5 ms·

Idk how I feel about this. If Tesla has a known bug that causes death, the bug should be patched ASAP. People should not be able to decide if they want the fix.

by itake 4y ago

Idk how I feel about this. If Tesla has a known bug that causes death, the bug should be patched ASAP. People should not be able to decide if they want the fix. Classic example is MS Windows. Unpatched windows disrupt everyone’s lives with DDOS attacks, so MS is painfully aggressive at forcing free updates.

vinyl7 4y ago
Or maybe they use that as the scape goat to forcefully push out ad and spyware updates
KMnO4 4y ago
Most cars don’t have OTA. If there’s a bug that causes death, they issue a recall and firmware is updated through the OBD. Sure, it’s an expensive process, but maybe it would persuade Tesla to invest more into their quality control.
- itake 4y ago
  How is an OTA update much different than a policy change requiring all new cars to do {safety thing}? The rollout is slower, but the end state is consumers are forced to have {safety thing} in their car.
hamandcheese 4y ago
> If Tesla has a known bug that causes death, the bug should be patched ASAP. People should not be able to decide if they want the fix. Why should this be treated differently than any non-software bug that causes death? I am not aware of any car manufactures that send mechanics to your home to replace your airbags without your consent.
- caf 4y ago
  If you ignored the Takata airbag recall for long enough, your car was forcibly deregistered. I know this, because my car was stolen but was on their list, so I saw the escalating series of advisories that was mailed out.
- itake 4y ago
  > I am not aware of any car manufactures that send mechanics to your home to replace your airbags without your consent. Not exactly a fair comparison. Mechanics coming to your home isn't economical and would require gov policy (and subsidy) to enforce. I think a better comparison is if the gov acts a policy such that "all new cars much have {update}." As the old vehicles breakdown, everyone is forced to have the new update. This is a slower process, but has the same end as an OTA update.
Dylan16807 4y ago
Bug fixes like that don't control behavior, so they would not be blocked by such a regulation. Bundling other changes with the bug fix would be blocked.
userbinator 4y ago
That's called authoritarianism.

by itake 4y ago

vinyl7 4y ago

Or maybe they use that as the scape goat to forcefully push out ad and spyware updates

KMnO4 4y ago

Most cars don’t have OTA. If there’s a bug that causes death, they issue a recall and firmware is updated through the OBD. Sure, it’s an expensive process, but maybe it would persuade Tesla to invest more into their quality control.

itake 4y ago
How is an OTA update much different than a policy change requiring all new cars to do {safety thing}? The rollout is slower, but the end state is consumers are forced to have {safety thing} in their car.

hamandcheese 4y ago

> If Tesla has a known bug that causes death, the bug should be patched ASAP. People should not be able to decide if they want the fix. Why should this be treated differently than any non-software bug that causes death? I am not aware of any car manufactures that send mechanics to your home to replace your airbags without your consent.

caf 4y ago
If you ignored the Takata airbag recall for long enough, your car was forcibly deregistered. I know this, because my car was stolen but was on their list, so I saw the escalating series of advisories that was mailed out.
itake 4y ago
> I am not aware of any car manufactures that send mechanics to your home to replace your airbags without your consent. Not exactly a fair comparison. Mechanics coming to your home isn't economical and would require gov policy (and subsidy) to enforce. I think a better comparison is if the gov acts a policy such that "all new cars much have {update}." As the old vehicles breakdown, everyone is forced to have the new update. This is a slower process, but has the same end as an OTA update.

Dylan16807 4y ago

Bug fixes like that don't control behavior, so they would not be blocked by such a regulation. Bundling other changes with the bug fix would be blocked.

userbinator 4y ago

That's called authoritarianism.