GM Makes $1,500 OnStar Subscription Mandatory on GMC, Buick, Cadillac Models

submitted by Drewski from (thedrive.com)

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]IkeConn 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Eat shit, GM.

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ford better than gm

[–]CreditKnifeMan 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Is this how they'll shut off your non-electric vehicle? Paying a slavery premium.

Is it mandatory on Chevrolet vehicles?

[–]Drewski[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

archive.today mirror

[–]filbs111 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's unclear whether the marketing department dropped the ball. Why not just just include it in the base price? You could say the car costs $100 to get people through the door, then explain that the radio is a mandatory extra for $100,000.

The idea of a car having all the gubbins required for speech transcription, and being connected to the internet, makes me uncomfortable, even if it is officially "turned off". Just because you don't subscribe, doesn't mean that the state can't subscribe (using your money).

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Two ideas come to mind.

One is that participation is required, perhaps to ensure the surveillance is effective.

The other is that, not only are those who can afford new cars more financially comfortable with more to lose, and potentially in positions of power and able to force their future surveillance participation upon their underlings, but perhaps this is just another way to normalize and enforce the idea of all pervasive surveillance upon the masses. Death by a thousand cuts.

[–]Touchngo 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Customer: Isn't OnStar an option?

Salesman: Well, yes, it is.

Customer: Ok, I don't want it.

Salesman: While it is an option, it's a mandatory option!

WTF GM? Are you actively trying to lose customers?

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well that's settled it. I'm definitely buying a used car. Thanks OP.

[–]cant_even 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

People should reflect on what a 'transport device' entails, and what it's used for.

Cars are used to get you somewhere, and also to get you away from persons and situations you've decided it's in your best interest to depart. In the latter scenarios, time is often of the essence.

Any 'authority' mandating such a system should be totally liable for any harm that comes from malfunctions, false alarms, and the decision process by which they decided to prioritize its use.

In simpler times, horse-thieves were routinely hanged because depriving someone of transportation was often a death-sentence on its own. The 'post-industrial West' isn't all that different in some areas.