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

Software is eating the car

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 549 posts

Re: Software is eating the car

#41

Post by floren »

yardie wrote: post #17
mthomasmw wrote: post #6

Serious question - what alternatives are left for those of us who want a dumb car? I've spent the last three months finding out I can't get solar panels installed without a high-fidelity power-monitor tap connected to the provider's cloud, logging every appliance I use and what it's doing. Same deal with cars - they are on the internet and they generate evidence used to convict, and geofencing is coming. Other than s…

EVs are quite simply and there has been a small, but growing base of users using AC induction motors on sailboats. I imagine you're going to need a pre-OBDII car and some mechanical skills and convert it to electric drive. After that you'll have a car that has half the range of a modern EV do to weight optimization.

I've got a 1985 Jeep CJ-7 sitting in a shed in another state right now. The 4-cylinder engine sucked when it was new, and 35 years of entropy have not been kind to it, especially the labyrinthine emissions control systems. But I'm holding on to it because I think it would be an absolute hoot converted to electric... plus, it's got such a small gas tank and bad gas mileage that a 150 mile electric range would be no worse.

Re: Software is eating the car

#42

Post by dvh »

ArkanExplorer wrote: post #4

It seems that 'hardware' is eating the car, too. I want to just buy a small, slow, simple EV for picking up groceries and other city errands, for $5k-$10k. It seems like the only companies making that are the Chinese, and usually only selling them in China. Heck, it doesn't even need an Infotainment system - just bluetooth for audio and calls, USB-A charger port and phone cradle.

Citroen Ami, $6000, 75km range, max speed 40km/h. The car is rotationally symmetrical (left and right doors are exactly the same, front and back is also the same)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Ami_(electric)

Re: Software is eating the car

#43

Post by mthomasmw »

quacked wrote: post #13
mthomasmw wrote: post #6

Serious question - what alternatives are left for those of us who want a dumb car? I've spent the last three months finding out I can't get solar panels installed without a high-fidelity power-monitor tap connected to the provider's cloud, logging every appliance I use and what it's doing. Same deal with cars - they are on the internet and they generate evidence used to convict, and geofencing is coming. Other than s…

I don't think there are any. If you got to the point where you somehow managed to source the labor, materials, and space to manufacture "dumb technology", you'd be sued into oblivion by competitors who wouldn't want you to eat into their profit margins. I think the market is huge. Imagine a company that suddenly started selling all-metal consumer appliances with minimal functionality, controlled by old-fashioned swit…

Vitamix

Re: Software is eating the car

#44

Post by politelemon »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

Short answer to the lede: no, the industry cannot cope. Or rather, it will limp along with bloatware, bugs, and malware exactly the same way we see desktop OSes bloat, or the way we see routers and set-top boxes hacked to become botnets. In my 40+ years in the industry I've yet to see code get SMALLER. With the exception of Linux kernel 1.0 in the 90's which was a step backwards into smaller, more compact code, code…

Hey I'm with you. Not just in cars but for gadgets around the home. Coffee makers, microwaves, fridges, thermostats. Please give me as few moving parts as possible, the consequences of decisions made outside my control are a huge unknown with potentially large impacts.

Re: Software is eating the car

#45

Post by fighterpilot »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #32

Maybe not a "dumb" car, but yes, I would like to see more good analog options if the digital alternative is getting screens in cars that look utterly embarrassing compared to yesteryear's netbook-sized screen fad. If you're going to put tech in my car, you better go all the way. I'm talking a huge screen, fast multicore processor or redundant systems, touchscreen to UI update response times under 5ms. None of this no…

Is there an established word for the chronic build up in annoyance of waiting a few hundred ms each time you click something on a smart phone or computer?

Re: Software is eating the car

#46

Post by vikingerik »

mthomasmw wrote: post #6

Serious question - what alternatives are left for those of us who want a dumb car? I've spent the last three months finding out I can't get solar panels installed without a high-fidelity power-monitor tap connected to the provider's cloud, logging every appliance I use and what it's doing. Same deal with cars - they are on the internet and they generate evidence used to convict, and geofencing is coming. Other than s…

I bought a new Nissan Kicks last year (the lowest-end crossover SUV) and it seems pretty dumb. It has no internet connectivity as far as I can tell. It has a touch-screen, but it's pretty much just for the backup camera and audio controls, everything else has physical controls. It does have a computer that is involved in operating the CVT, but besides that it never gets in my way. And it does have sensors for the safety features (blind spot warning, etc) but that stays out of my way too. (The one annoying exception was when I had a bike rack on the back. I couldn't drive in reverse, the collision detection kept sensing the rack as an obstacle and slamming the brakes.)

Mostly-dumb cars still exist on the lower end of the manufacturers' lines. But yeah, who knows how long that situation will last, or if you'll be able to get anything technologically dumb with premium power and handling.

Re: Software is eating the car

#47

Post by mlac »

jonshariat wrote: post #14

Link isn't working but Selzered's link does. What is interesting is that graph half way down: in 2010 the software cost of the car was 35% and they project by 2030 it will make up 50% the cost of the car. As a consumer, I don't want anything but Apply Play or Android Auto in my car with a display. Why not cut costs and go a different direction? Am I really in the minority of consumers?

