Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajross | Hacker News Reader

> I don’t want [my car] to be connected [...] to the internet

Really? No remote access, security notifications, navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes? No open source location analytic API?

I mean, I'm sure there's some bad stuff that happens too. But this is very much throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I won't tell you what you, personally, want in a vehicle. But the market as a whole absolutely wants their cars on the internet.

View on HN

IT. IS. A. CAR! It takes you from Point A to Point B! Nobody needs to watch TV in their car! Nobody needs subscription services for heated seats or 0.2s off your 0-60mph time! Nobody needs cameras replacing their sideview mirrors! Get rid off all this bullshit in vehicles.

6-speed manual, adjustable seats, a GPS/nav screen and radio/aux, and a damn cupholder is all anyone needs from a car. Everything else is just a bunch of accessorial crap that usually detracts from the form factor of a functional car.

I don't even want the GPS: my phone already has maps that are better than what is in the car: they update in real time for current traffic.

I'm currently driving a car from 2007 because of how much I do not want the "connected" features that have become standard since the advent of smartphones.

I can't even find anyone who will sell me one with those features disabled. My only option is just to buy cars from before those features existed, and it gets harder every year.

Yeah, it feels like at some point I'll have to just buy a freakin kit car to get something simple.

Sure, even that's a luxury, but cars already have a display for audio, and it makes sense to have an in-built nav system (would be great if you could simply select the mapping/nav software from a list like a: goog, b: apple, c: OSM, and have it only do directions). This reduces the need for a 2nd, handheld or mounted device which has the potential for increased distraction. Navigation is a core function of travel, which is the primary purpose of a vehicle.

A bluetooth standard for navigation (turn left in 500 meters on adams street.) functions would be nice. The only thing I find my car nav does well is put that turn indication next to the speedometer so if I don't hear/understand the directions I can see it at a glance.

Of course my only car with nav is 11 years old, maybe there are other features of more modern systems worth having. I doubt it, but I have to allow for the possibility. The real key here is the car is 11 years old - if you only buy new cars you may fail to realize how bad features such as nav age. When my car was new 3g cell networks were the fast service (4g existed but it was in the early roll out phase), and thus what I would expect my car to have: now 3g is gone - so even if my car had a NAV subscription it couldn't get OTA updates.

Eh, my subie is almost 10 years old at this point. The nav is definitely quite old and clunky, but works fine as long as you don't expect it to be snappy like a modern smartphone. I don't think it's much in need of an update; that's just modern expectations advancing at a ridiculous pace thanks to tech.

I'm not saying that these are inherently bad. Hell, I'd enjoy having programmable 2-driver power-adjustment settings for the driver seat. That, dual zone climate control, and google maps built into the nav are basically the only luxury features I think really add value to a car. But I'm not dying without them. Meanwhile, my wife wants all that, android auto, ventilated seats, a moonroof, the side-view mirror blind spot assistance things, automatic cruise control, an auto-dimming rearview mirror, automatic lights/brights, being able to start the car remotely, etc.

Why do you need direct access to your phone? Just dock the phone and have the screen work like Samsung's Dex.

You... don't? That was my point. A dock works fine, too, I guess.

If that were true then we'd all still be driving 2-cylinder air cooled put-puts.

I'm not telling you what to desire in a vehicle. I'm just saying that reactionary ludditism makes for poor market analysis. People want connected cars, period. I don't make the rules.

Really poor equivocation re: 2-cyls. Engine performance and efficiency is one of the primary and critical aspects that define the ability effectively travel between places, which, again is the entire purpose of a car.

Engine (drivetrain really) power, torque, efficiency, durability and reliabilty are core aspects of a vehicle. Being able to accelerate (and brake) when needed is important. Watching a YouTube vehicle in traffic is not. Carmakers should be focused on improving drivetrains, handling (chassis, suspension, brakes, etc.), safety in collisions (including pedestrians/cyclists). Not on introducing a bunch of superfluous luxuries that only serve to drive up the cost of a car (and make people worse, more distracted, more selfish drivers).

Edit: It's not ludditism to oppose needless 'improvements' that increase the complexity, cost, supply chain requirements, weight, and fragility of a vehicle. It's utilitarian.

The ludditism is in who decides what's "needless". To you it's needless, to other's it's utilitarian, and there are generational differences to account for as well. You probably know how to drive from your house to a number of destinations without a GPS. Other's... don't, making a screen and an entertainment system with CarPlay a utilitarian feature for them that's a deal-breaker on a new car if doesn't have that because it's a safety hazard otherwise. You could argue that people should just have the local version of The Knowledge memorized, but that's unrealistic, plus it doesn't account for traffic causing accidents along your preferred route.

