Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jailbreaking Used Teslas

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 296 posts

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#171

Post by [deleted] »

jpambrun wrote: post #169
judge2020 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely the people salvaging these cars would be happy to enter into a contract with Tesla to accept all liability (including superchargers/stations) for damages caused by the car they fixed up, then, right? Edit to add from a below comment I made: I mean more in the scenario of a cell going bad, causing a fire, then maybe blowing up the car and causing collateral damage. As I understand it, this would be covered by t…

This is nonsense. Chargers should be designed to protect themselves. It a defective car can damage it it's only the charger's manufacturer fault.

[deleted]

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#172

Post by jkepler »

illumanaughty wrote: post #105
dragosmocrii wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when Tesla issued that paid software update to make your car accelerate 0-100 a 0.1 seconds faster. If the hardware is there unchanged, why should the software update be a paid upgrade? It means the software was not good to begin with. Seems to me Tesla is trying to model a software development business, but they forget they're in the hardware business

Owners of photoshop don't get free updates even though they own their computer. Software costs money to develop so saying all updates should be free simply because they already own the hardware doesn't makes any sense.

Owners of GIMP get free updates (or any other FOSS/libre software or OS), and can improve things themselves with the right skills. Car software out to be the same.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#173

Post by jpambrun »

marcinzm wrote: post #15
sheepdestroyer wrote: post #4

As I understand, The FSD package (and I guess the performance package too) is linked to the car, not your account. It doesn't follow you from car to car. Then, what is the justification of Telsa's " you did not pay for it" given to second hand owners as seen in this article? This is really disingenuous and in total contradiction with Musk's "your car is an appreciating asset".

As I understand it, if you buy a non-salvage used car from another individual then the package follows the car. If you buy a salvage car then the package does not follow it as the car is officially junk (it also loses warranty, etc). If you buy a used car from Tesla they will remove the package before sale. There's one case where Tesla apparently messed up and didn't remove the package from a car they re-sold until a…

Wait. So features are onwer AND car bounded? It does not carry to the next owner of the same car and does not carry to the next car of the same owner? At least when going through Tesla dealership? That would be pretty despicable..

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#174

Post by jpambrun »

crazygringo wrote: post #12

None of this adds up -- there must be details missing. First, if a dealer advertises a car with a feature and the car is missing that feature, then you have recourse -- with the dealer. Second, how does Tesla even know that a car has changed owners? What triggered Tesla disabling the feature at this time for this car? I mean look, if you want to sell your Tesla back to an official Tesla dealer and they have an agreem…

Selling car AND user bound features is pretty disgusting. I just can't get behind that. Pick one.. not both.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#175

Post by anuila »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #148
kwhitefoot wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving is not a service, it is a feature of the car.

Maybe, or maybe not, self driving requires constant improvement and a herd of programmers continuing to serve the service and improve it.

Whatever it is, it’s been paid for, so you don’t just pull it from under my feet.

The price was decided upon purchase and unless it specifies limits it’s “lifetime”

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#176

Post by hajile »

ilamont wrote: post #3

Teslas are notoriously expensive to fix, partially because the automaker retains a tight hold on parts availability. So when a Tesla gets into a crash, insurance companies are quick to declare them a total loss because the cost of repairs approaches the value of the vehicle. At that point, Tesla stops supporting the vehicle, meaning all warranties are voided and Supercharging is disabled, even after the repaired vehi…

It's well-known that the gas-guzzler you own today is more green than scrapping it and buying a new car.

Constant replacement eliminates any possible "green" savings.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#177

Post by jiofih »

simon1573 wrote: post #112
illumanaughty wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owners of photoshop don't get free updates even though they own their computer. Software costs money to develop so saying all updates should be free simply because they already own the hardware doesn't makes any sense.

I don't agree with the analogy. Tesla manufacturers the whole package and you buy the car as a package. You don't buy the metal from your local car dealer and the software as a separate thing from Tesla. A more fitting analogy would be Apple charging you to upgrade your BIOS.

Apple does charge you to upgrade the OS.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#178

Post by Shivetya »

GhostVII wrote: post #103

The worst part isn't even listed in the article - Tesla is remotely disabling fast charging on all salvage cars across all networks, regardless of what the actual damage is. If it was just limited to the supercharger network I would somewhat understand, it's their network and I don't think it's a huge deal to disallow salvage cars on it. But they are removing the ability to charge even at third party chargers, basica…

I will be blunt, I really wish "salvage" cars had no right to exist. There is insufficient consistency between states as to what can be titled as such and still driven on our roads. You can get on the road most of the time just fixing cosmetic items and inspection in some states more concerned with emissions than much else; some states don't even check for working ABS or airbags.

I think companies like Tesla are correct in blocking access to their own charging network and I have no issue with another company blocking access to theirs. However I do not agree with the idea Tesla can block you from using another fast charging system.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#179

Post by pdpi »

illumanaughty wrote: post #105
dragosmocrii wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when Tesla issued that paid software update to make your car accelerate 0-100 a 0.1 seconds faster. If the hardware is there unchanged, why should the software update be a paid upgrade? It means the software was not good to begin with. Seems to me Tesla is trying to model a software development business, but they forget they're in the hardware business

Owners of photoshop don't get free updates even though they own their computer. Software costs money to develop so saying all updates should be free simply because they already own the hardware doesn't makes any sense.

Right but I didn’t buy my computer from Adobe
Post reply on HN