66
submitted 11 months ago by Illecors@lemmy.cafe to c/folderol@lemmy.cafe

I do wonder how were they going to enforce it in the first place.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Illecors@lemmy.cafe 9 points 11 months ago

I guess I was going more for the legal reasoning rather than technical. Yes, technically disabling a computer is trivial. I just can't see how a company can do that when it's legal property of somebody else. That's just a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

why would laws and regulations stop muski ?

[-] McNomin@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Just a guess, but perhaps it's treated as a software license?

[-] Illecors@lemmy.cafe 4 points 11 months ago

It might be tesla's wishlist, but no way you can brick a car and use that as an excuse.

[-] McNomin@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The car still functions so not fully bricked, but I see the argument that the purchased self driving function is bricked. Wouldn't be surprised if there's language in the agreement that deems it as a service. Just another shitty business practice to increase bottom line.

this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
66 points (92.3% liked)

Folderol

97 readers
1 users here now


From Cambridge Dictionary:

unnecessary actions or words that have little meaning and make something seem more important or complicated than it really is


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS