11 ms·

>I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then? Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? It gives the im

>I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then? Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? It gives the impression you think this makes it somehow lesser. The cybertruck, for example, was subject to a recall because the rearview camera wouldn't come up, but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. That's a safety issue, irrespective of whether or not the fix was in software.

justinclift 2y ago
> Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? Maybe because an over-the-air update is hard to seriously consider a "recall"?
- noapologies 2y ago
  Why? Are safety issues not "serious"?
  - wobfan 2y ago
    If you think about the financial implications then probably yes. Software issues, safety related or not, can probably easily be fixed OTA and thus don’t even cause a fraction of the costs a (let’s call it "real") recall costs. Also, in the head of most people, I think, a recall is something where the car needs to be returned physically. But still, obviously, the issues can be as serious as physical issues. It’s just that we’re used to physical recalls.
  - damon_c 2y ago
    The word recall sort of implies that the vehicle is recalled to the manufacturer. Calling a software update that happens in your garage at night and takes 20 minutes a “recall” definitely is worthy of quotes.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - taberiand 2y ago
      Unless of course that patch can't be delivered because the truck was totalled in an accident that the patch was too late to prevent
      - liontwist 2y ago
        Did this happen? Or?
    - judofyr 2y ago
      The word bug sort of implies that the device was struck by a terrestrial arthropod animal. Calling a software defect that happens due to a programming error a "bug" definitely is worthy of quotes. (The etymology of a word can be quite different from its current meaning today.)
    - alxlaz 2y ago
      > The word recall sort of implies that the vehicle is recalled to the manufacturer. It does not, no more than gaslighting implies lighting a gas lamp or the phrase crossing the Rubicon implies actually crossing a river in Italy, in any case. It hasn't meant anything of that sort since the mid-sixties. Recall is what legislation requires you to call it if something is unsafe for public use and it has to be withdrawn for the market until it's remedied. It doesn't matter how that's done. The NHTSA guidelines don't include physically getting the product to a manufacturer or a distributor as a requirement to issue, or as a criteria for fulfillment, of a recall. (I don't think recall guidelines in any industry do, it's just the NHTSA's that apply in this case). Yes, this also applies for firmware upgrades. No, it doesn't matter where they're performed. The FDA has issued firmware-related recalls for devices with programmable logic since programmable logic in medical devices was a thing so like... fourty years. If anyone in some company's safety staff just learned about that's let's all please give them a warm welcome to the 20th century. The main reason why recalls typically involve returning the product to the manufacturer (or, more often, as the vast majority of recalls are for food, medicine or cosmetics, to the distributor) is traceability. Manufacturers need to maintain documentation that shows they took reasonable action to notify all customers, that depending on how they chose to handle it they made repairs for free, replaced them for free, or that the refund they issued made reasonable allowances for depreciation, and so on. Some foodstuffs or medicine also have disposal safety rules that require you to maintain adequate documentation as well. It's just the easiest way to deal with it, both in terms of remedying the actual issue, and in terms of legal risk. But it's got nothing to do with returning something to the factory, it hasn't meant anything of that sort in like half a century.
  - lmm 2y ago
    Getting an OTA software update to your vehicle is far less disruptive to your life than having to take it in to the dealer. Obviously safety issues shouldn't happen, but how easy they are to fix also matters.
  - justinclift 2y ago
    "Recall" is wording that means (to me) the vehicle needs to be physically returned to a dealer workshop for something to be done. That it's used for OTA updates just (to me) means they should use some more suitable wording for it. And yeah, as other people have pointed out it's the word used for the legislation. I still think they should use some kind of different wording though.
- matsemann 2y ago
  A recall is about the issue, not how it's resolved. A recall means there are some serious security flaws that needs fixing. Even if they can be fixed OTA, they're still a flaw, and Tesla has had many of those.
  - iamkoch 2y ago
    Couldn't agree more. Recall means "sufficiently dangerous to need to recall the vehicle to the manufacturer" - yes, in the modern world it can be fixed OTA, but it's still dangerous enough to require a mass fix to a fast-moving death machine.
- devjab 2y ago
