Hacker News Reader

Comment by cbanek | Hacker News Reader

Licensing vs ownership of things I buy is getting to be a real grey area. Businesses definitely want to license content to me rather than sell it, at least in a legal sense.

For example, when I buy a DVD, I don't really own it. I own a physical copy of the media with a license to only play it in an approved player.

This has spread a bit for example to gaming. Katamari Damacy for the 360 was actually shipped with DLC on the game disc that you had to pay additional money to unlock, and it wasn't the only one.

If I were rich enough to afford a Tesla, I guess it would probably be against the license to use the hardware I have to the fullest (if I didn't pay for it), because Tesla doesn't want that and I've only licensed their software.

View on HN

I think there is a difference from the game. The disc for the game costs the same to produce regardless of whether you buy the DLC or not. The larger battery costs more to produce regardless of whether you pay for it or not and (slightly) hurts the performance of cars that don't have the upgrade (it's literal dead weight).

I guess I don't really care, especially if there is good disclosure for expensive physical devices (because I can then not buy them).

It is definitely different which is what makes it interesting. Since you're maybe getting something you didn't pay for. On one hand, it is dead weight if you can't use it, which is even worse (since it degrades performance) but if you can jailbreak it you get it for free. But either way, it definitely has a real physical cost, it's not just code.

It both helps and hurts performance. The added weight will hurt handling and efficiency, but the increased capacity allows for increased power output. This is why the 90D has a lower 0-60 time than the 75D, for example. The new 60 has a quoted 5.5s 0-60, whereas the original 60 (which actually had a 60kWh battery) was 5.9s.

Licensing is old news. The hip new thing in business is the social media model.

Businesses are now trying to give you things for free in exchange for rights to your data. That's the entire social media business model. It is so lucrative at the moment that even microsoft is now employing the social model for their consumer OS ( starting with windows 10 ). You get a "free" OS, but that OS is going to track what you do and sell your data.

Of course this model is much easier for software than hardware because of the low cost of distributing software and an easier way to achieve scale. If hardware decides to try this model, it will be interesting and funny to see what the implications would be. Tesla could offer to lease you a "free" car but they get to monitor you, collect your data and sell your data. Hell, what happens when housing developers try the "social media" model. You get to lease a "free" house but the developer gets to record/monitor everything you and sell your data.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com