5 ms·

My honest opinion here is that almost everyone is completely missing a crucial point. Nearly all of the reasons given for locking people out of modifying their

by miander 12y ago

My honest opinion here is that almost everyone is completely missing a crucial point. Nearly all of the reasons given for locking people out of modifying their cars apply equally to cars without computers. Changing the odometer? It's far easier to do that on a car with a mechanical odometer. Making the vehicle non-emissions compliant? Nobody used the DMCA to argue that people shouldn't be allowed to remove their catalytic converters. All of this has been fought for far longer than computers have existed. People have been successfully fooled into thinking that this is a new situation, when technology is only being used to prop up an ancient ideology. Very frustrating indeed!

stolio 12y ago
The new artificial boundaries are only recreating the natural boundaries from before. If you wanted to boost your fuel/air ratio in 1965 you had to open your hood and take apart your carburetor, that keeps most people out of it. Now we're talking about downloading iPhone apps that promise 10% more speed and the only technical challenge is aligning your car's USB plug with your phone. And then hitting the big green button labeled "GO FASTER!"
- Gracana 12y ago
  > Now we're talking about downloading iPhone apps that promise 10% more speed That doesn't sound like anything I've ever heard of. Many manufacturers require expensive subscriptions to access service manuals and programming software.[1] The average person (and even a lot of small-time mechanics) doesn't have access to those resources. [1] http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3291 http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3291
  - stolio 12y ago
    You haven't heard of it because it's too stupid and dangerous to allow to happen. But it's a natural consequence of car ownership including read-write access to its computers.
    - bri3d 12y ago
      Many cars have had externally reprogrammable ECUs since the mid 1990s (with lots being fully reverse engineered), but yet tuning is still relatively esoteric and generally very expensive. What do you think has changed / will change that will lead to an onslaught of dangerous amateur tuning by phone? The technology to do so has existed for years.
      - freehunter 12y ago
        It exists in other motor vehicles. My last roommate had a quad where he would tune the ECU with software on his laptop depending on where he was riding and what parts he had installed.
      - stolio 12y ago
        Falling barriers. Like you say, tuning is currently very expensive. The financial and technical costs act as an idiot filter (forgive my negativity.) Those barriers are falling so we're left with artificial costs i.e. legal penalties and intentional code obfuscation.
  - projct 12y ago
    ECU flashes don't require much more than software and the right kind of cable.
- Spooky23 12y ago
  Huh? I knew kids in high school who could barely read who could tune old cars without much of a problem. Now you need a computer, hard to find software, special cables, etc.
belorn 12y ago
Of course this has nothing to do with lawsuits, fear of car modifications or emissions compliance. It is a businesses decision in order to establish new revenue streams where before there only was a single sale (and revenue) per product. See all that data that is generated when people use the product? That could be mined, refined, and made into new products. All those computer screens in the car are suddenly new avenues to push advertisements. All those critical equipment are a avenue to sell repairs, where the producer has monopoly. And if nothing else, the computer inside the car can always be made into a platform. Take a product, throw in some DRM, and voila, you can create revenue after sale. The DRM and the accompanying user agreement is the glue from which all that extra revenue can be made. From a company perspective, I don't see how much of a choice they've got. A competitor can use that extra revenue to lower prices for which a consumer won't be able to assess when buying. Selling equal-looking products at higher prices normally spells doom, and regulations haven't even begun addressing the issue.
- miander 12y ago
  I completely agree. And I think that addressing that kind of situation, where competitors have no choice but to do the same dirty deeds or be undercut, is the one true purpose of regulation. If you change the rules for everyone you protect the consumer but keep the playing field level and let the market keep doing its job.
- bri3d 12y ago
  It's not only the data, but also the continued promotion of dealer service lock-ins. There are many modern cars where (for example) the "service in XXX miles" indicator for oil changes can't be reset except by the access-restricted and very expensive factory service tool. Many independent shops already have to buy reverse-engineered tools to allow them to service these cars and continue to stay in business. It's clear that automakers are very interested in abusing copyright laws to force a monopoly on after-sales service.
  - chii 12y ago
    it should be made illegal to force the use of a particular after-sales service dealer - monopolies never help the consumer ever, and although some things have arisen as a natural monopoly, car after-sale servicing isn't and shouldn't be one of those.
alexqgb 12y ago
Both of your examples relate to the state, not the maker, and the state (in theory) is involving itself for the sake of the common good. Indeed, both of the problems behind these restrictions (criminal fraud and air pollution) are the kinds of anti-social behavior that we expect states to address. All of this is categorically different from a private party renegotiating the well-established legal concept of ownership for the sake of private profit and ongoing exploitation.
- wbillingsley 12y ago
  Unfortunately, the state also cares about industry creating new costs for you. If you now have to pay $500 for what you used to be able to do yourself, GDP just went up by ($500 * market size) and a politician sleeps more comfortably about their re-election chances. If a car manufacturer shores up its profitability and that of its dealers by ensuring that everything right down to the oil change needs their licensed and authorised device, then many governments would label that "business innovation" and claim it's in the common good of the economy.
bliti 12y ago
This has been going since forever. It has been slowly gaining ground through the development and inclusion of non-serviceable components. Take for example the body control module that resides in most cars today. It manages the power windows by using solid state electronics. Before you had some relays and switches. Which was easy and cheap to fix. Not to mention that you could pretty much fix it with almost any 12v relay. Now days you are stuck with an smd board with multiple microchips and tons of miniscule resistors. Who in their right mind could repair that? No one. That's why a $20 fix turned into a $500 one.
- kragen 12y ago
  It's a good example for another reason, too, though: switches and 12V relays are inherently unreliable devices that vaporize a small part of their contacts every time they turn on and off, and so while fixing the system is indeed easy and cheap, it's also frequently necessary. Meanwhile, it's pretty easy to build solid-state power electronics that with MTBFs and wearout times in the billions of cycle times, far longer than the rest of the car. (Not to say automakers don't ever biff it and build shitty solid-state power electronics that break all the time, though.)
  - bliti 12y ago
    I'm am ex mechanic and I hardly ever replaced a relay. Even in the old Porsches I still work on as a weekend. The few I did replace were due to a fan motor going bad. Which made the relay overheat. But I did replace many solid state boards that would die from vibration or regular under hood heat.
    - kragen 11y ago
      While I believe you, I continue to insist that this is a problem with shitty solid-state boards, not with solid-state electronics in general.

