try to.
And yet the citizen taxpayers will still be forced to pay and try and prove otherwise about Physics, because humans and clickbait headlines will sell it so.
If you are not paying close enough attention to keep a steady speed with your foot on the gas pedal then you should not be behind the wheel of thousands of pounds of metal going down the highway, and keep both hands on the wheel as much as possible
Spoken like someone who rides a bicycle to work, and has never driven more than 50 miles on a single trip.
If you’re going to be that anal about driver capability, any driver over the age of 40 should be passing a physical to validate vision and reflexes, and every driver under the age of 40 should be tested for smartphone addiction.
Both hands on the wheel better not be at “10 and 2” either. That was before airbags would blow your arm through the window.
"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android
