3 ms·

Lots of things "are computers" (thermostats, refrigerators, cameras, etc.), but most of those things don't get updates. They're shipped in working order, and th

Lots of things "are computers" (thermostats, refrigerators, cameras, etc.), but most of those things don't get updates. They're shipped in working order, and they go in working as intended through their service life. Why are cars different? Personally, I would rather not have the UX of my car be subject to arbitrary change.

quonn 2y ago
> Why are cars different? Price.
jameson 2y ago
> Why are cars different? Safety
grumpyprole 2y ago
There no problem with this, as long as these cars and other appliances aren't plugged into the internet.
Zigurd 2y ago
Cars used to be the same as everything you cite as examples of ordinary embedded systems. Adding Android Automative-based UX, for example, puts a general purpose OS and app suite in your car. It will probably work better than the Android refrigerators. Probably.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
mindslight 2y ago
Because they need updates to fix security holes in the network stack that is required for doing the updates, don't you know? And of course also to facilitate all that juicy surveillance backhaul and anti-ownership decommodification. What we've needed the whole time is mandated open standards and open documentation for both the local buses and any WAN communications. There's really no reason that center console units from cars aren't widely interchangeable with each other, rather than being specific even down to the model year. But instead, companies use software complexity as a hook to perform wealth extraction, and then respond to any public pushback by marketing the extractionary dynamic as "innovation" and trumpeting the revenue numbers as if they represent legitimate economic activity.
pixl97 2y ago
Cars are more than UX. There is an awful lot of computer control in the engine and transmission theses days and issues crop up commonly where the programming cab cause excessive damage and wear to components.
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  Well, cars have mechanical components that have problems too. Those get fixed through the recall process. If there's a significant problem with the software, that should also get fixed through the recall process. There's no need for regular updates. Fix problems the way they're normally fixed, and other than that, don't update anything.
  - quonn 2y ago
    The same argument could be made for any software. I disagree, cars should be fully updated OTA. It's cheaper than a recall and easier for the consumer. New features increase the longevity of the car.
    - jasomill 2y ago
      So long as both manufacturers and executives are willing to assume unlimited liability for all direct, incidental, and consequential losses caused by both updates themselves and any security vulnerabilities in the update mechanism, and are held criminally liable in cases where negligence leads to injury or death, I have no problem with this.
      - quonn 2y ago
        Why would they be, anymore than for the original product? Also, do you have a single example where there was a security vulnerability in the update mechanism of a car that resulted in an attack? Do you have a single example of a loss caused by an update (that would not also occur during offline servicing)?
  - nextweek2 2y ago
paxys 2y ago
> and they go in working as intended through their service life Unless they are connected to the internet and end up as part of a botnet due to shoddy firmware. Or the manufacturer decides to shut off a cloud service that is needed for their operation for some reason and they get bricked. IoT devices are the opposite of the example you want to use for stable, functional computers in electronics.
antisthenes 2y ago
It's a self-inflicted problem, because as soon as you expose a device to the internet, you have to do constant security updates. You basically sign up the consumer to an ever-escalating security war against devices by malicious actors. I just don't want my car to be connected to the internet, full stop, ever. Let it receive GPS signals, and that's it.

quonn 2y ago

> Why are cars different? Price.

jameson 2y ago

> Why are cars different? Safety

grumpyprole 2y ago

There no problem with this, as long as these cars and other appliances aren't plugged into the internet.

Zigurd 2y ago

Cars used to be the same as everything you cite as examples of ordinary embedded systems. Adding Android Automative-based UX, for example, puts a general purpose OS and app suite in your car. It will probably work better than the Android refrigerators. Probably.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

mindslight 2y ago

Because they need updates to fix security holes in the network stack that is required for doing the updates, don't you know? And of course also to facilitate all that juicy surveillance backhaul and anti-ownership decommodification. What we've needed the whole time is mandated open standards and open documentation for both the local buses and any WAN communications. There's really no reason that center console units from cars aren't widely interchangeable with each other, rather than being specific even down to the model year. But instead, companies use software complexity as a hook to perform wealth extraction, and then respond to any public pushback by marketing the extractionary dynamic as "innovation" and trumpeting the revenue numbers as if they represent legitimate economic activity.

pixl97 2y ago

Cars are more than UX. There is an awful lot of computer control in the engine and transmission theses days and issues crop up commonly where the programming cab cause excessive damage and wear to components.

AnimalMuppet 2y ago
Well, cars have mechanical components that have problems too. Those get fixed through the recall process. If there's a significant problem with the software, that should also get fixed through the recall process. There's no need for regular updates. Fix problems the way they're normally fixed, and other than that, don't update anything.
- quonn 2y ago
  The same argument could be made for any software. I disagree, cars should be fully updated OTA. It's cheaper than a recall and easier for the consumer. New features increase the longevity of the car.
  - jasomill 2y ago
    So long as both manufacturers and executives are willing to assume unlimited liability for all direct, incidental, and consequential losses caused by both updates themselves and any security vulnerabilities in the update mechanism, and are held criminally liable in cases where negligence leads to injury or death, I have no problem with this.
    - quonn 2y ago
      Why would they be, anymore than for the original product? Also, do you have a single example where there was a security vulnerability in the update mechanism of a car that resulted in an attack? Do you have a single example of a loss caused by an update (that would not also occur during offline servicing)?
- nextweek2 2y ago

paxys 2y ago

> and they go in working as intended through their service life Unless they are connected to the internet and end up as part of a botnet due to shoddy firmware. Or the manufacturer decides to shut off a cloud service that is needed for their operation for some reason and they get bricked. IoT devices are the opposite of the example you want to use for stable, functional computers in electronics.

antisthenes 2y ago

It's a self-inflicted problem, because as soon as you expose a device to the internet, you have to do constant security updates. You basically sign up the consumer to an ever-escalating security war against devices by malicious actors. I just don't want my car to be connected to the internet, full stop, ever. Let it receive GPS signals, and that's it.