  They are called recalls because that’s what the term for legalisation mandates. They are issued when a vehicle is unsafe to drive and they are mandated because a manufacturer is required to take a lot of steps to remedy their failure. If they fail to repair the issue they are forced to issue full refunds as an example. So no, the word recall is used because is the official terminology used for these issues regardless of the solution required to fix them. The word does have its origin in a world where solutions were rarely software updates. That they are software issues make them no less serious though. I suspect that in some cases the software issues might indeed be far more dangerous than errors which mandate physical recalls.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Isn't this just restating part of the previous point? "We use a silly word for OTA software updates: 'recalls'" "Recalls is the word we use" "Yes..."
    - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
      The important part is the legal obligation to produce a safe product. If that doesn't happen there are legal consequences. The fact that software is involved changes exactly nothing. And honestly - the entire industry needs to get over the bizarre belief that software has a magical right to be less performant, less competent, less reliable, less robust, and more consumer hostile than hardware, just because it can be updated.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        None of this seems relevant to the single point that "recall is a misleading term to use for an OTA software update".
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  At the very least, it puts the quality control of Tesla in question, as those are failures which should have been caught PRIOR to a commercial launch. Tesla is treating its product-launches like it's just some browser-game in the cloud, instead of treating it as what it is: The handover of a 6000 pound bullet into the hand of a customer who will fire it into a crowd in expectation to not hit anyone...
- rob74 2y ago
  Maybe, to eliminate ambiguity (and make it sound cooler), they should call it a "roadworthiness directive", similar to "airworthiness directive" for aircraft. Of course airworthiness directives are issued by the authorities (the FAA in the US), while "recalls" are from the manufacturers, but still...
  - mrguyorama 2y ago
    Maybe Tesla doesn't deserve to have the world redefined around them to make their products look less shit? This conversation happens every single time Tesla produces a product that is legally unsafe. We keep having this conversation because Tesla keeps making an unsafe product.
imiric 2y ago
The problem is that those issues shouldn't happen on a public road vehicle to begin with. Tesla's approach is shipping beta software to customers, and using them as testers. This is an insidious practice in modern software development, but is criminal when that software is running a 3-ton vehicle, regardless if it can be fixed with an OTA update or not. There are reasons why strict car safety regulations exist. You can't just sell early access cars and fix issues as customers experience them.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  I completely agree, but saying it's a 'recall' when your car sits in your driveway still feels entirely wrong.
  - jmb99 2y ago
    Recall is the industry-standard (and populace-understood) term for “this vehicle has a safety or reliability issue that must be resolved by the manufacturer.” It is all encompassing; anything from possibly loose lugnuts to faulty airbags to engine failures to yes, the reverse camera failing to appear. It doesn’t matter if the manufacturer ships an OTA update, shows up at your house with a loaner and a flatbed to take your car, or requires you to go into the dealership for service, it’s a recall.
    - aikinai 2y ago
      It might be industry-standard term, but it’s certainly not understood that way by layman, including car customers. To the public, “recall” will always carry the implication that the vehicle needs to go back to the manufacturer for a fix.
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        I don't think that's true. Most people are accustomed to there being many "recalls" for trifling matters which can be simply ignored until maybe the next time they bring the car into the shop. A typical conversation about recalls: > "I changed your oil, and I also replaced one of your door seals because there was a recall for the rubber cracking in cold weather" > "Oh, okay." It doesn't colloquially imply that the manufacturer is going to come take your car due to some major issue.
eigart 2y ago
Yeah, software recalls are recalls. The car has steer by wire, so even steering wheel issues could be ”just” a software recall.
- hot_gril 2y ago
  Usually your steer by wire isn't fixable over the air
johnp314 2y ago
Well, the OED definition of 'recall' is "official order to return to a place" and a software update or fix requires no return to the place of purchase. I wonder how may legally defined 'recalls' Microsoft Windows has experienced with each new version.
- 0xEF 2y ago
