• ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Fuck yeah, I love tactical controls. There’s just something nice about something physical you can feel and manipulate.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    No I wouldn’t say touchscreens are out, I would say augmenting them with physical buttons is about to get popular.

  • MonkeyBusiness@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    3 days ago

    They are more safe since people can feel the buttons without taking their eyes off of the road. I don’t understand why they thought it was a good idea to use touchscreens.

    • RenegadeTwister@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      It had nothing to do with being a good idea. It was just the more profitable idea. Tactile controls cost more to install than a cheap touchscreen with a dogshit GUI. Bonus being you have a proprietary part, the consumer can’t easily swap out later if they want. So you’ve baked in some nice obsolescence to boot.

      Ain’t capitalism great? Race to the bottom.

      • MonkeyBusiness@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        In my lurking time here, I have seen many comments on Lemmy that criticize capitalism, but I think it’s not as bad as it is made out to be on here. I earn money by working, can spend my money on what I want, and can start a business if I wanted to. The best businesses are rewarded with more money while poor businesses fail. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Admittedly, it is possible that I am wrong because I have never studied economy other than the short lessons from required college classes my first two years. Do you have any objective sources where I can start to learn? I tend to be liberal/Democrat, btw.

        • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          The best businesses are rewarded with more money while poor businesses fail.

          Absolutely 100% false.

        • omarfw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I earn money by working

          But do you earn enough? Does the working class earn enough? The general consensus for most people is no. The vast majority of wealth that the working class produces every year does not make it into the hands of the people who produced it, but rather the oligarchs who already possess most of the wealth already.

          I can spend my money on what I want, and can start a business if I wanted to.

          These are not exclusive to only capitalism. People were trading money for goods and starting businesses for thousands of years before capitalism was around.

          The best businesses are rewarded with more money while poor businesses fail.

          This is how it’s supposed to work in a merit driven free market economy, but that’s not how late stage capitalism plays out.

          Many corporations are run by imbeciles and hemorrhage money, pursue short term profits at the expense of long term sustainability, treat their workers horribly, and rely on their monopolistic position in the market to survive rather than merit, competence, ethics, or quality. When they finally make an error that would normally bankrupt a company out of existence, they simply cry to the government for bailout money, and they get it every time because our politicians are bought and owned by billionaires and their lobbyists. This is the core principle of an oligarchy, which we are, and which capitalism always evolves into given enough time.

          The rich get bailouts, the workers do not. This is a direct product of wealth inequality and regulatory capture that capitalism inherently generates.

          The main argument against capitalism is that it leads to only a privileged few getting all the wealth, opportunities and freedom while the rest become wage slaves and debt slaves. It is the ultimate capitulation to artificial scarcity as if that’s somehow the best we can do as a species.

          All the homelessness, overpriced healthcare and education, unaffordable housing, etc exists because of capitalism and it’s supporters look at this and say “good. fuck the poor.” or “this is the best we can do.”

          I stopped being a libertarian because I was tired of the cynical capitulation.

          • bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            The funniest thing is that the final stage of unbound capitalism means no estate and then, when they need help there will be nobody to save them.

        • oo1@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          You’re talking about free and open competition in a perfect competition marketplace. This is an ideal (similarly far-fetched as communism/socialism*) where there are low barriers to entry, and consumers have good information to make well informed choices. In this world competition bid’s down excess profits in the long run - essentially to consumers benefit. not the benefit of producers. wages are low but it doesnt so much matter becauases competition keeps prices low.

          Capitalism wants to increase the return to capital , so it works against competition to create market power (by many means including legal system power and regulatory capture as well tacit or explicit corruption) both over consumers and over their own supply chain (e.g. employees). It inherits its legacy from rentierism and landowners who also like to monopolize land, ration it and have tenants bid up rents.

          ‘objective sources’, on economics? Good luck. economists are so bi-assed that most of them can spew shit out of two holes simultaneously.

