Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars • Hacker News Board

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#191

Post by usaphp » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:28 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #45

One of the things that makes a car valuable is having a healthy aftermarket. It looks like, from this article anyway, Tesla is doing anything they can to make sure there is no aftermarket for their vehicles. To me, a car that you can't service yourself is worthless. A car that needs the manufacturer's permission to activate is not your car--it's owned by the manufacturer. And, when the manufacturer places a threateni…

But think about it from another perspective: someone purchases Tesla car, decided to service it himself without sufficient knowledge, then later he resells his car to another individual, the person who buys his car enables the autopilot mode on a car and because of the poor service quality/mistake the original owner did to a car the autopilot goes crazy and steers your car into a brick wall, everyone will blame Tesla for that, but it's the original owner in fault, because he performed a service for himself and did it badly.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#192

Post by gwright » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:28 PM UTC

marssaxman wrote: post #155

amelius wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A car that needs the manufacturer's permission to activate is not your car--it's owned by the manufacturer. Yes, but on the other hand it is best to view a car as a service, because this makes sure that the interests of the manufacturer (or service provider) are aligned with those of the user: no more "planned obsolescence"; and the manufacturer will plan ahead for recycling of materials because this is in their be…

You are so much more optimistic about the motivations of these "providers" than I that I am struggling to find any common ground where we could have a discussion. All I see are new opportunities for exploitation and control driven by rent-seeking behavior.

If the market is open and competitive then your concerns should be addressed by other vendors. There is no need, nor is it possible, for every product to be appropriate for every consumer. The 'motivation' for these providers is to achieve a return on investment, they can only do that by creating a value proposition that the market approves, which is not the same things as a value proposition that everyone approves.

It isn't entirely clear to me if 'rent-seeking' is the appropriate description here though. You aren't being forced into to this type of arrangement and are free to purchase from other vendors. I'd like to see a bit more regulatory capture, government mandates, and so on before it makes sense to me to start talking about 'rent-seeking'.

For example, the byzentine dealership laws in many states and the lobbying by dealers to maintain the status quo via legislation seems more like rent-seeking to me.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#193

Post by protomyth » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:31 PM UTC

greendesk wrote: post #179

I remembered this story when reading the article: A boy wants to repair his dad's printer. As he troubleshoots the problem, he calls a repair shops with the information on the printer. The repair shops gives him guidance on how to repair the printer on his own and sends the parts for it. The boy asks: "Why would you do it? Would not you make more money by asking me to have it repaired at the shop?" "Oh, but when peop…

"I rather trust official repairs than garage shops."

Had a Chevy and took it in for an official repair on the recall. They didn't do it correctly. Had it in the shop because the belt broke (not timing) and they asked if it I had taken it in for the recall. I was a bit peeved to find out the official shop had not only messed up the recall repair on the brakes, they had actually broke some other stuff.

Took my Dad's Buick into Devils Lake to get the door repaired. Common problem on that model, and the local repair shop (Harold's) decided ordering a $120 plastic part was all kinds of dumb, so he made an aluminum version of the part. It never broke again.

Its about people and incentives. There are very important consumer protections in not letting the manufactures control everything. I have seen bad manufacture shops and good ones and good and bad independent shops. Its about people.

If we can keep manufactures from controlling all repairs with decent legislation, we might be able to keep a strong and healthy 3rd party repair capability. Otherwise, its just one more thing we don't actually own and the incentive is to build things that will break.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#194

Post by zitterbewegung » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

usaphp wrote: post #191

ryandrake wrote: post #45

One of the things that makes a car valuable is having a healthy aftermarket. It looks like, from this article anyway, Tesla is doing anything they can to make sure there is no aftermarket for their vehicles. To me, a car that you can't service yourself is worthless. A car that needs the manufacturer's permission to activate is not your car--it's owned by the manufacturer. And, when the manufacturer places a threateni…

But think about it from another perspective: someone purchases Tesla car, decided to service it himself without sufficient knowledge, then later he resells his car to another individual, the person who buys his car enables the autopilot mode on a car and because of the poor service quality/mistake the original owner did to a car the autopilot goes crazy and steers your car into a brick wall, everyone will blame Tesla…

