Categories
Data Custody Decentralisation and Neutrality Products and Design The Next Computer

Tesla remotely disabling functionality in cars

From Vice:

a person… bought a used Tesla from a dealer—who in turn bought it at auction directly from Tesla under California’s lemon law buyback program—advertised as having Autopilot, the company’s Advanced Driver Assistance System. The entire Autopilot package, which the car had when the dealer bought it, costs an extra $8,000. Then, Tesla remotely removed the software because “Full-Self Driving was not a feature that you had paid for.” Tesla said if the customer wanted Autopilot back, he’d have to fork over the $8,000.

To be clear, this is not a subscription service. This is a one-time package that was paid for by the original buyer, upgrading the car’s capabilities over software. Tesla’s policy here is that the purchase belongs to the owner, not to the car. There still appears to be confusion about whether enhancements can be transferred to the new owner. I couldn’t find anything on Tesla’s site, but found these two contrasting threads. One, on Tesla Motors Club titled “Why is FSD not transferable to your next Tesla?” FSD is full self-driving. The second is on the Only Used Teslas site, “Does Autopilot/Full Self-Driving Transfer to Subsequent Owners?” which states that it in fact does:

Q: What about owners who added Autopilot and/or Full Self-Driving Capability after delivery? A: Those features will also be active for the life of the car, and will transfer from the current owner’s Tesla account to the next owner’s account.

The tech news site The Next Web also did an article on this, stating

TNW spoke with a number of new and used Tesla sales departments in the UK who all confirmed that if a second-hand Tesla is specified with additional options like Autopilot and FSD, that is what the customer will receive.

In the case of the individual mentioned in the Vice article, Tesla did restore the functionality the original owner had bought, but only after the car enthusiast website Jalopnik ran an article about it – and Vice and The Next Web.

We have seen before (here and here and here) about “smart” devices that you do not own despite having paid full price for. A Tesla seems to be among the most expensive one in that list.

I’m not advocating for or against buying a Tesla – or for that matter any smart device [1]. I do think we should be more conscious, more circumspect when we buy new devices, since an increasing number of them have electronics, a connection to the Internet, and a link to the manufacturer throughout their lifetimes.

Advertising is sexy. Skepticism never is.


[1] I had in fact paid the deposit for two Model 3 units when they were announced in 2016 (and had it refunded when it was clear Tesla would not be launching in India any time soon).


(Featured image photo credits: Bram Van Oost/Unsplash)

Categories
Products and Design The Next Computer Wellness when Always-On

Healthy habit formation through tiny first steps

This blog post about building habits by breaking actions down to two-minute first steps:

Whenever you find it hard to get started on a task, consider scaling it down into a 2-minute version. For example… Read a book → Read one page, Write an essay → Write one sentence… Do 100 push-ups → Do 1 push up, Eat more vegetables → Eat an apple

I agree. I’m drawn to apps and software that make it easy to take first iny first steps. Apple’s iOS Books app is one such. In fact, we have written about this before:

You can set a daily reading goal – I’ve set it to twenty minutes, even though I will get a little more done every day. The app then tracks this as you read over the day, and sends you a notification when you’re hit it… The app then logs streaks for the number of days that you’ve hit this goal. You can see this in the large screenshot at the top. For me, streaks are highly motivating.

This is the screenshot I was referring to. You can see progress towards a daily goal as well as the streak right below it.

If you want to build up a reading habit, this can be very helpful. You can set your daily reading goal to as low as you like – even the two minutes that the blog post talks about.

You can set a phone reminder that goes off in the morning, or when you’re winding down, to get your two minutes of reading done.

The Fitbit’s gentle nudge to walk at least 250 steps every hour is another example. Fitbit calls this Reminders to Move. 250 steps isn’t much, but if you do it during the course of a 8 hour workday it adds up to 2000 steps. And keeps you from sitting idle for extended periods of time.

I wish more apps were designed with healthy habit formation in mind as opposed to being heavily optimized for constant, mindless usage.


