4 ms·

I would like to start with forcing them to allow it as a low/no cost option, at least for some models. Imagine people had the option when buying a car, truck o

I would like to start with forcing them to allow it as a low/no cost option, at least for some models. Imagine people had the option when buying a car, truck or minivan of having it be open and tinkerable? Most people won't care, but some hobbyists will. Some companies will love it, some startups might be founded for it. But eventually there will be a killer app, or huge benefit, and it will become more common until it is standard. I'd imagine certain groups like farmers would jump on buying open source trucks, hoping they can get them to last longer, or repair them cheaper.

jijijijij 3y ago
I am not sure it's manageable for a society, when random people start messing with code controlling breaks and stuff. You'd think that's neatly separated into a single purpose IC, but I fear it isn't. Gonna be a nightmare for insurances and courts.
- newsclues 3y ago
  There is no software locks to prevent modification to existing mechanical cars that can and are modified to be dangerous and there is inspection processes etc and laws to deal with it. It’s even easier to scan for modified software than look inside an engine. There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control.
  - xmcqdpt2 3y ago
    > Imagine people had the option when buying a car, truck or minivan of having it be open and tinkerable? [...] > There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control. I don't think many people track modded minivans. "No the Subaru WRX is my DD, my main track car is a Honda Odyssey"
  - adrianN 3y ago
    It’s extremely hard to figure out whether modified software poses a security risk. I wouldn’t trust experts spending long hours to get it right, I certainly wouldn’t trust people at TÜV doing spotchecks to find the bugs.
    - jacquesm 3y ago
      I wouldn't trust the original developers either.
  - quesera 3y ago
    In many US states, there is not even a meaningful safety inspection. In some there is no inspection required at all. People won't intentionally make their vehicles dangerous, but it's easier to make bad software than to completely bodge a physical repair using manufactured parts. I don't know how vehicle software works, but hopefully they don't crash like consumer software. Someone here knows the answer -- is there like a supervisory manager/kernel that keeps all the subsystems running? And modular separation so that bad changes to the fuel injection system won't take out the fly-by-wire brakes?
moffkalast 3y ago
Listening to the recent CES interviews by Jeff Geerling where car manufacturers explain how they see the process, with SOAFEE (the ROS knock off for cars) and other systems where they want software defined vehicles and complete freedom to change anything (and charge for those changes ofc) after they already sell them them it's honestly completely horrifying from the end user perspective. As much as it would be nice for hobbyists, this is one can 2.0A of worms that needs to be kept as shut as possible by lawmakers.

jijijijij 3y ago

I am not sure it's manageable for a society, when random people start messing with code controlling breaks and stuff. You'd think that's neatly separated into a single purpose IC, but I fear it isn't. Gonna be a nightmare for insurances and courts.

newsclues 3y ago
There is no software locks to prevent modification to existing mechanical cars that can and are modified to be dangerous and there is inspection processes etc and laws to deal with it. It’s even easier to scan for modified software than look inside an engine. There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control.
- xmcqdpt2 3y ago
  > Imagine people had the option when buying a car, truck or minivan of having it be open and tinkerable? [...] > There are places for safe experimentation like tracks, so I don’t see why this fear isn’t irrational or a ploy for control. I don't think many people track modded minivans. "No the Subaru WRX is my DD, my main track car is a Honda Odyssey"
- adrianN 3y ago
  It’s extremely hard to figure out whether modified software poses a security risk. I wouldn’t trust experts spending long hours to get it right, I certainly wouldn’t trust people at TÜV doing spotchecks to find the bugs.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    I wouldn't trust the original developers either.
- quesera 3y ago
  In many US states, there is not even a meaningful safety inspection. In some there is no inspection required at all. People won't intentionally make their vehicles dangerous, but it's easier to make bad software than to completely bodge a physical repair using manufactured parts. I don't know how vehicle software works, but hopefully they don't crash like consumer software. Someone here knows the answer -- is there like a supervisory manager/kernel that keeps all the subsystems running? And modular separation so that bad changes to the fuel injection system won't take out the fly-by-wire brakes?

moffkalast 3y ago

Listening to the recent CES interviews by Jeff Geerling where car manufacturers explain how they see the process, with SOAFEE (the ROS knock off for cars) and other systems where they want software defined vehicles and complete freedom to change anything (and charge for those changes ofc) after they already sell them them it's honestly completely horrifying from the end user perspective. As much as it would be nice for hobbyists, this is one can 2.0A of worms that needs to be kept as shut as possible by lawmakers.