I don't think other people would blame Tesla. People don't blame the manufacturer when someone services a car and doesn't put on the breaks correctly and causes an accident.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#195

Post by qb45 » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:38 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #172

BufordTJustice wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Armin is right; further more, I suspect a lot of technology like MegaSquirt will continue to improve, and we'll have (thank god) aftermarket ECMs to put into these cars to give the user more control over the vehicle. We can only hope that a similar movement to Linux on PCs builds up steam up in the automotive space, as many of us like being able to understand, adapt, and improve on our vehicles.

Until you need verified checksums to drive on a public road. Using public infrastructure is a privilege, not a right.

You appear to be advocating troublesome technological solution to a social problem (people going "screw emmisions, I want powerrrr!") which isn't even that widespread.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#196

Post by raziel2701 » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:40 PM UTC

zitterbewegung wrote: post #194

usaphp wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But think about it from another perspective: someone purchases Tesla car, decided to service it himself without sufficient knowledge, then later he resells his car to another individual, the person who buys his car enables the autopilot mode on a car and because of the poor service quality/mistake the original owner did to a car the autopilot goes crazy and steers your car into a brick wall, everyone will blame Tesla…

I don't think other people would blame Tesla. People don't blame the manufacturer when someone services a car and doesn't put on the breaks correctly and causes an accident.

The media would blame Tesla, they have an agenda.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#197

Post by toomuchtodo » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:41 PM UTC

qb45 wrote: post #195

toomuchtodo wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until you need verified checksums to drive on a public road. Using public infrastructure is a privilege, not a right.

You appear to be advocating troublesome technological solution to a social problem (people going "screw emmisions, I want powerrrr!") which isn't even that widespread.

I don't believe I am. Verified software on your vehicle is no different than other safety features required by law. Break the law, you lose your right to drive, or you go to jail (depending on the severity of the violation).

I am _not_ arguing you shouldn't be allowed to tinker with your vehicle. You're just not entitled to the source code that runs it (unless you buy a car from a manufacturer that agrees to that as part of the sale agreement), nor are you allowed to make modifications and take it out on a public road if you could cause harm to others.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#198

Post by maratd » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:41 PM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #63

ryandrake wrote: post #45

One of the things that makes a car valuable is having a healthy aftermarket. It looks like, from this article anyway, Tesla is doing anything they can to make sure there is no aftermarket for their vehicles. To me, a car that you can't service yourself is worthless. A car that needs the manufacturer's permission to activate is not your car--it's owned by the manufacturer. And, when the manufacturer places a threateni…

You'd think that out of the thousands of people who have already bought one of these cars, there might be one out there with both the skills and desire to actually own what they paid for On the other hand, it could just be that those who want to really own their cars would not consider buying a Tesla anyway, and those who have the skills are too scared of the legal aspects. I think at the moment, electric cars are st…

> The aftermarket community for existing cars basically doesn't care about emissions --- one of the biggest attractions of an electric.

You've clearly never been behind the wheel of a Tesla. Please go drive one. Emissions were literally the very last reason for buying the car for me.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#199

Post by qume » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:42 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #109

qume wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's gasoline. You're thinking of diesel.

Here in Lisbon no such distinction is made, any diesel or gasoline car built before 2000 is banned from the city center.

Wow that's very interesting, I didn't know that.

Although going by year is a little arbitrary (a 1995 honda vs a 2005 GM SUV?) I do support the concept.

Personally I'd like to see most city centers car free.

Re: Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars

#200

Post by qume » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 8:43 PM UTC

jjawssd wrote: post #160

qume wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And don't forget the 'cost of money'. Take the purchase price, $35k, minus an old car, say $5k, and you have $30k making money for you over the 20 years. Conservatively, even in a bank in some countries, the return from $30k in the bank is going to pay for your gas then you'll still have the principle left over at the end.

Can you please clarify where your numbers are coming from and what they are referencing

They come from my keyboard, just above the QWERTYUIOP keys. They are referencing currency.