Search the Community

This article sibeh zhunkar : https://medium.com/@BookSamurai/you-bought-it-but-dont-own-it-when-tesla-lg-and-smart-locks-turn-against-you-ad2dc552b4bc Think you own your smart TV, car, or digital lock? Think again. This deep dive exposes how companies like LG, Tesla, and others are quietly rewriting the rules of ownership through subscriptions and digital locks. Learn how to fight back and make smarter choices. We used to buy things. Now, we rent features from the products we own. Subscription capitalism has crept into every corner of our lives — quietly, aggressively, and often without consent. It’s no longer just about Netflix or Spotify. It’s your $2,000 smart TV, your fridge, your EV — and, in one horrifying case in Singapore, your front door lock. We are watching in real-time as the idea of ownership is being dismantled, feature by feature, ad by ad, paywall by paywall. LG’s Subscription Play: Turning Appliances Into Ad Platforms In 2023, LG announced it would transform its smart TVs and appliances into an ecosystem of services — complete with ads, subscriptions, and ongoing monetization through its webOS platform. Think your smart fridge is just for storing milk? Think again. It might soon push recipe ads, suggest grocery services, or require a subscription for premium functions. LG’s goal is clear: turn your home into a recurring revenue model. This isn’t just feature expansion — it’s feature gatekeeping. The Printer Industry Walked So LG Could Run This model isn’t new. Printers pioneered it decades ago. They sold you cheap hardware, then charged exorbitantly for ink. Worse, they often blocked third-party cartridges with DRM or “low ink” warnings even when the cartridges were full. And insultingly, people have realised that printer ink costs much more than human blood! One comedian even said in a stand up show that he might just fill his ink cartridges with his own blood to save money. Consumers hated it. But companies loved the profits. And now, it’s scaled into multi-thousand-dollar products. Of course savvy consumers fight back! And companies have relented and offered reasonable alternatives. We actively search for ink‑tank printers from Epson HP or Brother that offer cost-efficient, cartridge-free alternatives. Never will a savvy customer be held hostage to subscription based printing anymore! Consider these Ethical and Pragmatic alternatives: Epson EcoTank L1250 Color Catridge free ink tank — A reliable, refillable printer that minimizes cartridge waste and resists overpriced consumables. Tesla’s Hidden Battery Range: Pay to Unlock What’s Already There Tesla has followed the same playbook. Many Model Y RWD owners discovered their cars were capable of far more range — but only if they paid Tesla a software unlock fee. Up to 60 extra miles, already built in, just sitting behind a digital paywall. This sparked widespread backlash. Imagine buying a full tank of gas, but being told you need to subscribe to access the last quarter. Again, the Internet comes to the rescue, where Hackers have managed to Unlock Tesla Software locked features worth up to $15,000 Tesla reversed some controversial unlocks — but the model raises tough questions about digital ownership. And Then There’s Singapore: Smart Locks Gone Rogue In one of the most chilling examples of digital control, over 50 homeowners in Singapore were locked out of their homes in July 2025. Their smart digital locks — sold and managed by SHP (Smart Home Products) and distributed by Technex International — were remotely disabled after a supplier dispute. Not a tech failure. Not user error. This was a business conflict weaponized. On a personal note, I still trust a regular lock and key and put a copy with a trusted neighbour or family friend. What if your smart car doesn’t start because your subscription lapsed? Or your home becomes inaccessible because of a contract fight? The Bigger Issue: Ownership Is Becoming Illusionary Let’s be blunt: the devices in your home, the features in your vehicle, and the software in your locks are no longer fully yours. Corporations are: Locking hardware behind software Charging for features already built in Injecting ads into previously ad-free appliances Retaining remote control over essential devices This is not just about revenue — it’s about control, trust, and ethics. Where Is the Ethical Responsibility? Is it ethical to sell hardware that can be remotely disabled? Is it fair to charge for functions you already bought? Should customers dig through EULAs to protect basic rights? When a lock company can literally lock you out of your home, we’re not just dealing with subscriptions — we’re confronting corporate gatekeeping of reality. How Consumers Can Fight Back 1. Do Your Research Before Buying Look for products that don’t require ongoing subscriptions to remain functional and that don’t carry remote-disable clauses. 2. Choose Open, Offline-Ready Hardware Schlage Offline Electronic Lock — A robust, stand-alone lock that works without cloud dependencies, protecting you from remote lockouts. 3. Read the Fine Print — and Ask Questions Check for remote-control terms in warranties or T&Cs. Ask sellers directly: “Can this device be deactivated remotely?” 4. Share Your Story The Singapore smart-lock fiasco gained traction because people spoke out. Use reviews and social platforms to shed light on abusive policies. 5. Reward Ethical Brands Support companies that respect ownership and transparency — even if they charge a premium for device autonomy. 6. Demand Better Regulations Call for laws that prohibit unilateral remote disabling and mandate clear disclosure of subscription-based features before purchase. We Must Be Savvy — or Be Subscribed to Death The modern consumer must be vigilant. A fridge that shows ads today; a locked door tomorrow — if we don’t fight to retain control, we risk renting every aspect of our lives. We also have seen this with another glaring example of Microsoft Office being exponentially ditched when they started a subscription and individuals + corporations embracing the full Google Workspace. Individuals hate the subscription service model. We need to let companies know. When they hold consumers ransom and backed to a corner, consumers will fight back.

Source: https://mustsharenews.com/sph-should-remove-paywall/ SPH Is Still Gatekeeping Media Content With Paywall Even Though It’s An “Essential Public Good” Since 2015, The Straits Times (ST) has had a paywall for many of its articles, and in 2018 introduced ST Premium in light of falling profits. On 15 Oct 2018, Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) reported a 19.7 per cent fall in net profit for the year. However, that was not enough to stop SPH from becoming a non-profit organisation (NGO), named SPH Media Trust (SMT) in 2021. Even though the Government promised S$900 million to SMT over the next five years, ST Premium remains. Currently, a subscription costs S$9.90 a month, or S$24.90/month to read it on a tablet. If the Government is already funding SPH with taxpayers’ money, why do citizens still have to pay for articles under their paywall? When announcing SMT’s funding in February 2022, Minister for Communications and Information Josephine Teo said in Parliament that “preserving local news media remains critical”. She also referred to the local news media as an “essential public good in our multiracial, multi-religious society”. If the Government believes that SMT is an “essential public good”, shouldn’t the content on ST and SPH’s other publications be free? What is a public good if it’s not available to all? Since SMT is now legally an NGO, there’s no longer a need to seek profit. It also received funding to restructure its operations last year. Considering the substantial financial support SMT is receiving, there’s no reason why they should charge readers for access to their content. If anything, their publications should be free, especially for Singaporeans. Ms Teo mentioned in Parliament that, “SPH had invested almost S$50 million annually in technology investments and digital talent”. More money than that is flowing into SMT now. How much does ST Premium make for SMT? And is it still necessary to gatekeep this “essential public good” from readers? Marcus