"...only FOSS survives" But yeah on of the many learnings of the long now foundation is that for things (wind Mills, businesses, etc.) To survive over a thousand years they need a community to maintain them.

Netscape died and yet we still have Firefox.

Editor have come and gone and Emacs is still here, and I'm sure it will be here in 10 years.

While I agree with your general sentiment, this is also a huge overstatement, especially when it comes to cars.

Cars aren't currently like that, but if the manufacturers could build in adware, prevent resale, and trigger obsolescence, do you think they wouldn't?

You only have to look at John Deere to see what manufacturers will do without sufficient regulation in favour of consumer rights.

https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repa...

Not to worry: once there is sufficient regulation in a given product category, said regulations may eventually mandate that products refuse to work without server connections and kill switches. You know, for consumer safety. Or to combat wrong information. Or whatever it is that decade.

I acknowledge that this is a huge problem, but I can't help but feel like this is a massive opportunity for a competitor to charge a premium for a saner, more consumer friendly business model. So it might take a couple years but I'm not convinced yet that regulation is necessary - especially considering said regulation in the long run can have unintended side effects and chances are because of lobbying and regulatory capture it won't actually benefit the consumer much, if at all. Legislation is much more difficult to overturn than shitty market forces if consumers are savy and willing to vote with their wallets.

There was a good point raised about this very idea on an earlier thread, which resonated with me based on other things I've read.

Basically, small and medium sized family farms, (i.e. the hearty, resourceful folk who want to fix their own damn tractors, thank you very much (e.g. my father and grandfather)), are disappearing.[0] They are being replaced by large, corporate "factory" farms, who have little interest in doing repairs on tractors that go beyond basic maintenance. Rather than building a staff of what are becoming increasingly sophisticated (i.e. expensive) technicians, along with the necessary facilities that meet all safety regulations, etc., a simple "tractor service" is preferred.

So, the customer base of the "consumer friendly business model" may not be large enough to support such an endeavor. The times, they are a-changin'...

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/09/american...

*edit: typos

I don't see any reason to be optimistic about consumers guiding the market. It seems like everything points to cheap, ad-filled crud winning out over premium "ethical" alternatives all the time. Apple might be a counter example, but I think many would debate that.

I think the problem is you get crushed by the incumbents before you have a chance to take off. John Deere has lots of infrastructure (manufacturing, service) already in place. In a different market, see Google trying to break into the ISP space.

Was Google's failure there due to lack of technical infrastructure?

They had plenty of expertise but an extremely hard time securing utility pole right of way, IIRC, to the point of being sued my incumbents to stop them providing service.

There should also be a room for third party to do a complete replacement of electronics, for a tractor this seems quite viable.

I test drove a Tesla. That thing is constantly calling home and it's only a matter of time before it starts snitching on drivers who break the speed limit, run red lights, or park incorrectly.

How did you know that it was phoning home from a test drive?

There's a story someone wrote in a comment or otherwise posted here about Tesla telemetry identifying an employee who crossed one of the SF bay area bridges at 130mph

The Tesla salesman told me when I asked.

What would be the motivation for Tesla to "snitch" on their customers and kill sales?

Legislation requiring them to do so. If they have the capability, eventually law enforcement will start asking for the data. If Tesla don't provide the data, you get a lot of headlines about how police are unable to solve hit-and-run cases etc. because they're not getting data that's just there for the taking. Cue legislation.

Then all car manufacturers would have to as well. (Tesla is not the only car that "phones home", others do as well, and increasingly so.)

So, to avoid this type surveillance, you would need to forego driving, which is completely your choice. However, this is not merely a "Tesla" problem.

Sure, fully agree. I didn't mean to imply it was just Tesla's issue, it's an issue with "Smart tech" in general, which was the topic at hand.

Cops asking politely! If you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to hide, etc.

If Tesla goes belly up, a LOT of their features (like keyless driving, remote start, summon, ota updates etc. etc.) will all stop working.

Although perhaps to a lesser extent, (but probably not for long as they adopt these features), the same goes for other car manufacturers.

Tesla or not, if the company from which you purchased your car goes away, you're gonna have a bad time.

What is the guarantee that FOSS electronic equipment will survive any longer? Just because someone could support it doesn’t mean someone will, right?

As with all of life there is no guarantee.

The difference is that with FOSS anyone in the world with the skills and the disposition can help maintain a thing. With closed systems you are always at the mercy of a single bean counter somewhere.

And why do these things need support? If you build them with open standards and protocols they will continue to work until they break, no support required