  I think the gist is "recall" is the same saying "safety issue that needs to be fixed in the software or hardware" since we don't have a word for software issues, which carry a bit more weight on a fly-by-wire vehicle like the Cybertruck. Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's issues. While I agree that language is important (and dynamic), I suspect that discussion around this vehicle is also charged by politics and sycophantic thinking. If I remove my personal opinions about Musk, I find that I actually do not hate the Cybertruck. Sure, I think it looks absolutely stupid and it bothers me that the flat paneling does not line up perfectly, but I am also cheering on it's attempts to break some rules, try something different and possibly spark some future innovation. With that in mind, it's easy for me to expect that it will have problems since anything new that breaks the mold tends to, so with that reframing, a lot of recalls make sense and could even be looked at as good since solutions are being developed.
  - mewpmewp2 2y ago
    People are pedantic over this because they have a strong association from their past with this term and now it is being used unexpectedly. No matter how bad Tesla's issue might be, then maybe a different wording has to be used to highlight the issue. As right now it seems as if when the term is used it is almost intentionally made to seem as if the vehicle has to be physically transported back which would be a logistical and financial disaster. Sure, safety issues can be bad, but it is entirely different level of feasibility of physically recalling back all those vehicles. Why are people pretending it is not? The whole issue is a spectrum of consequences. Right now it seems that the term used confusingly is always justified because the issue is binarily bad in the first place.
  - 2y ago
rsynnott 2y ago
> but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. I'm quite surprised that that is allowed at all. Seems like an unnecessary risk.
- chasd00 2y ago
  I suspect that’s a bit of an exaggeration by the author. If the mirrors were not required by law and therefore comply with the law they wouldn’t exist. “The best part is no part”
- Tostino 2y ago
  All new cars are required to have backup cameras, so manufacturers have used that "freedom" to change car shapes. Not only Tesla.
  - liontwist 2y ago
    I can’t understand why a regulatory group would feel the need to make that a requirement. That vastly increases the cost to develop a vehicle. Why can’t I choose that feature as a consumer? Did their brother in law have the patent for backing cameras?
    - Tostino 2y ago
      I get it, but the reasoning behind it was that little kids kept getting run over by their parents / family members because they couldn't see them. The cost at this point is pretty negligible. Mandate went into effect (in the US) in 2018: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera#Mandates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera#Mandates
      - liontwist 2y ago
        Thanks for the info. Yeah the cost is negligible if you are already planning to have a screen running chrome on Ubuntu server, but I hope it was still an option not to have that.
jimmydddd 2y ago
I think recall in quotes because the original meaning of recall was that you had to return (recall) the thing to the shop so that it could be fixed. Like when the brakes might fail and I have to schedule an appointment to bring my car into the shop for a week seems different from pushing out a software fix to adjust the AC temperature or whatever. It seems more like an "update" like when Apple pushes out a fix to the iPhone. They call that an update, not an iPhone recall. (However, your camera example does sound like a major issue.)
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  There are tons of non-mission-critical recalls that you can have fixed (or not) at your leisure.
losvedir 2y ago
Well, "recall" implies both a safety issue and a convenience issue. Pre-Tesla OTA updates a "recall" was a logistical nightmare, meaning you had to take the day off work, wait at the dealership all day, sometimes deal with a loaner car, etc. To a lot of folks, maybe older than the average HN user at this point, the reason recalls were such a hated thing was not primarily that it implied a safety defect, but because they were super inconvenient. For example, I had a recall on my Tesla having to do with the automatic window closing being dangerous. That is a safety issue, and I do have kids, so I realize that there's a very small chance they could damage or lose a finger with it, so I do want it fixed. But because it was fixed OTA, I don't really mind it or hold it against them. In contrast, if fixing it meant taking it into a dealership and losing a day, it would be a hugely negative thing! I ascribe a negative sentiment to the fact that there was a safety issue in proportion to the chance of damage and how severe it was, so: minor. In other words, I know why it's called a "recall" and it makes sense. But on the other hand, you have to realize why people put it in scare quotes, too. The plain denotation of the word hasn't changed, but the connotation is really disproportionate to the experience of someone with a Tesla.
s1artibartfast 2y ago
>The cybertruck, for example, was subject to a recall because the rearview camera wouldn't come up, but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. Every vehicle since 2018 has been required to have one for safety. No car or truck is sufficiently safe without one.

