4 ms·
I’m assuming Tesla don’t give you the source code to their cars. Does anyone? I’d love to have a car that can be taken apart and put back together — the engin
by gorgoiler 5y ago
I’m assuming Tesla don’t give you the source code to their cars. Does anyone? I’d love to have a car that can be taken apart and put back together — the engine and the UI. Not because I have the skill or shop needed to do maintenance, but because at least I stand a chance of paying someone else to.
Right now it feels like I’m dealing with a bunch of pirates. I either pay $800 to hack an HDMI cable into my Audi’s virtual cockpit just so I can use a map that’s not 6 years out of date, or $500 to the dealership to install the latest map update pack. Argh!
- chuckSu 5y agoI feel your pain
- hutzlibu 5y agoNo, sadly there is no open source car avaiable (I think some designs exist, coming from univerisies, but nothing you could buy anywhere) I suppose consumers, tuners and repair shops would love it. But I do not see any big company ever going into that direction. It would be interesting, how it could avoid the patent madness. I assume EVERYTHING with cars is patented.
- Roritharr 5y agoI've actually had the intention of building a company focused on manufacturing and selling open-source household appliances, like washing machines, fridges etc. Cars would be the endgame for a company like this. Still in the early planning stages, just creating a good toaster that's repairable, open etc. is an interesting undertaking if you want everything above board.
- have_faith 5y agoAny way I can follow your progress?
- follower 5y agoI spoke about a concept related to this a few years ago in "Fair Trade Consumer Electronics with Open Hardware": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM80hQ117JM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM80hQ117JM Might have some prior art for folks interested in the topic. It's a pretty interesting topic from both a technical & business/marketing point of view. Couple other lists of somewhat related links: * http://web.archive.org/web/20200119053707/http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-open-consumer-electronics http://web.archive.org/web/20200119053707/http://www.labrado... * http://web.archive.org/web/20200119061518/http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-fair-electronics http://web.archive.org/web/20200119061518/http://www.labrado... * http://web.archive.org/web/20200119061518/http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-fair-electronics http://web.archive.org/web/20200119061518/http://www.labrado...
- ArekDymalski 5y ago>But I do not see any big company ever going into that direction. IBM did that with PC architecture and it had profound impact on technology, business and world as a whole I believe.
- batch12 5y agoIt is my understanding that the impact came from the IBM compatible PCs that were reverse engineered to match that architecture.
- the-dude 5y agoThis was the BIOS only. That was only valuable because the rest was already open.
- upofadown 5y agoWhich, interestingly enough, was forced on IBM in the form of a right to repair/interface provision in an anti-trust consent decree targeting mainframes.
- jaclaz 5y agoI don't see an issue with source code, nor intellectual property or similar, it is all about recorded data, the whole point is that Tesla, requested according to the Law to provide the recorded data (decrypted) provided only a (small) subset of such data and the guys from the NFI managed to decrypt the whole stuff, finding out that Tesla omitted data useful to establish the reasons of the crash. It also seems that - casually - the omitted data lead to believe that the root cause was Tesla's autoipilot making the car tailgating the one in front of it. Imagine that an airplane crashes and the decoding of the flight recorder is carried by the airplane manufacturer that omits the part where (say) the tail rudder didn't work as it should have.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]