I 100% agree with this. I want climate control knobs and buttons, a basic AM/FM radio, and a CarPlay/android auto screen. Everything else is noise, and as Toyota would put it, MUDA (Waste / non-value added).

In my view, there is no reason for an auto manufacturer to invest heavily in their infotainment systems anymore - it just isn't a competitive advantage for most cars. Almost all users who buy the upgraded trims will have a smart phone.

Re: Software is eating the car

#48

Post by arpyzo »

zippergz wrote: post #21
vannevar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad to hear I'm not the only one who wants a dumb car. Unfortunately, the idea of electric cars has become bound up with the notion of software-driven cars. I want an electric car with analog controls, no touch screens or over-the-air updates, and minimal software. A car that I feel like I own, rather than one I'm getting a click-through license to use.

1000% agree. I do not want a car that is a smartphone on wheels and I have no idea why so many people find this attractive.

I own a 2014 Subaru Impreza and my brother in-law a 2017. I've driven both extensively. Sometime during those years, Subaru switched from knobs and levers to a touchscreen and the controls are so much worse!

1. The controls on the 2014 are obvious, easy to find, and my choices are readily apparent. In the 2017 I have to search for them and often guess their meanings. If I'm actively driving, I just give up because it's too distracting.

2. The controls are not as responsive. Sometimes there's a lag. Sometimes they don't respond at all.

3. There are bugs with the digital controls that simply don't exist in the analog versions. As an example in the 2017 the radio turns on every time the car gets started regardless of if it was on when the car was turned off.

Re: Software is eating the car

#49

Post by giantrobot »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

Short answer to the lede: no, the industry cannot cope. Or rather, it will limp along with bloatware, bugs, and malware exactly the same way we see desktop OSes bloat, or the way we see routers and set-top boxes hacked to become botnets. In my 40+ years in the industry I've yet to see code get SMALLER. With the exception of Linux kernel 1.0 in the 90's which was a step backwards into smaller, more compact code, code…

I'm definitely in the same boat wrt complexity. My pickup has just enough extra electronics to be a quality of life improvement over a model that lacked those features. It doesn't try to drive for me and second guess my actions in unexpected ways. It doesn't give me unfathomable warning beeps that only serve as a distraction trying to figure out what's causing the beep.

At the same time it's important to recognize there's a difference between software bloat and growth. Security fixes often cause code to grow (checks, verifications, etc). That growth isn't bloat. The previous version of the software was exploitable because it lacked the checks that were added. Adding drivers or better handling edge cases in drivers grows code but isn't bloat.

Even "bloat" that's only added on-disk size (a secret Tetris game in some code) that doesn't affect normal code flow isn't the same as bloat as adding some advertising telemetry in the middle of a critical code path.

Not all code growth is bloat and not all bloat is equal.

Re: Software is eating the car

#50

Post by andrewia »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #3

Short answer to the lede: no, the industry cannot cope. Or rather, it will limp along with bloatware, bugs, and malware exactly the same way we see desktop OSes bloat, or the way we see routers and set-top boxes hacked to become botnets. In my 40+ years in the industry I've yet to see code get SMALLER. With the exception of Linux kernel 1.0 in the 90's which was a step backwards into smaller, more compact code, code…

If you want the simplest car possible, you can look at models designed to sell in volume worldwide. I'm talking the Hyundai Venue crossover, Hyundai Accent subcompact sedan, Honda Fit/Jazz hatchback (recently discontinued for the US), Ford EcoSport crossover, etc. They are designed to be serviced in poor conditions. They will tolerate removal of electronics like the infotainment because some countries' base models have simpler configurations. In the case of the Honda Fit, the climate control dials physically move the ducts! And repair documentation and parts will be plentiful because there's a large market for parts suppliers to compete. Also look at body-on-frame fleet vehicles like a base Ford Ranger or F-150, but be ready to forgo stuff like cruise control.

There are EV equivalents too, like the Chevy Bolt and Hyundai Kona EV that offer range in the 200s of miles with make driver assists as an optional upgrade. Even with complicated powertrain electronics, EVs are still more reliable than ICE cars because any iffy software is made up for by lack of mechanical parts. The repair procedure is the same as mechnical parts - just swap the faulty part out for a working one, and the "upstream" supplier will probably take the broken module to reflash software or frankenstein together half-working PCBs to make another refurbished module to sell.

If you're worried about remote compromise, it's pretty easy to avoid IMO. Open the dashboard and yank the cellular antenna, and never pair the infotainment to Bluetooth or Wi-Fi (or just yank the 2.4 GHz antenna). Those are basically the only avenues for wireless attacks into a vehicle unless you count the TPMS and key fob radios, which seem too simple and low-bandwidth to offer an attack surface. And if an attacker can access your car's physical ports, they could already attack you in other ways like by weakening the brake lines. Other new electronics, like MOSFETS instead of relays in the BCM, have actually made the car more reliable so they should be fine. Other newly standard features like blind spot monitoring are (1) solid state, so they won't fail often and (2) tolerate failure or complete removal.

Post reply on HN