4 ms·

Software-like licenses make their way to hardware world. I wonder how soon we'll start seeing "as is" and "no guarantees of any kind" clauses…

erikpukinskis 9y ago
I mean... Autopilot is software, right?
- sjwright 9y ago
  If you consider that the hardware is entirely comprised of third-party commodity parts* then yes, whatever it is that makes Autopilot a distinct product/proposition is entirely software. * It's all really just off-the-shelf cameras, sensors, processors etc sourced from various suppliers. Of course we should acknowledge that the validation and alignment of these parts plays an important role, but there's not really any secret sauce there.
- elmigranto 9y ago
  I wouldn't say that. It certainly not exclusively software and I don't think it is honest to divide a system like that into "soft" and "hard" components, since neither one has value for customer on its own.
  - jyrkesh 9y ago
    Really? You don't see this as any different than iOS running on an iPhone? I can't use the iOS license on any other device, I can't run binaries on the device outside of what's available on the App Store. I'm wholly restricted to their rules on both the hardware and software sides of things.
    - elmigranto 9y ago
      I don't get what's the disagreement here. Apple sells you a whole system, iPhone + iOS. They don't sell you two things, like in PC world, for example, and that's different and that's okay as long as everyone is upfront about it. What I am saying is that Apple sells you a product. You own it. You can do whatever you want with it. Feel free to alter any part of it, just don't expect it to work or keep your warrantee. The fact the product has limitations out of the box is a different matter. (Kind of like no one complains that kitchen timer can't boil water, or doesn't have nanoseconds precision — you want those things, you buy a different thing or make your own.) What Apple doesn't do is to restrict you in how you use their product. There's no such thing like "you can only non-commercially photograph your family" or "never resell your iPhone", or "detaching screen is illegal". And, more importantly, there is nothing Apple can do to stop you from doing any of those things.
      - elmigranto 9y ago
        In a nutshell, the difference is "sell" vs "license", "own" vs "rent". You own your iPhone and you rent your Tesla Autopilot it seems.
quotemstr 9y ago
People try these shenanigans every generation or so. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
- barrkel 9y ago
  It's not going to work, things will change or we will have no self driving cars. There must be someone who's liable, and that person will be the corporation that wrote the software. That in turn will mean restrictions; the software must be updated on a timely basis, and the risk to the company must be controlled in an actuarial sense just like vehicle insurance. Vehicle insurance like today can't be used because incentives aren't aligned. Fully self-driving cars will come with an insurance package, and the company will need to control its insurable risk, or there will be no self-driving cars at all. If it's against the law, the law will change, not the model. I'm sorry, but society will demand it. You will not and cannot have full ownership control over a self-driving car.

erikpukinskis 9y ago

I mean... Autopilot is software, right?

sjwright 9y ago
If you consider that the hardware is entirely comprised of third-party commodity parts* then yes, whatever it is that makes Autopilot a distinct product/proposition is entirely software. * It's all really just off-the-shelf cameras, sensors, processors etc sourced from various suppliers. Of course we should acknowledge that the validation and alignment of these parts plays an important role, but there's not really any secret sauce there.
elmigranto 9y ago
I wouldn't say that. It certainly not exclusively software and I don't think it is honest to divide a system like that into "soft" and "hard" components, since neither one has value for customer on its own.
- jyrkesh 9y ago
  Really? You don't see this as any different than iOS running on an iPhone? I can't use the iOS license on any other device, I can't run binaries on the device outside of what's available on the App Store. I'm wholly restricted to their rules on both the hardware and software sides of things.
  - elmigranto 9y ago
    I don't get what's the disagreement here. Apple sells you a whole system, iPhone + iOS. They don't sell you two things, like in PC world, for example, and that's different and that's okay as long as everyone is upfront about it. What I am saying is that Apple sells you a product. You own it. You can do whatever you want with it. Feel free to alter any part of it, just don't expect it to work or keep your warrantee. The fact the product has limitations out of the box is a different matter. (Kind of like no one complains that kitchen timer can't boil water, or doesn't have nanoseconds precision — you want those things, you buy a different thing or make your own.) What Apple doesn't do is to restrict you in how you use their product. There's no such thing like "you can only non-commercially photograph your family" or "never resell your iPhone", or "detaching screen is illegal". And, more importantly, there is nothing Apple can do to stop you from doing any of those things.
    - elmigranto 9y ago
      In a nutshell, the difference is "sell" vs "license", "own" vs "rent". You own your iPhone and you rent your Tesla Autopilot it seems.

quotemstr 9y ago

People try these shenanigans every generation or so. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

barrkel 9y ago
It's not going to work, things will change or we will have no self driving cars. There must be someone who's liable, and that person will be the corporation that wrote the software. That in turn will mean restrictions; the software must be updated on a timely basis, and the risk to the company must be controlled in an actuarial sense just like vehicle insurance. Vehicle insurance like today can't be used because incentives aren't aligned. Fully self-driving cars will come with an insurance package, and the company will need to control its insurable risk, or there will be no self-driving cars at all. If it's against the law, the law will change, not the model. I'm sorry, but society will demand it. You will not and cannot have full ownership control over a self-driving car.