This entire subthread is full of people missing the point: no removing features.
You can add them, you can even move them, but you don't get to take back something you already sold me, unless I also get to take back the money I gave you.
Really not super interested in excuses and whining. Either support the features you sold me, or refund my money. It really is that simple... and it really should be the law.
You can wish the thread was about that, but that's a completely different conversation, and you're the first to bring it up. I haven't seen any excuses for it. I don't like when I have something simple like an export tool in my app and it's suddenly gone.
But the question is how do you define what a feature is in networked apps? If you play an online game with a sniper rifle that one-shots people, and the developers nerf it, have they taken a feature from you? But everyone else loved the nerf? How do we support you and the players? Let you continue one-shotting them?
If the app you're paying for could message other users, but now they can block you, is the company supposed to give you a refund because now you can't message some users?
There might as well have been. What an annoying video to watch (and listen to). Did they play music in the math classroom when this guy went to school? No? Well, what's it doing here?
The sound design complements it extremely well. It's a lot like that classic sphere eversion film Outside In produced by The Geometry Center, which uses different sound effects to build up the steps in the explanation, subtly helping the audience not lose track of what's going on.
...Maybe there should be more music in math class?
It will be even more annoying if more and more otherwise-good educational video producers start to add gratuitous, distracting music to everything they release.
We get more of what we tolerate, so let's not tolerate that.
Looks like a nice book, but what's up with his assertion on page 148 (164 of the .pdf) that the integers don't form a group under addition?
If he defines integers as "natural numbers excluding zero," that seems goofy and nonstandard but also interesting. Is that a Russian-specific convention?
It seems like a typo where "integers" is used when the intention was to write "natural numbers". That is the solution to exercise 194 part a) which asked if the set of natural numbers is a field.
Not really. A lot of Starlink installations, like mine, are strictly for emergency backup purposes. My account stays suspended 99% of the time, but it's reasonable for them to count me as a "customer."
You don't do it that way. As the other poster suggests, you mandate that UI changes can always be rolled back by the user.
It should be illegal for you to change a product you sold me in a way that degrades functionality or impairs usability, without offering me the option of either a full refund or a software rollback.
If that causes pain and grief for server-based products, oh, well. Bummer. They'll get by somehow.
>It's connected to the Internet. Every car has a SIM card now.
Maybe every new car, but the average car is 13 years old, and the OP made no clarification on whether his advice was for only new cars, or for a 2015 econobox as well.
My car is older than that and came with an embedded SIM card. Quite a few navigation consoles had "live traffic updates" (often in trial format, but sometimes "lifetime") that basically consisted of 2G clients occasionally updating traffic data along planned routes. Not quite bottom of the line at the time, but also not uncommon at that point either. It's probably slightly worse than the dedicated satnav screens people were buying back when the car was new, although neither compares to what a smartphone will expose passively from just being inside of a moving car.
There's other ways to get local traffic data, too. For instance: Traffic Message Channel, which can be broadcast with RDS on an FM station, exists.
As long as stations persist that transmit the data (it's sent over RDS), then it will continue to work. There's no subscription involved (or at least, there isn't for my car -- it works where it works, and there's no mechanism by which to pay for using it).
On the one hand, they won't be able to communicate with the home base anymore. On the other hand, they'll light up the map like a Christmas tree if someone ever turns on a stingray in their vicinity.
Most people don't know, and will never know whether their car is connected to the internet, so it's better to assume it is unless you have specific information. The app or phone you connect to the car could also be a major exfil point of this data.
They don’t want people modifying ADAS systems mostly, and the main requirement is SecOC, which is cryptographic authentication but the message is still plaintext. Basically they don’t want third party modifications able to randomly send the “steer left” message to the steering rack, for example.