justinclift 2y ago

> Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? Maybe because an over-the-air update is hard to seriously consider a "recall"?

noapologies 2y ago
Why? Are safety issues not "serious"?
- wobfan 2y ago
  If you think about the financial implications then probably yes. Software issues, safety related or not, can probably easily be fixed OTA and thus don’t even cause a fraction of the costs a (let’s call it "real") recall costs. Also, in the head of most people, I think, a recall is something where the car needs to be returned physically. But still, obviously, the issues can be as serious as physical issues. It’s just that we’re used to physical recalls.
- damon_c 2y ago
  The word recall sort of implies that the vehicle is recalled to the manufacturer. Calling a software update that happens in your garage at night and takes 20 minutes a “recall” definitely is worthy of quotes.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - taberiand 2y ago
    Unless of course that patch can't be delivered because the truck was totalled in an accident that the patch was too late to prevent
    - liontwist 2y ago
      Did this happen? Or?
  - judofyr 2y ago
    The word bug sort of implies that the device was struck by a terrestrial arthropod animal. Calling a software defect that happens due to a programming error a "bug" definitely is worthy of quotes. (The etymology of a word can be quite different from its current meaning today.)
  - alxlaz 2y ago
    > The word recall sort of implies that the vehicle is recalled to the manufacturer. It does not, no more than gaslighting implies lighting a gas lamp or the phrase crossing the Rubicon implies actually crossing a river in Italy, in any case. It hasn't meant anything of that sort since the mid-sixties. Recall is what legislation requires you to call it if something is unsafe for public use and it has to be withdrawn for the market until it's remedied. It doesn't matter how that's done. The NHTSA guidelines don't include physically getting the product to a manufacturer or a distributor as a requirement to issue, or as a criteria for fulfillment, of a recall. (I don't think recall guidelines in any industry do, it's just the NHTSA's that apply in this case). Yes, this also applies for firmware upgrades. No, it doesn't matter where they're performed. The FDA has issued firmware-related recalls for devices with programmable logic since programmable logic in medical devices was a thing so like... fourty years. If anyone in some company's safety staff just learned about that's let's all please give them a warm welcome to the 20th century. The main reason why recalls typically involve returning the product to the manufacturer (or, more often, as the vast majority of recalls are for food, medicine or cosmetics, to the distributor) is traceability. Manufacturers need to maintain documentation that shows they took reasonable action to notify all customers, that depending on how they chose to handle it they made repairs for free, replaced them for free, or that the refund they issued made reasonable allowances for depreciation, and so on. Some foodstuffs or medicine also have disposal safety rules that require you to maintain adequate documentation as well. It's just the easiest way to deal with it, both in terms of remedying the actual issue, and in terms of legal risk. But it's got nothing to do with returning something to the factory, it hasn't meant anything of that sort in like half a century.
- lmm 2y ago
  Getting an OTA software update to your vehicle is far less disruptive to your life than having to take it in to the dealer. Obviously safety issues shouldn't happen, but how easy they are to fix also matters.
- justinclift 2y ago
  "Recall" is wording that means (to me) the vehicle needs to be physically returned to a dealer workshop for something to be done. That it's used for OTA updates just (to me) means they should use some more suitable wording for it. And yeah, as other people have pointed out it's the word used for the legislation. I still think they should use some kind of different wording though.
matsemann 2y ago
A recall is about the issue, not how it's resolved. A recall means there are some serious security flaws that needs fixing. Even if they can be fixed OTA, they're still a flaw, and Tesla has had many of those.
- iamkoch 2y ago
  Couldn't agree more. Recall means "sufficiently dangerous to need to recall the vehicle to the manufacturer" - yes, in the modern world it can be fixed OTA, but it's still dangerous enough to require a mass fix to a fast-moving death machine.
devjab 2y ago
They are called recalls because that’s what the term for legalisation mandates. They are issued when a vehicle is unsafe to drive and they are mandated because a manufacturer is required to take a lot of steps to remedy their failure. If they fail to repair the issue they are forced to issue full refunds as an example. So no, the word recall is used because is the official terminology used for these issues regardless of the solution required to fix them. The word does have its origin in a world where solutions were rarely software updates. That they are software issues make them no less serious though. I suspect that in some cases the software issues might indeed be far more dangerous than errors which mandate physical recalls.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  Isn't this just restating part of the previous point? "We use a silly word for OTA software updates: 'recalls'" "Recalls is the word we use" "Yes..."
  - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
    The important part is the legal obligation to produce a safe product. If that doesn't happen there are legal consequences. The fact that software is involved changes exactly nothing. And honestly - the entire industry needs to get over the bizarre belief that software has a magical right to be less performant, less competent, less reliable, less robust, and more consumer hostile than hardware, just because it can be updated.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      None of this seems relevant to the single point that "recall is a misleading term to use for an OTA software update".
rickdeckard 2y ago
At the very least, it puts the quality control of Tesla in question, as those are failures which should have been caught PRIOR to a commercial launch. Tesla is treating its product-launches like it's just some browser-game in the cloud, instead of treating it as what it is: The handover of a 6000 pound bullet into the hand of a customer who will fire it into a crowd in expectation to not hit anyone...
rob74 2y ago
Maybe, to eliminate ambiguity (and make it sound cooler), they should call it a "roadworthiness directive", similar to "airworthiness directive" for aircraft. Of course airworthiness directives are issued by the authorities (the FAA in the US), while "recalls" are from the manufacturers, but still...
- mrguyorama 2y ago
  Maybe Tesla doesn't deserve to have the world redefined around them to make their products look less shit? This conversation happens every single time Tesla produces a product that is legally unsafe. We keep having this conversation because Tesla keeps making an unsafe product.