> You probably know how to drive from your house to a number of destinations without a GPS. Other's... don't,

Well then they should learn how to fucking navigate. Learn where North is and go from there.

> Nobody needs cameras replacing their sideview mirrors

This measurably improves fuel economy. Not sure why it's grouped with the others.

Because it's another huge failure point of more software and significantly increases cost and complexity when the aerodynamic gains from no mirrors are negligible, especially considering the absolute monstrous size and brick like shape (terrible cda) of SUVs, trucks, and 'crossovers' that are extremely popular today.

> gains from no mirrors are negligible

This study says 3% - 6%. [0]

The fact that inefficient vehicles exist doesn't seem like a reason to make more efficient ones even more efficient.

[0]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S111001682...

3-6% is almost free air conditioning 4-8%

Fair. That's not nothing, but again, it's a tradeoff. I'd take a plain old mirror for the sake of simplicity/cost instead of the slightly higher efficiency.

This is why it'd take some catastrophe for me to get rid of my 04 WRX STI. The interesting part has been seeing how got here.

Why would I want remote access to my car? Why should my car need security notifications? And if I'm charging, I can use that as an opportunity to get out of the car, or catch up on notifications I've ignored for the last several hours. Every routine fix that I've seen on a car has been something mechanical, which either I can do myself (e.g. oil and bulb changes) or I have to take into a shop anyway.

The only semi-valid reason for connectivity here is navigation, but even then I'm already paying for a connection for my phone so I'll use that instead. I don't even want a big screen on the dashboard anyway, which means having navigation software built-in would be a worse experience than using what I already have.

Remote start is extremely popular in cold or very hot climates so that the car feels nice when you get in.

> Really? No remote access, security notifications, navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging? No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes? No open source location analytic API?

I've never owned a car that does any of these. I'm very happy with my car. I do not see the benefits of them outweighing the downsides.

Nope, absolutely fucking none of that. The "baby" in here is not a baby, it is a gigantic pile of dogshit that seconds as a tracking device. I'm more than happy to get rid of all of it.

Most of that you get better with your phone; the rest, I don't have, don't feel the lack, and wouldn't think to look for in a new car.

I may not mind too much having essentially an Android phone embedded in the dashboard (although I'll try to jailbreak it as much as I can, and cripple it if I can't).

However, I REQUIRE an air gap between the Internet and any electronics that are involved in piloting the metal box that is currently transporting my squishy flesh at 130 km/h.

So no, no self-driving Tesla for me.

(As an aside, what kind of person gets excited over "open source location analytic API[s]"? Do you actively enjoy being tracked by your corporate overlords?)

Security notifications is probably the only thing on that list that actually requires internet (or some kind of connectivity). Even remote start doesn't need to be internet connected.

Everything else can be solved using your phone/tablet.

And yes, it undoubtedly would be a nicer experience to have navigation done entirely on the in-car display. But IMO in-car displays and interfaces are universally terrible.

> No remote access

What would that be useful for? If I am away from my car, I absolutely don't need to "access" it. It is not a home server or something like that.

> security notifications

What are those? Notify me that my car is being broken into? Maybe it is good-to-have, but far from crucial.

> navigation facilities

No thanks, I have a phone for that. I can connect it to my car's screen if needed.

> No watching TV while charging?

No, it just takes a couple of minutes to fill up. You should try one of these new-fangled internal combustion engine cars. They are amazing!

> No OTA updates that obviate the need to take it to the dealership for routine fixes?

What routine fixes? My car has never needed a software bugfix in the decade I have owned it.

> No open source location analytic API?

Huh??! Is this a satirical post I've fallen bait to?

> remote access, security notifications

Or just don't put so much software in it that you need security updates for remote access in the first place, how about that?

> navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging?

Why would I pay to have the same features as my phone/tablet/laptop but with the added disadvantage of not having access outside the car?

> remote access, security notifications > Or just don't put so much software in it that you need security updates for remote access in the first place, how about that?

They're talking about being able to get notifications about the security of your car (e.g you left the trunk open, someone is opening the door etc). I'm guess you don't have a modern car, but having a security system for your car is super useful, especially if you live in left-leaning crime-friendly place like SF.

> navigation facilities? No watching TV while charging?

> Why would I pay to have the same features as my phone/tablet/laptop but with the added disadvantage of not having access outside the car?

Because you can access it on a 15-30" screen rather than a 6" phone screen

> Because you can access it on a 15-30" screen rather than a 6" phone screen

Displayport over usb-c would also solve this problem.

No, you’re understanding correctly. None of that is desirable.

The baby is dead and should be disposed of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com