by miander 12y ago

stolio 12y ago

The new artificial boundaries are only recreating the natural boundaries from before. If you wanted to boost your fuel/air ratio in 1965 you had to open your hood and take apart your carburetor, that keeps most people out of it. Now we're talking about downloading iPhone apps that promise 10% more speed and the only technical challenge is aligning your car's USB plug with your phone. And then hitting the big green button labeled "GO FASTER!"

Gracana 12y ago
> Now we're talking about downloading iPhone apps that promise 10% more speed That doesn't sound like anything I've ever heard of. Many manufacturers require expensive subscriptions to access service manuals and programming software.[1] The average person (and even a lot of small-time mechanics) doesn't have access to those resources. [1] http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3291 http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3291
- stolio 12y ago
  You haven't heard of it because it's too stupid and dangerous to allow to happen. But it's a natural consequence of car ownership including read-write access to its computers.
  - bri3d 12y ago
    Many cars have had externally reprogrammable ECUs since the mid 1990s (with lots being fully reverse engineered), but yet tuning is still relatively esoteric and generally very expensive. What do you think has changed / will change that will lead to an onslaught of dangerous amateur tuning by phone? The technology to do so has existed for years.
    - freehunter 12y ago
      It exists in other motor vehicles. My last roommate had a quad where he would tune the ECU with software on his laptop depending on where he was riding and what parts he had installed.
    - stolio 12y ago
      Falling barriers. Like you say, tuning is currently very expensive. The financial and technical costs act as an idiot filter (forgive my negativity.) Those barriers are falling so we're left with artificial costs i.e. legal penalties and intentional code obfuscation.
- projct 12y ago
  ECU flashes don't require much more than software and the right kind of cable.
Spooky23 12y ago
Huh? I knew kids in high school who could barely read who could tune old cars without much of a problem. Now you need a computer, hard to find software, special cables, etc.