imiric 2y ago

The problem is that those issues shouldn't happen on a public road vehicle to begin with. Tesla's approach is shipping beta software to customers, and using them as testers. This is an insidious practice in modern software development, but is criminal when that software is running a 3-ton vehicle, regardless if it can be fixed with an OTA update or not. There are reasons why strict car safety regulations exist. You can't just sell early access cars and fix issues as customers experience them.

Aeolun 2y ago
I completely agree, but saying it's a 'recall' when your car sits in your driveway still feels entirely wrong.
- jmb99 2y ago
  Recall is the industry-standard (and populace-understood) term for “this vehicle has a safety or reliability issue that must be resolved by the manufacturer.” It is all encompassing; anything from possibly loose lugnuts to faulty airbags to engine failures to yes, the reverse camera failing to appear. It doesn’t matter if the manufacturer ships an OTA update, shows up at your house with a loaner and a flatbed to take your car, or requires you to go into the dealership for service, it’s a recall.
  - aikinai 2y ago
    It might be industry-standard term, but it’s certainly not understood that way by layman, including car customers. To the public, “recall” will always carry the implication that the vehicle needs to go back to the manufacturer for a fix.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      I don't think that's true. Most people are accustomed to there being many "recalls" for trifling matters which can be simply ignored until maybe the next time they bring the car into the shop. A typical conversation about recalls: > "I changed your oil, and I also replaced one of your door seals because there was a recall for the rubber cracking in cold weather" > "Oh, okay." It doesn't colloquially imply that the manufacturer is going to come take your car due to some major issue.

eigart 2y ago

Yeah, software recalls are recalls. The car has steer by wire, so even steering wheel issues could be ”just” a software recall.

hot_gril 2y ago
Usually your steer by wire isn't fixable over the air

johnp314 2y ago

Well, the OED definition of 'recall' is "official order to return to a place" and a software update or fix requires no return to the place of purchase. I wonder how may legally defined 'recalls' Microsoft Windows has experienced with each new version.