The ADAS systems mandated in Europe are insanely intrusive. I had a few rental cars in Europe this summer and wanted to send them off a cliff. (and I'm not an auto tech luddite, I've had modern cars in the US with autopilot type systems, lane keep, blind spot warning, rear traffic assist radar, forward collision warning, etc. IMO rear traffic assist/FCW/AEB tend to work really well, autopilot pretty well, and lane keep and blind spot silly gimmicks at best).
Bring on the full self-driving cars, or let me drive my own car. This human-in-the-loop middle state is maddening. We're either supervising our "self-driving, but not really" cars, where the car does all of the work but we still have to be 100% aware and ready to "take over" the instant anything gets hard (which we know from studies is something humans are TERRIBLE at)... Or, we're actively _driving_ the car, but you're not really. The steering feel is going in and out as the car subtly corrects for you, so you can't trust your own human senses. Typically 40% brake pedal pressure gets you 40% brake pressure, unless you lift off the throttle and hop to the brakes quickly, in which case it decides when you apply 40% pedal pressure you actually want 80% brake pressure. Again, you can't trust your human senses. The same input gets different outputs depending on the foggy decisions of some computer. Add to that the beeping and ping-ponging and flashing lights in the cluster.
It's like clippy all over again. They've decided that, if one warning is good and helpful, constant alerts are MORE good and MORE helpful. Not a thought has been given to alert fatigue or the consequences of this mixed human-in-the-loop mode.
So much this. We had a rental BYD in Greece this summer, and while it was actually great car in general the mandated “assistance” was awful.
It constantly got the speed limits wrong, constantly tried to tug me out of the correct lane, and was generally awful. It could be disabled but was re-enabled on each restart of the ignition because it’s mandated by EU regulation.
I appreciate a Greek island perimeter road may be a worst case scenario, but it did the same with roadworks on the freeway and many other situations.
“Lane keep” yanks the wheel dangerously because it incorrectly detects the lane, or because you don’t indicate to pass a pothole on an empty road (which itself would be confusing to other road users)
Forward collision warning has misfired on 2 occasions on me in the last 3 years
The main issue is that so many cars have broken “auto dipping” headlights which don’t dip, or matrix headlights which don’t pick out other cars.
This automation shit should stop, but it won’t.
parking beepers are reasonable, they simply come on occasionally and don’t actually interfere when they go wrong. The rest of it just makes things far worse at scale.
> Forward collision warning has misfired on 2 occasions on me in the last 3 years
My Lexus is afraid of a bush behind my garage in the alley. It's on a neighbors property and not really overgrown, but my car refuses to get within about 5 ft of it. Makes backing out a nightmare. I haven't figured out a way to disable it, and have considered just selling this 2025 NX.
I integrated SecOC on some ECU's at work. I hate myself for it. I frigging hate what they're doing with this. I think it's going to make cars less repairable, less modifiable. It's a horrible horrible stupid initiative in the name of "cybersecurity".
I understand notionally where they were going, but it all sort of went off the deep end somewhere along the line. A concern that someone buying some "mileage blocker" or whatever other shady device off of AliExpress might be vulnerable to the device steering their car into a wall is actually quite a valid one, but of course the solution is some overcomplicated AUTOSAR nightmare that doesn't solve for key provisioning in a way to make modules replaceable.
I have less trust in their good intentions. I think OEM's want to lock down their platforms in order to squeeze extra revenue streams. And I tend to be quite charitable with my interpretations.
As an aside, I checked out your GitHub. Cool projects, the vag flashing tool looks super useful, might actually give it a spin in sive development projects.
Of course, he shot himself in the foot but that’s what AI companies are pushing. They’re promoting the idea of running multiple agents in parallel. How long will it take before most people grow exhausted from constantly acknowledging requests from five different agents at once and simply switch on auto-pilot?
You can add them, you can even move them, but you don't get to take back something you already sold me, unless I also get to take back the money I gave you.
Really not super interested in excuses and whining. Either support the features you sold me, or refund my money. It really is that simple... and it really should be the law.
reply