          • both communism and perfect competition probably work fine in a small closed community, where everyone pretty much has repeated interactions with everyone - visibility - and there will be other examples where they each work fine-ish, but on a large enough scale, anomynity and human nature come into play. The reality is human trust is excellent, but some people will abuse it when they think they’ll get away with it and that destroys it.
        • BlueMacaw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Wouldn’t your comment equally apply to being a small business owner (let’s say blacksmith) under feudalism? As a good blacksmith, you will earn more clients and prestige, while poor blacksmiths won’t get repeat business. You might be able to expand your forge and hire more people to do the tedious work of making chainmail or whatever.

          I don’t know that anyone can ever provide an “objective” source on capitalism. Anyone who writes on the topic has inherent biases. Here are a few: https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-at-Work-Cure-Capitalism/dp/1608462471

          https://www.amazon.com/Slow-Down-Manifesto-KOHEI-SAITO/dp/1662602723

          https://www.chelseagreen.com/product/doughnut-economics-paperback/

          https://www.amazon.com/What-Wrong-Capitalism-Ruchir-Sharma/dp/1668008262

          https://www.amazon.com/There-Are-No-Accidents-Disaster_Who/dp/1982129689

          https://www.amazon.com/Deaths-Despair-Future-Capitalism-Anne/dp/0691217076

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Yup. “Capitalism” has become a punching bag for people who are frustrated about some form of government protectionism or lack of interventionism. If you ask someone to define it, you’ll get wildly different answers based on whatever they’re frustrated by. The real problem is cronyism, where the “haves” get special treatment from those in power so both sides benefit.

            Example w/ Musk and Trump

            As an example, look at Elon Musk buddying up to Trump. There are two explanations (probably more) here:

            • Musk actually thinks Trump is the best thing since sliced bread
            • Musk wants protectionism in the form of more EV tariffs, which will absolutely benefit his cash cow, Tesla

            This all happens under “capitalism” because Musk is motivated to get more capital, but it’s happening through government, which ends up essentially as a government subsidy of Tesla (and other domestic EVs) using taxpayer dollars (in this case tariffs). It’s not a direct handover of cash, but when your foreign competition needs to charge twice as much as they normally would, there’s less motivation for your company to drop prices.

            Capitalism is intended to be a system where the market is largely separate from the government, but everything is co-mingled and people point to the knotted mess as “capitalism,” when really it’s a mess of different political ideologies all messing with market forces. What we actually need is for more capitalism, as in less government interference w/ the market, so market forces can actually fix things.

            Potential solutions to better use market forces

            This means:

            • less protection for corporations - rich people using tactical bankruptcies indicates a broken system
            • fewer regulations, but higher penalties - regulations reduce the penalties for bad action to a fine, we need lawsuits and jail time
            • fairer tax system - we currently reward capital gains far more than earned income, we exclude a significant amount of inheritance from taxation, and we have structures (trusts and whatnot) to further protect money from taxation; the tax system should be drastically simplified to reduce abuse
            • enforce anti-trust more consistently and frequently

            There’s certainly more we could do, but the above should significantly help correct the major problems we see today. Right now, it takes a massive scandal for a wealthy person or very large business to fail, and the above would dramatically reduce the scandal needed to cause one to fail.

            “More capitalism” doesn’t mean screwing over the poor either. In fact, if you look at the Nordic countries, they’re actually more capitalist than the US ins many ways, and they have solid social programs. The difference is that there are clearer boundaries between government and the market, so you don’t end up with as much weird “collaboration” between companies and the government.

            I personally believe in UBI/NIT (Universal Basic Income/Negative Income Tax) instead of most welfare programs (perhaps keep Medicare/Medicaid, but replace Social Security, food/housing assistance, etc) to minimize the disruption of natural market forces. That would be a very capitalist-friendly solution where the government and the market stay in their own lanes.

