That's a hell of a defeatist attitude, and exactly the result they are hoping for.

What's the advantage in having a self-driving car?

Why is a self-driving car so important to you? Is it really worth giving up your privacy, and advocating that others should give up theirs, just for some shortcoming in your own capabilities?

> electric-drivetrain with onboard gasoline generator

Generally speaking, it's more efficient to power a car using a series-parallel hybrid system than an electric drivetrain with generator (series hybrid) while not really being any more complicated.

In a series hybrid (electric with generator), you're losing energy converting the rotational energy into electric energy. It's better to use the engine's output to power the wheels while it's in an efficient range. It's why Toyota's series-parallel hybrid design offered better mileage than vehicles that (primarily or fully) operated as series hybrids like the Chevy Volt.

> No screens

You can't really sell a car without a screen due to government regulations which require backup cameras (since 2018 in North America, since 2022 in the EU and Japan).

> no assists

Automatic Emergency Braking is going to be required in the US in 2029 (detecting frontal crashes about to happen and automatically braking, including pedestrian detection).

The EU requires even more including blind spot detection and lane-keeping assist.

I certainly agree that cars need knobs and buttons for controls like AC/heat, music, etc. However, it'd be hard to make a car where you aren't putting in a screen and assistive technology. I think a better argument would be to make a car where the screen was simply Apple CarPlay/Android Auto and a backup camera - rather than shoving a lot of garbage UX into it.

There is no way that is true, basic cars have always existed, like Dacia with bare minimum features to pass all requirements and they are far from being popular. The fact of the matter is, is that people just like fancy things and cars especially

It is probably like with smart TV's where the value of the telemetry data ends up subsidizing a significant fraction of the hardware. Car manufacturers seem to be doing a lot of experiments with what they can charge for in terms of ongoing subscriptions. I am sure if they could show ads without it being considered distracting they would.

I think the problem is there isn't a fortune there. It would be a successful endeavor, but not something to rake in huge piles of cash. The kinds of leaders and investors who could pull off what you're describing are instead working where they can make multi-millions rather that multi-hundreds of thousands.

Well, Bollinger Motors tried just that, but they couldn't make it fly.

However, you now have a chance to buy one of the rare prototypes!

https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/bollin...

A screen for the back-up camera is federally required for new cars in the US, afaik. But using the screen for additional purposes is still optional... for now...

Cars are now using eSIMs. Cutting an antenna wire only limits the effectiveness of the communication. You can wirelessly send and receive data with a solder terminal on a board if you're dedicated enough.

I wonder if removing the antenna would possibly cause the modem to try to transmit at a higher power level, thus running the car's battery down.

Yeah this would be different. Also let me tell you my approach so I disconnected my car's data connectivity unit and all that does is forward the signal from the cell antennas down to the main head unit. So by disconnecting it my car doesn't actually know that it cell service has been turned off it literally just thinks there is no signal right now.

There's a post earlier linking to someone doing that for a Tacoma