0xEF 2y ago
I think the gist is "recall" is the same saying "safety issue that needs to be fixed in the software or hardware" since we don't have a word for software issues, which carry a bit more weight on a fly-by-wire vehicle like the Cybertruck. Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's issues. While I agree that language is important (and dynamic), I suspect that discussion around this vehicle is also charged by politics and sycophantic thinking. If I remove my personal opinions about Musk, I find that I actually do not hate the Cybertruck. Sure, I think it looks absolutely stupid and it bothers me that the flat paneling does not line up perfectly, but I am also cheering on it's attempts to break some rules, try something different and possibly spark some future innovation. With that in mind, it's easy for me to expect that it will have problems since anything new that breaks the mold tends to, so with that reframing, a lot of recalls make sense and could even be looked at as good since solutions are being developed.
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  People are pedantic over this because they have a strong association from their past with this term and now it is being used unexpectedly. No matter how bad Tesla's issue might be, then maybe a different wording has to be used to highlight the issue. As right now it seems as if when the term is used it is almost intentionally made to seem as if the vehicle has to be physically transported back which would be a logistical and financial disaster. Sure, safety issues can be bad, but it is entirely different level of feasibility of physically recalling back all those vehicles. Why are people pretending it is not? The whole issue is a spectrum of consequences. Right now it seems that the term used confusingly is always justified because the issue is binarily bad in the first place.
- 2y ago

rsynnott 2y ago

> but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. I'm quite surprised that that is allowed at all. Seems like an unnecessary risk.

chasd00 2y ago
I suspect that’s a bit of an exaggeration by the author. If the mirrors were not required by law and therefore comply with the law they wouldn’t exist. “The best part is no part”
Tostino 2y ago
All new cars are required to have backup cameras, so manufacturers have used that "freedom" to change car shapes. Not only Tesla.
- liontwist 2y ago
  I can’t understand why a regulatory group would feel the need to make that a requirement. That vastly increases the cost to develop a vehicle. Why can’t I choose that feature as a consumer? Did their brother in law have the patent for backing cameras?
  - Tostino 2y ago
    I get it, but the reasoning behind it was that little kids kept getting run over by their parents / family members because they couldn't see them. The cost at this point is pretty negligible. Mandate went into effect (in the US) in 2018: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera#Mandates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera#Mandates
    - liontwist 2y ago
      Thanks for the info. Yeah the cost is negligible if you are already planning to have a screen running chrome on Ubuntu server, but I hope it was still an option not to have that.

jimmydddd 2y ago

I think recall in quotes because the original meaning of recall was that you had to return (recall) the thing to the shop so that it could be fixed. Like when the brakes might fail and I have to schedule an appointment to bring my car into the shop for a week seems different from pushing out a software fix to adjust the AC temperature or whatever. It seems more like an "update" like when Apple pushes out a fix to the iPhone. They call that an update, not an iPhone recall. (However, your camera example does sound like a major issue.)

llamaimperative 2y ago
There are tons of non-mission-critical recalls that you can have fixed (or not) at your leisure.

losvedir 2y ago

Well, "recall" implies both a safety issue and a convenience issue. Pre-Tesla OTA updates a "recall" was a logistical nightmare, meaning you had to take the day off work, wait at the dealership all day, sometimes deal with a loaner car, etc. To a lot of folks, maybe older than the average HN user at this point, the reason recalls were such a hated thing was not primarily that it implied a safety defect, but because they were super inconvenient. For example, I had a recall on my Tesla having to do with the automatic window closing being dangerous. That is a safety issue, and I do have kids, so I realize that there's a very small chance they could damage or lose a finger with it, so I do want it fixed. But because it was fixed OTA, I don't really mind it or hold it against them. In contrast, if fixing it meant taking it into a dealership and losing a day, it would be a hugely negative thing! I ascribe a negative sentiment to the fact that there was a safety issue in proportion to the chance of damage and how severe it was, so: minor. In other words, I know why it's called a "recall" and it makes sense. But on the other hand, you have to realize why people put it in scare quotes, too. The plain denotation of the word hasn't changed, but the connotation is really disproportionate to the experience of someone with a Tesla.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

>The cybertruck, for example, was subject to a recall because the rearview camera wouldn't come up, but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. Every vehicle since 2018 has been required to have one for safety. No car or truck is sufficiently safe without one.