(Featured image photo credit: Freestocks/Unsplash)

Categories
Data Custody Decentralisation and Neutrality Discovery and Curation Making Money Online Products and Design Wellness when Always-On

Misinformation and countering it – Part 1

This excellent long-form article in TIME describes the nature of misinformation that is rife in America:

Most Trump voters I met had clear, well-articulated reasons for supporting him: he had lowered their taxes, appointed antiabortion judges, presided over a soaring stock market. These voters wielded their rationality as a shield: their goals were sound, and the President was achieving them, so didn’t it make sense to ignore the tweets, the controversies and the media frenzy?

But there was a darker strain. For every two people who offered a rational and informed reason for why they were supporting Biden or Trump, there was another–almost always a Trump supporter–who offered an explanation divorced from reality. You could call this persistent style of untethered reasoning “unlogic.” Unlogic is not ignorance or stupidity; it is reason distorted by suspicion and misinformation, an Orwellian state of mind that arranges itself around convenient fictions rather than established facts.

When everyone can come up with his or her facts, the responsible thing is for everyone to also become his or her fact-checker. This is easier said than done. We saw yesterday how spam is a community problem than can only be fixed by the community – misinformation is the same.

Social media is complicit

The cost of spreading misinformation is nothing – social media and messaging services have spent years reducing the friction of sharing.

In comparison, they have spent almost no resources to determine and signal whether information is accurate or not. Recommendation algorithms simply don’t distinguish between what’s accurate and what isn’t. On YouTube, watching one conspiracy video and clicking on ‘Also watch’ recommendations can quickly lead one down a dark path, as the Guardian article describes.

It goes beyond just neglect. Social media companies have historically distinguished themselves from regular news media, arguing that they are merely platforms on which other people express their opinion, and that they can’t be held liable for what is posted by such people. However, they also argue that only they are in a position to create and apply policies regarding hate speech, abuse and misinformation. For example, see this WIRED article on Facebook’s weak efforts to self-regulate.

In short, they’d like to have it all. And so far, they have succeeded.

This imbalance by new media companies means that you and I must pick up the slack. Checking the accuracy of information means verifying the source, and then verifying the source of the source, and so on. It means looking at the bigger picture to judge if comments were taken out of context. It means determining if someone’s opinion was presented as fact. All this takes time. This example of fake national glorification took me several minutes to locate and correct:

And then there’s the social angle. Correcting someone on Whatsapp or a more public channel is almost never rewarding. The person who shared the original piece of misinformation, like anyone, has had their ego hurt and will push back. At best, it makes your real-life relationship awkward. At worst, it exposes you to online abuse. But we will need to power through this.

(Part 2: So who should you trust – and avoid?)


(Featured image photo credit: Markus Spiske/Unsplash)

Categories
Data Custody Decentralisation and Neutrality Discovery and Curation Making Money Online Privacy and Anonymity Products and Design The Next Computer

Nationalism, capitalism and the Indian App Store

A Swadeshi App Store. It may well happen.

It began with the temporary removal of the Paytm app from Google’s Android Play Store. And snowballed with Google’s announcement that it would enforce its existing policy of a 30% commission on the in-app sale of all digital goods (with some exceptions). We discussed this a couple of weeks ago.

Soon after, the founders of some of India’s best-known tech companies put out statements not just condemning Google’s policy but also its intent, calling it a new Lagaan, after the tax that the British occupation of the 19th and 20th centuries levied on Indian peasants.

Vivek Wadhwa, a Distinguished Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program, lauded the banding of Indian entrepreneurs and likened Silicon Valley giants’ hold on India to the rising days of East India Company, which pillaged India. “Modern day tech companies pose a similar risk,” he told TechCrunch.

And they called for a local, all-Indian app store, piggybacking on the new term Atmanirbhar, one that the current government has coined to promote local manufacturing and services.

“This is the problem of India’s app ecosystem. So many founders have reached out to us… if we believe this country can build digital business, we must know that it is at somebody else’s hand to bless that business and not this country’s rules and regulations.”

Inevitably, as is the case in India, at least some heads turned to the government for help:

Even though Google said it will allow developers to sell their services through other app stores, or websites, the industry doesn’t see this as an option either. Naidu suggested that unless the government chooses to intervene, there may be no other solution. According to tech policy analyst Prasanto K. Roy, the government’s Mobile Seva Appstore has over a thousand apps and 85 million downloads, yet it is unknown among Indian users.

To which the government, of course, responded with a why nothttps://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/internet/centre-open-to-launching-an-indian-app-store/articleshow/78438620.cms:

Weighing in on the issue, union minister for electronics and IT Ravi Shankar Prasad said in a post on Twitter that he is happy to receive notable suggestions from Indian app developers on how to encourage the ecosystem. “Encouraging Indian app developers is vital to create an #AatmanirbharBharat app ecosystem,” he tweeted on Thursday.

The Indian government “is not averse to the idea” of launching its own app store, officials said. The existing digital store for government apps, developed by the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC), hosts a slew of applications such as e-governance app Umang, health app Aarogya Setu and storage app DigiLocker.

Paytm has since created and advertised heavily what it calls a mini-app-store, but is in reality a catalog of shortcuts to 3rd party web apps. Google has postponed the implementation of its policy to 2022.

In this tale, everyone’s actions and responses have been predictable. Google’s been tone-deaf and has immediately switched to appeasement. Tech company founders have been cynically opportunistic. They have been happy with Google’s (and Apple’s) stores for distribution, even advertising heavily on them, until the moment it worked against them and they switched immediately to victim mode, some even raising the spectre of neocolonialism. Though they’re among the most visible figures of India’s capitalists, they’ve quickly appealed to the government for a solution favourable to them, further pushing the nationalist angle. And of course the Indian government, regardless of its political learnings, is happy to intervene and get into the business of running business.

(Featured image photo credit: Mika Baumeister/Unsplash)

Categories
Products and Design The Next Computer

More USB-C standards confusion

We have seen before how confusing USB-C can be: what cables and device support what capabilities. This article has more examples of confusion about the standard:

If you buy a USB-C charger that doesn’t support Power Delivery and try to use it with a Microsoft Surface, for example, the laptop will complain that it’s “not charging” despite receiving some power. Fixing this requires figuring out whether or not it’s the cable or wall charger that doesn’t support Power Delivery, and replacing it with something that does support it. There would be no way for a layperson to hold two USB-C chargers and know the difference between one that supports Power Delivery and one that doesn’t.

Furthering the confusion, some devices actually can’t be charged with chargers supporting Power Delivery, despite sporting a USB-C port — because they weren’t designed to negotiate the higher wattage being delivered by the Power Delivery standard. A pair of cheap Anker headphones I own, for example, refuse to charge when plugged into a MacBook charger. Other devices, like the Nintendo Switch, only partially support the standard, and some unsupported chargers have bricked devices, reportedly due to the Switch’s maximum voltage being exceeded.

If you need to use different ‘supported’ chargers and cables with different devices, how is that any better than a proprietary standard?

Categories
Products and Design The Next Computer Wellness when Always-On

Sustainability and the ‘joy of fixing things’

From this short, beautiful piece on the joy of fixing things:

Watch a story about the owner of a priceless collectible car or wristwatch, and you’ll notice that they often state that they aren’t the owner of that object, but instead the steward who is keeping it till it moves on to the next owner.

It’s that same feeling that I have about all the objects in my possession. Whether it’s a vacuum cleaner, a knife, or tape measure, when I look at it, I think about the people that brought it to fruition. I think of the people who designed it, assembled it, shipped it across continents, and placed it on a store shelf. When it breaks, I think of its possible future in a landfill somewhere, all of that effort then forgotten. No object deserves that future.

As readers of this site know, I feel strongly about this.

And using well-constructed hand-me-downs has also forced me to become at least somewhat proficient at repair and maintenance, meaning I get to know these things better, which in turn teaches me what about them makes them great in the first place.

Finally, adopting a mindset of being okay using such tools has over time helped me get better at identifying new items that are likely to last long, perpetuating the cycle.

