DRM To Be Used In Renault Electric Cars

mahiskali writes with this interesting news via the EFF's Deep Links "The new Renault Zoe comes with a 'feature' that absolutely nobody wants. Instead of selling consumers a complete car that they can use, repair, and upgrade as they see fit, Renault has opted to lock purchasers into a rental contract with a battery manufacturer and enforce that contract with digital rights management (DRM) restrictions that can remotely prevent the battery from charging at all. This coming on the heels of the recent Trans-Pacific Partnership IP Rights Chapter leak certainly makes you wonder how much of that device (car?) you really own. Perhaps Merriam-Webster can simply change the definition of ownership."

Comments

Re:And all these computer parts in cars...

[BronsCon]

You need to check again. Fuel economy is no better now than it was in the 80's; in fact, there were cars that were popular in the 80's that got better mileage than some of today's hybrids.

Not providing a citation since you won't buy it anyway. Do your own research.

Re:And all these computer parts in cars...

[BronsCon]

Crumple zones don't add weight... They're created through the use of (more) thinner and lighter materials, strategically placed so that they push in more easily at first and provide more resistance as they crumple in on themselves. The result is the same amount of material used, overall, and a higher incidence of vehicles totaled in low-speed incidents, e.g. more money for car manufacturers. Air bags, on the other hand, actually provide some amount of actual safety, when combined with properly-fitted and actually-used seatbelts.

Regarding catalytic converters, let me ask you... if my car's emissions are 10% higher, per gallon of fuel burned, without a catalytic converter than they are with it (they are, it's been tested) but my mileage is 20% lower with than without, would that not indicate that, per mile, my vehicle actually pollutes less without the converter? e.g. if I get 30MPG with a converter and release 30ppm of hydrocarbons, but I could be getting 37.5MPG while releasing 33ppm of hydrocarbons, overall I'm burning less fuel and releasing less pollution over the same distance traveled. Since I'm traveling the same number of miles either way, this actually works out in the real world; though I do admit it falls apart when you assume the same quantity of fuel is burned -- there's a reason mileage matters. Mind you the 10% and 15% are estimates but they are very much based on real measurements from the 2000 Corolla I currently own. It's amazing what you can achieve when you stop restricting the flow of exhaust gasses to the point that the engine has to fight against the backpressure of its own waste products.

Also, screw NOx production, controlling combustion chamber temps (which is where your NOx compounds come from) so you don't blow your head through your hood precludes really lean operation, but today's engines could run considerably leaner than they are if people were willing to actually maintain them. The safety margin I mention wouldn't be required if people would spend $200 every 2 years on a pair of O2 sensors; and the fuel efficiency gains that would enable would save them at least double that in fuel costs.