            • moonbunny@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Thats a pretty thorough reply which gives some further insight into the issues we’re facing. While the ideas certainly makes sense in a vacuum (especially with governments and markets staying in their lane), there is a major issue in that the very politicians managing the government would have a pretty big conflict of interest which would prevent the sort of reforms necessary, as most politicians would fall under one or more of the following:

              • They own/run businesses from prior to running for a political position- there’s always going to be a subconscious bias towards playing favours especially as they can go back to said business if they don’t last a term
              • They have a stake in the businesses that are in the free market
              • They could be receiving gifts and/or contributions from businesses that have a vested interest in having a politician that aligns with the business’ political agenda, including having a position for a politician if they lose a re-election bid

              It’s really difficult to see how the government can be separated from the free market if the politicians are closely involved with the businesses, which can later be deemed as “too big to fail”.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Yeah, we need a lot of reforms to fix underlying problems that get in the way of progress. Some things that I think can help:

                • voting reform - STAR, approval, or even ranked choice voting to better reflect the will of the people
                • electoral reform - some solution to gerrymandering, either algorithmic redistricting or (my preference) proportional representation
                • reduce obstructionism - in the US, I’d prefer for the House to pass laws, and for the Senate to ratify them with a high vote tally (say, 60% to block a piece of legislation)

                These are large shifts in how governments are organized, and potentially could be passed through large-scale public protests, like the Civil Rights Movement in the US. The public is incredibly hard to motivate, so organizers need to be really careful about which causes they push for. My preference is the second, because I think it has the best chance of creating positive, long-term change, and it’s something that’s pretty hard for politicians to competently argue against.

            • Jarix@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              First time hearing negative income tax but sounds like an idea i had after a nice walk after the edible kicked in lol

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          The best businesses are rewarded with more money while poor businesses fail.

          citation needed

    • moakley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      That’s true.

      With a T9 phone, I used to be able to send a complete text message without ever taking my eyes off the road.

      Now that I’ve got a touchscreen I’m swerving all over the place every time I try to text. It’s way less safe.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      One word. Tesla.

      It became the Apple of automobiles and everyone was rushing to copy them. Then came the fall of Elon and everyone is realizing how full of shit the company is.

    • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Cheap tech that looks expensive, that is why we have touch screens. Also harder to repair for the customer to do. A physcial button is easy to replace and quick.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      There’s a kind of people who think they don’t need to know an industry to know where it’s heading and where the progress is.

      Mobile computers being thinner and replacing buttons with touchscreens are from that kind of delusions.

      Now built-in chatbots with voice recognition and synthesis are all the rage. If you remember that “elevator in Scotland” sketch.

  • Subtracty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    3 days ago

    Plotnick, an associate professor of cinema and media studies at Indiana University in Bloomington, is the leading expert on buttons and how people interact with them.

    I like that being a leading expert on buttons is a profession that exists in this world. You go Rachel Plotnick.

    • Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      Leading expert on buttons says to use buttons?

      Mild shock

      Seriously though they are needed for many features especially cars or eyes away

      • TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Leading expert on buttons says to use buttons?

        It’s exactly what Big Button wants you to think!!! Wake up sheeple!!!1!1!11

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m just shocked that’s a cinema and media studies professor. I’d’ve expected human factors engineering or psychology, especially at such a psych school

      • EpeeGnome@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Professors don’t always teach in their actual area of expertise. I had a German language professor whose PhD was in Philosophy and activity published in that field, in English, German and French journals. It does seem like an odd combination, but probably not a lot of students signing up for a class in usability of buttons, even from the fields you would expect to study them .

  • RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Touchscreens can stay, but only for non-essential tasks like changing settings or entering addresses. Climate, media, and all other controls you usually use while driving should be tactile by mandate.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      Here’s my rule: Anything in my Chevy S10 that you control by turning a knob, moving a lever, or momentarily push a button? That needs to be a physical control in a car. Anything where you push and hold a button, or mash a button multiple times (like setting the clock or turning off the DRLs respectively) can be moved to a settings menu in a touch screen. These things shouldn’t be done while moving.

      And no, touch sensitive single-function panels like the climate controls in my father’s Avalon are not good enough, it needs to be a mechanical control that you can feel for without activating.

      • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        96
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Yeah, so the thing is, any amount of trust that I had has already been completely destroyed. “We don’t do it anymore because it’s illegal, trust me bro” isn’t going to cut it. Does the bill include mandatory prison time for executives for violations, or just cost-of-doing-business fines? Will this be enforced by a government regulatory body that is not literally outnumbered 20:1 by car manufacturer lawyers?

        If the car has any kind of network capabilities and 100% of the car’s software is not open source, I’m not buying it. Period.

        This bill would not need to exist if cars were FOSS, or if cars were non-networked. Those are the only 2 solutions that I will accept. This bill is worthless to me.

        • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 days ago

          I didn’t read too far, but,

          To restrict car manufacturers and other companies from selling consumer car-related data, increase transparency regarding data practices, and for other purposes.

          already skips over collecting the data, so yeah. I would guess this bill just exists for the optics, and isn’t actually intended to challenge the industry.

        • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          I agree with you, the damage has been done. That’s why I’m looking at alternative methods of transportation, like an ebike or public transit. Hopefully your area has good infrastructure for that.

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s nice to have principles, but in a few years you’re going to have to find a new way to get around.

          • Cris@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            I mean, a lot of cars have a genuinely phenomenal life span, if you don’t mind getting something that isn’t shiny and new you can probably get like a 2012 Toyota or Honda and drive it till the wheels fall off. My dream car is from the 90s and people still generally regard them as fairly reliable

            Eventually it’ll be an issue, but that does leave a lot of time for nerds and hackers to find a way to gut networking stuff while telling the car it’s still intact. Dunno if we’ll ever see an open source car OS compatible with the systems in major manufacturer’s vehicles, but privacy workarounds feel like they could be pretty realistic

            • Anivia@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              My dream car is from the 90s and people still generally regard them as fairly reliable

              I would not want to share the road with modern oversized cars while driving a car with 90s crash safety

              I drive a Miata as a 2nd car for weekend fun, but it’s not a real option as a daily driver if you value your life

              Not to mention that it uses 8 liters of gas per 100km, whilst my daily driver averages 12wkh per 100km

              • Cris@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Thats fair. A na miata is basically my dream car, I hope to someday daily one in spite of being from the 90s 😅

          • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Lol cars last more than “a few years”, my current vehicle is 20 years old. I’ll easily get another 150,000 miles out of it, probably more. I already have a crate motor picked out to swap in when the engine finally dies. Or I could just “upgrade” to a newer year and still be non-networked.

            Now I’m being a little silly, but at this rate of climate change acceleration, I’m starting to bet that my current vehicle is going to outlive capitalism anyway.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      81
      ·
      3 days ago

      my issue isn’t really with the brightness, it’s the height. Don’t get me wrong bright headlights are annoying as fuck, but a huge ass truck behind me with their headlights literally higher than my back window is insane.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        3 days ago

        My point exactly. The brightness is great, when it works in your favor. But when a modern car sits at such a height, where the low-beams shine directly over the top of my car, it’s obnoxious

        • Throw_away_migrator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          3 days ago

          Especially when people fuck with the ride height on their trucks. They almost always end up with the front higher than the back, relative to it’s stock setting. Then don’t bother to adjust the head light angle to compensate.

          Then, on I need a massive light bar on the top of my truck. Never mind that I never take this thing off road or do any work with it. It looks cool and it’s bright and shiny.

          Fuck off. Can we just tax these things properly and not v give them a lower tax rate since their classed as commercial vehicles. No one buying these massive boats uses them for more than going to home Depot once a year to buy some leaf bags.

          /Rant

        • T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          3 days ago

          That, and people don’t know how to adjust them, or are unwilling to. My parents’ cars have a dial to adjust the headlight angle for when carrying weight in the back of the car, or when towing, but they never touch the setting.

          • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            I miss that in my old car. When I’m drivng around in the city and don’t rally need much headlighting I’d angle them all the way down. When I’m in a dark area where there’s enough people that I can’t use my brights I’d just angle them up. My current car has stupid self leveling headlights so I don’t get any of that fun :(

      • Franklin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t know the white point on some of the LED headlights is extremely taxing to look at at night.

      • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        My car has adjustable headlight height and I love it. I put em all the way down because they’re stupid bright.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      That and buttons that are almost as flat as touchscreens.

      I want my clickety-click Fallout and Star Wars rugged industrial feeling.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        And for some reason my state still doesn’t have properly reflecting paint, so everyone drives with their high-beams on because otherwise you can’t see the lanes. The net result is that nobody can see anything because they’re constantly being blinded by oncoming traffic.

