The ability to change features, prices, and availability of things you’ve already paid for is a powerful temptation to corporations.

  • corship@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I mean, the analogy doesn’t even work.

    Just because I can only rent a car and not buy it, doesn’t mean it would be fine to smash the window and steal it instead.

    • Tier 1 Build-A-Bear 🧸@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 months ago

      What if the company wasn’t trying to get you to rent the car? What if they tried REALLY hard to get you to think you were buying the car, but once you “bought” it, they start crippling things and telling you you can’t fix it yourself but instead need to pay exorbitant prices for them to “upgrade” it, since, now that you’ve “bought” it, you don’t technically “own” it

    • amki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      The analogy is that you buy a car (because if it breaks, the car and your entertainment stuff, you will buy a new one to replace it, you will also carry all maintenance) but suddenly you can’t drive backwards anymore because the manufacturer decided retroactively that you should pay extra for that (possibly in a subscription).

      I would say it is your good right then to make your car drive backwards regardless of what it may take.