Categories
Discovery and Curation Privacy and Anonymity Products and Design The Next Computer Wellness when Always-On

Work, tools and agency

From the writer Anne Helen Petersen, on “How Work Became An Inescapable Hellhole”:

 Like email, Slack allowed work to spread into the crevices of life where until that point it couldn’t fit. In a more efficient, instantaneous manner than email, it brings the entire office into your phone, which is to say, into your bed, when you land on the plane, when you walk down the street, as you stand in line at the grocery store, or as you wait, half naked, on the exam table for your doctor.

 It didn’t just accelerate communication; it standardized a new, far more addictive form of communication, with a casualness that cloaked its destructiveness. When you “shoot off a few emails” on a Sunday afternoon, for example, you might convince yourself you’re just getting on top of things for the week ahead—which might feeltrue. But what you’re really doing is giving work access to be everywhere you are. 

… the technology writer John Herrman… predicted the ways in which Slack would screw with our conception of work: “Slack is where people make jokes and register their presence; it is where stories and editing and administrating are discussed as much for self-justification as for the completion of actual goals. Working in an active Slack … is a productivity nightmare, especially if you don’t hate your coworkers. Anyone who suggests otherwise is either rationalizing or delusional.”

While I fully agree with tools like Slack breaking down of boundaries between your work sphere and your other spheres, the state of mind that the writer describes is one of a poor pre-existing relationship with work.

It’s important to recognise that the normalisation of remote work and the ubiquity of work tools that are model led on addictive hyper-communicative social media have made this relationship worse, not caused it. Unless you are a bottom-of-the-rung worker drone with no flexibility and no voice, you have the ability, however little, to push back against a 24×7 work culture, a culture that causes enough anxiety that people need to show off their input instead of their output. As the writer herself says,

Many of us still navigate the workplace as if getting paid to produce knowledge means we’re getting away with something, and have to do everything possible to make sure no one realizes they’ve made a massive mistake. No wonder we spend so much time trying to communicate how hard we work.

If it weren’t for these tools, distributed work would have been much more difficult – in many cases impossible. For those companies that have been distributed for a while, it’s given employees the opportunity to optimise their location and time for their other interests and constraints. It’s lowered the overhead of building and scaling an organisation of people. It’s reduced the friction of communication – just five years ago your only option as a smallish company was email, with long chains, lost contexts and renamed file attachments as some form of version control. Today you’re split for choice with Slack, Google Docs, Trello, Notion, Airtable, Zapier and thousands more tools, free and paid.

But no matter how good they get, they are tools meant to serve us. Never the other way around. Regardless of whether you’re a founder or CEO, part of the leadership, or in some position of authority in the company. Be aware of your relationship to work. Make it easier for the ones whose work time your control to immerse themselves in their other sphere. Push back when people above you intrude into your non-work spheres. It’s not always going to result in you getting fired.

Categories
Products and Design

If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it

From this review of the new Fitbit smartwatch

… the Sense has a “solid-state button” on the left. It is, essentially a small, sunken area with capacitive sensing. When you press it with your finger, the watch vibrates, giving you the impression that you’ve pushed a button…

[But] I do not like this solid-state button. Unless you cover the entire button with your finger or thumb when pressing it, it won’t register, which leads to a lot of fiddling. Do you know what rarely suffers this kind of problem? A normal button. Another issue is that at certain angles the left side of the watch will just happen to press into the flesh of my forearm, which the Sense kept reading as a long-press, and so Alexa was constantly popping up and listening for a command. It happened so often that I eventually disabled long-pressing all together. Not ideal!

When you upgrade to a new version of the product you already use, it’s annoying to find that you have lost functionality, especially everyday functionality, because the company decided to pursue something ‘cool’.

I had recent first-hand experience of this. I can set my Fitbit Charge 2 to display the date, time and my progress towards the 250-steps hourly activity goal. It’s perfect and I rely on it constantly. Got a Fitbit Charge 3 for the spouse. It has a much wider range of ‘faces’ you can configure and set. None of them has the activity goal on the home face. Others are similarly annoyed (Fitbit Forum, Fitbit subreddit). It’s impossible to verify this before purchase, and there was no real reason why Fitbit couldn’t have also made it available.

(Featured image photo credit: Sporlab/Unsplash)