4 ms·

> Deere's just reiterated that position to a US Copyright Office inquiry on the future of the law, joined by auto manufacturers (but not Tesla)... Bravo, Tesla

• gambiting 9y ago
  Tesla is not hugely better. If you have an accident, the car's computer shuts down and only an authorised Tesla garage can reactivate it. They have effectively DRMd the entire repair process.
  • Clownshoesms 9y ago
    I wonder if that is more to keep a handle on the process though than anything sinister (in the early stages I would do that). Still quietly optimistic about Tesla's effect, so I hope they don't turn out as self-serving as the rest.
    • DiabloD3 9y ago
      I, too, suspect it is done for legal liability issues, since there is a lot of money riding on just killing Tesla outright and plunging car manufacturing back into the dark ages. Tesla and Elon Musk has no interest in preventing people from driving their cars. They have an interest in making sure those cars are safe to drive, something Toyota, VW, GM, Ford, and Chrysler have historically had issues with (Hyundai/Kia, Nissan, and Honda really haven't had issues here, in the interest of fairness). Toyota licensing Tesla tech is a bit of an outlier, which I had assumed at the time was Toyota trying to improve vehicle reliability and safety, but the technology seems to have not gone further than that one series of RAV4s.
      • Clownshoesms 9y ago
        Toyota strike me as extremely pragmatic. I miss that Corona.
  • kuschku 9y ago
    And if you try to modify your own car, they disable it remotely and send a herd of lawyers at you. They're just as bad as John Deere at this.
  • mrweasel 9y ago
    I'm a little torn about that one. It's honestly not a bad idea, but I see how it negatively impacts people ability to repair their own cars. In Europe it's not uncommon for BMW, Mercedes and other luxury cars to find their way to Romania and other eastern European country after they been in an accident. These cars aren't repaired in western Europe because they've been damage so badly that they would be unsafe, even after repairs. It was even the reason for massive thefts of airbags in northern Europe. The airbags would be sold in Romania to the people who where repairing the damaged cars. My point is that the reactivation by an authorised garage helps ensure that dangerous cars are driving around in less regulated / poorer countries.
    • petre 9y ago
      In fact most of the damaged western cars go to Romanian chop shops and get sold for spares. It's an okay business in Romania since repairing your BMW at a dealer could cost as much as getting an used one.
    • gambiting 9y ago
      I can see why they would want to prevent a reactivation of a car that was extremely badly damaged - but then, I don't agree that they should be the ones deciding. I am around people who go off roading a lot and you know why modern vehicles are not a good choice for extreme off roading? Because if you hit a tree and the fender falls off, the computer will tell you that you can't continue driving and shut off the engine. Why is it making that decision for you? Now, I'm not saying that Teslas are used for off roading, but I suppose it's a huge worry that in 10 years time if you have even a minor accident that can be easily repaired, Tesla will just say "sorry, we can't reactivate the computer on that model, it's out of support since 2025" and the only thing you can do is buy a new model. You wouldn't have that problem with a 20 year old Mercedes, would you?
  • pvaldes 9y ago
    This is not new. A lot of car brands have computers that do more or less the same currently. And yes, if your (four or six) airbags are deployed in a car crash often is cheaper to throw it and buy another, than to repair the old car. Probably by design.