        It sucks all the way down…

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Never had an issue with them but then I live in Europe, where auto-adjusting/adaptive lights aren’t just legal it’s a requirement if you want to make the headlights permanent high-beams.

  • Babalugats@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Touch screens are shit tor buttons. They can be hacked. They can be unresponsive.

    There’s a load of other reasons, but either or both are enough to realise that a physical button is much safer. Perfect example of safety being lost in technology. Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should.

  • Unknown1234_5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    3 days ago

    Should be illegal to have touchscreen controls in a car, it requires you to look at it to effectively control it, which means the car forces you to ignore the road to do anything.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Also, bring back gauges, instead of idiot-lights. It’s nice to know when a problem is beginning (overheating, etc) before it becomes a crisis when you have no choice but to pull over.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah I hate it when information is hidden in the name of minimalism. I’d rather have a plane cockpit UI than a bicycle UI, even if it means I feel like an idiot at various points when I discover new things I could have been doing the whole time.

      • Broken@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        My hybrid dash is anything but minimal. I have a zillion selections to show me a slew of random things. None of them are an engine temperature reading. So frustrating.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          If it hasn’t happened already, it wouldn’t surprise me if useful instrumentation space is reallocated to advertisement space at some point. Though hopefully the consumer rage in response would end whatever company tries that first.

          • Broken@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’ll start as a feature. When you need gas we’ll automatically show you the cheapest gas stations around you. People will gobble it up.

    • Kethal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I recently learned that in my car the same light is used to indicate that the parking brake is on and that the brake fluid is low. Nothing bad happened, and it’s getting worked on, but my first thought was that the sensor on the brake must be broken. It’s poor design, seemingly without reason.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’m so glad I kept my car and weathered through this shitty phase of car manufacturing.

    If only there was hope for weathering through the data collection, subscription-based features and the death of sedans though…

    • pinkystew@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I asked a dealer for a dumb-car. No fucking auto 911 dialing, bluetooth enabled, GPS service horseshit, just a normal car and he shot me

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Well, there are some strategies:

      • data collection - remove/disable the antenna/broadcasting chip - in some cars it’s as easy as removing a fuse, in others you need to take things apart to remove the TCU or modem
      • subscription-based features - don’t buy them and look for hacks to enabled them w/o buying
      • death of sedans - buy sedans

      Unfortunately, that’s a drop in the bucket since it seems the market in general wants larger cars with more spyware, and aren’t pushing back enough on subscription BS.

      I’m actively looking for a car, and unfortunately the process is:

      1. find models we want to try out
      2. look up online about how to disable the spyware nonsense
      3. actually go look at cars
      4. repeat from 1 as necessary
      5. play dealership games because the private used market is essentially gone
      6. actually remove spyware

      We’re on step 3, and I’m not looking forward to step 5. I’ve actually never purchased from a dealer before, because I’ve bought everything before now from a private seller. Wish me luck…

    • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Get any Infiniti with a 3g antenna. The network doesn’t exist anymore so it can’t phone home.

  • FrankFrankson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    183
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Touchscreens were never popular with customers. Manufacturers kept cramming touchscreens in cars and using them to control everything becuase they were being stupid with new tech.

    Edit: I guess I should have been clearer. I was talking about as a replacement for tactile controlls in a car like the article is talking about. Reverse cameras and other things that are good to have a touch screen for make perfect sense but using your touch screen to control your Air conditioning in a way that you have to divert your attention from the road to operate sliders and buttons on a touch screen is dumb as hell.

    • Sunshine @lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      97
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Also the fact that touch screens are cheaper to build with how expensive battery tech has been in electric cars.

        • Rizo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          One of the biggest problems with touch is still that you have to take your eyes off the road (for quite some time). I have no issue if we are talking about some internal media center stuff and you still have some sort of haptic button on a steering wheel. But as soon as we are talking about AC, fans and everything you sometimes need to drive, I’m off.

          • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            3 days ago

            Teslas are so bad for this, that whole “all the controls are on a big ipad” setup should be illegal.

