lastingwin

Hobbling the battery with software has nothing to do with safety and definitely is not federally-protected.

> But if you don't want that to happen, you can just pay for the full-priced version.

I would never buy hardware from a company that locks the capacity down with software, so a Tesla (nor BMW) is not the car for me.

> But if you don't want that to happen, you can just pay for the full-priced version.

Consumers should have full access to their hardware, limiting that is limiting consumer rights. It's also bad because it encourages other companies to do the same and soon people will be left with no options.

> am somehow being ripped off by not using 100% of available capacity?

If you paid for capacity that you don't need then yeah, I'd say you at the very least made a bad purchase.

If I paid for it and it's in my possession, I own it and will do what I like with it including rooting the software. If that's not possible I won't buy it. In any case I'll always advocate to others not to give money to companies that behave in unethical, rent seeking ways that hobble your rights as a consumer.

It's bad because someone is restricting the capabilities of hardware that you own and trying to extract fees to "unlock" it.

That is also beyond ridiculous and bad for the consumer. I feel like this is even worse though because it also includes environmental damage due to decreased efficiency and excess waste from the unneeded battery capacity (one of the most toxic parts of a car).

It's bad for all consumers, even if you don't buy a Tesla. It encourages other manufactures to software lock hardware you own. Soon there won't be any alternatives, I choose to object now.

> It's worth a reminder that batteries are heavy. They're the heaviest collective part of an electric car, and reducing the usable energy density of a pack by 27% and not the vehicle's weight would be a questionable move—if the end goal was overall efficiency instead of profit. Because there are reportedly no changes to the physical hardware, this means the car is essentially lugging around the same 1,200-pound, 100-kilowatt-hour battery despite only having access to about 73% of its capability.

This seems like something we should have regulations to protect against. Bad for the environment and bad for the consumer.

> A well fed rebel without a cause with a government aided financial safety net.

There's no safety net in the US and we have the homelessness to prove it. What you're seeing is the right wing roots of the US being used to promote a mix of corporate, government and individual cult-like (think Alex Jones) propaganda. Lots of people in the US are susceptible to that, they've spent generations trying to promote white supremacy, US supremacy... that radicalism is easy to hijack, especially when the "opposition" is also thinly veiled corporate and government propaganda.

I think it's safe to say that we should disregard any substack/medium posts, especially when it comes to AI.