belorn 12y ago

Of course this has nothing to do with lawsuits, fear of car modifications or emissions compliance. It is a businesses decision in order to establish new revenue streams where before there only was a single sale (and revenue) per product. See all that data that is generated when people use the product? That could be mined, refined, and made into new products. All those computer screens in the car are suddenly new avenues to push advertisements. All those critical equipment are a avenue to sell repairs, where the producer has monopoly. And if nothing else, the computer inside the car can always be made into a platform. Take a product, throw in some DRM, and voila, you can create revenue after sale. The DRM and the accompanying user agreement is the glue from which all that extra revenue can be made. From a company perspective, I don't see how much of a choice they've got. A competitor can use that extra revenue to lower prices for which a consumer won't be able to assess when buying. Selling equal-looking products at higher prices normally spells doom, and regulations haven't even begun addressing the issue.

miander 12y ago
I completely agree. And I think that addressing that kind of situation, where competitors have no choice but to do the same dirty deeds or be undercut, is the one true purpose of regulation. If you change the rules for everyone you protect the consumer but keep the playing field level and let the market keep doing its job.
bri3d 12y ago
It's not only the data, but also the continued promotion of dealer service lock-ins. There are many modern cars where (for example) the "service in XXX miles" indicator for oil changes can't be reset except by the access-restricted and very expensive factory service tool. Many independent shops already have to buy reverse-engineered tools to allow them to service these cars and continue to stay in business. It's clear that automakers are very interested in abusing copyright laws to force a monopoly on after-sales service.
- chii 12y ago
  it should be made illegal to force the use of a particular after-sales service dealer - monopolies never help the consumer ever, and although some things have arisen as a natural monopoly, car after-sale servicing isn't and shouldn't be one of those.

alexqgb 12y ago

Both of your examples relate to the state, not the maker, and the state (in theory) is involving itself for the sake of the common good. Indeed, both of the problems behind these restrictions (criminal fraud and air pollution) are the kinds of anti-social behavior that we expect states to address. All of this is categorically different from a private party renegotiating the well-established legal concept of ownership for the sake of private profit and ongoing exploitation.

wbillingsley 12y ago
Unfortunately, the state also cares about industry creating new costs for you. If you now have to pay $500 for what you used to be able to do yourself, GDP just went up by ($500 * market size) and a politician sleeps more comfortably about their re-election chances. If a car manufacturer shores up its profitability and that of its dealers by ensuring that everything right down to the oil change needs their licensed and authorised device, then many governments would label that "business innovation" and claim it's in the common good of the economy.

bliti 12y ago

This has been going since forever. It has been slowly gaining ground through the development and inclusion of non-serviceable components. Take for example the body control module that resides in most cars today. It manages the power windows by using solid state electronics. Before you had some relays and switches. Which was easy and cheap to fix. Not to mention that you could pretty much fix it with almost any 12v relay. Now days you are stuck with an smd board with multiple microchips and tons of miniscule resistors. Who in their right mind could repair that? No one. That's why a $20 fix turned into a $500 one.

kragen 12y ago
It's a good example for another reason, too, though: switches and 12V relays are inherently unreliable devices that vaporize a small part of their contacts every time they turn on and off, and so while fixing the system is indeed easy and cheap, it's also frequently necessary. Meanwhile, it's pretty easy to build solid-state power electronics that with MTBFs and wearout times in the billions of cycle times, far longer than the rest of the car. (Not to say automakers don't ever biff it and build shitty solid-state power electronics that break all the time, though.)
- bliti 12y ago
  I'm am ex mechanic and I hardly ever replaced a relay. Even in the old Porsches I still work on as a weekend. The few I did replace were due to a fan motor going bad. Which made the relay overheat. But I did replace many solid state boards that would die from vibration or regular under hood heat.
  - kragen 11y ago
    While I believe you, I continue to insist that this is a problem with shitty solid-state boards, not with solid-state electronics in general.