    • Anivia@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Touchscreens are great to have, controlling Android Auto or Apple Carplay with physical buttons like you have to do in a Mazda is a nightmare.

      The problem is when the touchscreen is used as a replacement for physical controls, instead of an addition. Stuff like controlling your climate control should not be exclusively controlled through the touchscreen

      And don’t even get me started about VWs stupid decision to put touch controls on the steering wheel. At least they backpedaled on that decision pretty quickly

      • svtdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        My wife and I drive almost the same model of Audi, separated by a couple of years. One still has physical buttons for infotainment and one has a touch screen, but both support Android Auto and CarPlay.

        I prefer the physical controls for it, because I can glance at the screen and know “turn right two clicks and press down” to get where I want, and then look back at the road while I do it.

        • ditty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I added Android Auto and Apple Carplay to my 2016 Audi via an aftermarket add-on module that ties into its native MMI system and it requires me to use the dial and buttons to interact with it. I also really like doing it that way for the reason you described. I can easily switch apps and navigate menus by counting clicks without taking my eyes off the road. Plus I can still use my phone for some of the more complicated interactions like entering in addresses that Google Assistant can’t decipher (only when the vehicle is stopped and in a brief and safe manner, of course)

    • DannyMac@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 days ago

      Touchscreens are cheaper UI part too. It saved money and “looked cool”… Win-win for shareholders

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      In my 2021 Seat Leon the controls for defogging the windscreen and the heated rear window (both essential in Sweden) are placed on a cluster of touch buttons below and to the left of the steering wheel.

      It is insane, you have to take you eyes off the road and lean forward to press them.

      Also, to activate the seat heater, you need to access the climate panel on the infotainment, so you loose the view of any CarPlay navigation.

      The car has dedicated touch surfaces to change the AC temp, but the main ones are next to the power button touch area for the infotainment, and none of the areas are illuminated.

      I like my car, it is fun and comfortable, but the overreliance of touch controls is infuriating at times.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Touch screens also seem like they would be easier to integrate with subscription services. Auto manufacturers are looking to make things like heated seats a subscription.

      Cars have been getting steadily worse. There doesn’t seem to be any enforcement of recalls (has anyone satisfactorily had the Honda Civic 2016-2021 air conditioning resolved? How much did you spend?)

      If they can take cars away from us entirely, and move to us renting self driving cars, that’s what they would really want to do. Pay for your radio, pay for heat and AC…

    • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Id settle just for a truck that isnt very clearly pandering “im a big boy!” energy. There all way too fucking big for no god damn reason other than validation of ego. Bunch of weak fucking man babies need some million ton 3 lane wide truck just so they can pretend theyre a big strong man to themselves and everyone else, despite never using the truck for what its purpose is supposed to be.

      • Kethal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I have heard that the reason for this is that trucks in that size range are less regulated by the EPA. Companies didn’t want to put in the research to develop trucks that met emissions standards, so they just make them really heavy for no purpose, evading regulations. Take this with a grain of salt, because I’ve done zero research of my own on it.

        • NoFuckingWaynado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think any truck gets a pass. Even a Honda Civic raised an inch or two, slap a bigger greenhouse on it, and send it on it’s way as a CUV.

          I suspect the growth spurt has more to do with “tax loophole trucks.” I might be wrong on both points.

      • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        YES! Where is my dad’s little Toyota Pickup? Closest thing we have is the Ford Maverick, which is still pretty fucking huge.

        • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Indeed, Nissan should respond with their e-Power hybrid too. Toyota applied for a patent using the Stout name in South America.

        • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Was always a fan of the tacoma they were making before they increased the size of it, thing was kind of the perfect size. Roomy enough cabin, small enough to be drivable in a parking lot, enough bed for towing occasionally.

      • mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Maybe a Ford Maverick or a Honda Ridgeline. The other trucks are just unreasonable. $80K for a Tundra, or $60K for a Tacoma? WTF!!!

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 days ago

    Thank god! Touch screens on the stuff in cars are a huge pain in the ass if you have hands as big as mine and the icons are all tiny