4 ms·

As do I. However, the friction that no one wants to part with (regulator or manufacturer) is the assurance that "nothing has been tinkered with by anyone who ca

As do I. However, the friction that no one wants to part with (regulator or manufacturer) is the assurance that "nothing has been tinkered with by anyone who can't be cited". And dealers will balk because of (to them) the loss of ability to meaningfully bin different trims. I've started to grok the industrial/government complex, and it really annoys the crap out of me. It's an attempt to do an end run around the consumer by doing de facto centralized control through companies, instead of actually implementing things in such a way as the entire lifecycle from production to EoL is able to be sampled and assessed. Like, take diesel emissions. We have a farce of a test suite that's done on a design by design basis. Then that is locked in and sssumed for that model of vehicle. This is exactly why people converged on defeat devices instead of actually going for compliance. Imagine if you will, a world where you can reconfigure your firmware, load it, test it on your property, fire off a copy to a regulator to get plugged into a test bed and put through the paces, and get a result back with an adjusted fee to reflect the difference in performance against standards for those changes. You have the option to tool differently. You can tinker, you can even find configurations better than the original implementer. You also get a record of change for insurance/warranty auditing purposes. (Though again, I'm squeamish on making life easier for manufacturers in that regard as long as they continue to use services like https://cccis.com/ https://cccis.com/) There are levels of corporate surveillance I'm not willing to accommodate.

lokar 4y ago
In the world of "software defined x", a lot of software has to be verified and approved by a regulator of some kind.
renonce 4y ago
> Imagine if you will, a world where you can reconfigure your firmware, load it, test it on your property, fire off a copy to a regulator to get plugged into a test bed and put through the paces, and get a result back with an adjusted fee to reflect the difference in performance against standards for those changes. You can if you would pay $10m to cover all the testing costs just to make a one line change to the firmware so braking works slightly more smoothly for you. The reason that things are centralized like this way is because it's more efficient to make a single car model safe for a million people rather than test a million different versions of cars programmed by different people. In a world without all that corporate surveillance, where everyone works on his own, a bicycle is as much as you can expect to get.

lokar 4y ago

In the world of "software defined x", a lot of software has to be verified and approved by a regulator of some kind.

renonce 4y ago

> Imagine if you will, a world where you can reconfigure your firmware, load it, test it on your property, fire off a copy to a regulator to get plugged into a test bed and put through the paces, and get a result back with an adjusted fee to reflect the difference in performance against standards for those changes. You can if you would pay $10m to cover all the testing costs just to make a one line change to the firmware so braking works slightly more smoothly for you. The reason that things are centralized like this way is because it's more efficient to make a single car model safe for a million people rather than test a million different versions of cars programmed by different people. In a world without all that corporate surveillance, where everyone works on his own, a bicycle is as much as you can expect to get.