You don't hate BMW enough

The video discusses how modern automakers, specifically BMW, often choose to limit car functionality and penalize users rather than educating them on benefits. The focus is on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which combine aspects of gas and electric cars. A PHEV offers the energy density of a gas car for long trips (quick refueling) and the efficiency of an electric motor for daily commutes. Electric cars require 20-40 minutes to charge from 0-100%, while gas cars take 45-90 seconds to fill. The significant cost of an electric car's large battery ($15,000-$30,000 for 300 miles of range) is mitigated in a PHEV, which uses a smaller battery (15-30 miles range) supplemented by a gas engine. This setup allows for more efficient electric driving for most commutes (typically 9-20 miles) and the convenience of gas for longer journeys. Charging an electric car at home is significantly cheaper per mile than buying gas. The optimal use of a PHEV is to plug it in daily and primarily use electricity, reserving gas for when the battery runs out. This method is cheaper due to lower electricity costs. However, some drivers forget or choose not to charge their vehicles regularly. BMW's chairman of the supervisory board, Nicholas Peters, views this as a "behavioral problem" that "discredits a climate friendly technology." He proposed a technical measure: if owners never plug in, engine power could be reduced to "persuade them to use the charging port." The speaker strongly criticizes this approach, arguing that it's punitive and ineffective. He believes that once a product is sold, its usage is up to the owner. Instead of penalizing, he suggests informing users about the financial and time savings of charging. For example, a car could calculate and display how much money a driver would have saved by plugging in, or how much time they wasted at gas stations for short trips. The speaker also highlights practical challenges, such as the difficulty or added expense of charging for some users. He cites his own experience in New York City, where a garage with charging cost an additional $300-$400 per month compared to a standard garage. Penalizing users without considering these real-world constraints is unfair. He argues that effective advocacy and "good activism" involve showing people how a technology can improve their lives, save them money, or make things easier, rather than scolding or punishing them. He contrasts this with his own right-to-repair advocacy, where he demonstrates the joy and financial benefits of fixing devices, rather than lecturing. Punitive measures, he concludes, are not only "evil and shitty" but also ineffective, often leading people to resent the very technology being promoted. He emphasizes the importance of treating users as individuals with independent thoughts and decisions, rather than "livestock to be controlled."