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

481–490 of 549 posts

Re: Software is eating the car

#481

Post by PhantomGremlin »

IgorPartola wrote: post #175
clairity wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Modern cars are absolutely terrible in the UX department, but they are a hell of a lot safer, so there’s that." tangentially, "safety" is highly cargo-culted. things that seem so obviously safer are taken without question as better, but in many cases, such features really only provide a false sense of security along with substantive unintended consequences. most safety features in cars (e.g., lane-keeping) allow p…

For anyone wondering what progress in terms of safety looks like, give this 77 second video a view: https://youtu.be/xtxd27jlZ_g

This is a great video that everyone should watch.

But part of the problem with the 50 y/o car may be that the steel has rusted (based on the rust-colored cloud of particles). That may be why the older car just disintegrates.

OTOH the weakening of the steel because of rust creates a de-facto "crumple zone"? A minor improvement? :)

Older cars were much too rigid and the body didn't absorb much energy. It was all transmitted to the occupants.

Also, forgetting about design improvements in safety, I'm not sure I want to "bet my life" on 50 year old brake lines, etc. That sort of stuff just wears out.

Re: Software is eating the car

#482

Post by PhantomGremlin »

Infinitesimus wrote: post #443
nogridbag wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently purchased a Kia Telluride. Perhaps I'm now biased because I love the car, but I think it has an excellent combination of tech and usability. 1. It still has buttons and knobs for the things that should be buttons and knobs (e.g. climate control, volume, etc). 2. The heads up display is the killer feature that should be standard on all cars (as is only available on the top speced Telluride). It displays spe…

2021 Sonata (Limited) here and I echo your sentiment. I spent a lot of time and realized that only Hyundai and Kia provided a good mix of the things I wanted in a smart way. Mazda's anti-touch stance makes it a non-starter for Android Auto/CarPlay Toyota, Subaru and Honda have abysmal infotainment interfaces and didn't seem to invest in me enjoying the interior of a car. Nissan CVTs have questionable reliability . Et…

Mazda's anti-touch stance makes it a non-starter for Android Auto/CarPlay

FWIW my daughter has absolutely no problem using CarPlay on her CX-30. She quickly breezes thru the menus like it's a twitch shooter game. She can probably navigate faster than if it were a touchscreen, because the control pad is low. Her hand isn't extended way out on the dash.

Re: Software is eating the car

#483

Post by yholio »

MrGilbert wrote: post #465
jacquesm wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that you don't know ahead of time when 'sometimes' is which is worse than nothing.

Not that I'm defending the technology in this case, but I notice that some people still believe it's unnecessary to read the user's manual of a modern car. Maybe this mindset has to change.

Strongly disagree. If you mimic the established user interface of the car people have been using for generations, then it should behave like people expect it too. If special qualifications are required to drive it, then you should sell it only to those who can prove them.

You cannot build something that looks like an elevator, has buttons with numeric labels, and when people push one button the doors close and they find out they just selected the power setting of a giant microwave oven. I mean, you can build it, if you don't care about people getting microwaved.

Re: Software is eating the car

#484

Post by PhantomGremlin »

rootusrootus wrote: post #448
wyre wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is special about Tesla that makes them not a “normal” car that happens to be electric?

Specifically, the post I was replying to was lamenting a future where EVs all try to be like Tesla, putting nearly 100% of the instrumentation and controls into a single large touchscreen. This is unique to Tesla, AFAIK. It worked out very well, it is a brilliant cost-saving measure that can also be marketed as 'elegant'. Have to hand it to Musk on that one. The R&D required to build a normal car interior is expensiv…

This is unique to Tesla, AFAIK.

Sadly, Ford decided to copy Tesla. This picture is from a first look but I think the production version isn't much different.

https://www.slashgear.com/ford-sync-4-first-look-mustang-mac...

Once Ford realized how stupid this was, they glued that knob onto the screen. It literally is glued on. There is a "finger" controlled by the knob that interfaces with the capacitive touchscreen.

I also want a "normal" EV, not a clown car.

Re: Software is eating the car

#485

Post by fock »

covidthrow wrote: post #95
quacked wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The key is to hunt for commercial-grade appliances. In some cases, they can be found and offer similar form factors to consumer devices, and in others you may be out of luck. Commercial kitchen appliances, washers/dryers, and flat panel displays can be sourced to your expectations. Just prepare to spend 1.5-3x as much right out of the gate.

the problem is that most of these are horrendously oversized for private use. So I would like to have a commercial agitator to create yeast dough; these aren't even that expensive for their small series and local production - compared to e.g. kitchen-aid stuff -, but I both don't have the space/floor to put down a 4sqft/1000 pound appliance and I certainly don't need a 5 gallon bowl for my dough... I'm sure you could create and sell a home-sized variant of these, but yeah, distribution won't be easy.

I have to admit though that I sometimes dream of setting up a company, which just goes through all these relatively low-tech, electromechanical things and cyclically produces these. Problem is: it's capital intensive, low-margin, low-growth and requires you to keep people around. At this point you've lost everyone nowadays even if it is sustainable (nothing goes to waste when making these repairable) and keeps skills alive (which both the US and EU are paying extreme prices for through the military acquisition procedures).

In this vein I also suspect that most people could easily afford to get their whole furniture sourced in a "raw wood" edition (to be painted/oiled) from local woodworking shops, as the price difference is virtually nonexistent (built a bed with the help of friendly non-CNC-shops: was 12h of work, which clocks in at maybe 900USD. Material was 300.). If I go to a non-ikea, but industrial/imported furniture-store, similar quality would have cost me ~4000USD. But of course, a healthy ecosystem of woodworkers and designers would not concentrate wealth.

Re: Software is eating the car

#486

Post by lelanthran »

duped wrote: post #267
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I'm the dark pattern developer I'm not logging when the EULA is accepted or how many times they declined it This cuts both ways. If the user can show one case of their rejecting the EULA without it being logged, they can then make the claim--correctly or not--that they repeatedly rejected it. If the car refuses to work without the EULA being accepted or rejected, proof of its movement would be sufficient to show…

There is hiding information and not collecting it to begin with. void handleEula() { auto eulaAccepted = readEulaAcceptedFile(); if (!eulaAccepted) eulaAccepted = promptForEulaAcceptance(); writeEulaFile(eulaAccepted); } This function reads a file from disk and writes back to it every time. If filesystem write audits aren't enabled there is no way to determine if the most recent write of "true" was the only write. >…

> This function reads a file from disk and writes back to it every time. If filesystem write audits aren't enabled there is no way to determine if the most recent write of "true" was the only write.

Yet, that doesn't matter - all the user has to demonstrate in court is that rejecting a EULA causes it to come up again in the future, meaning that sooner or later it is going to get accidentally accepted.

Re: Software is eating the car

#487

Post by rightbyte »

duped wrote: post #132
temporallobe wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car guy here. Yeah, I’m with you. My favorite car was a ‘96 Tercel with mechanical steering and a 4-speed manual. It even had manual roll-up windows. It had less than 100 HP, but it was simple as hell to operate, very fun to drive, cheap to maintain, and extremely reliable up until I sold it with nearly 400k miles on the odo. I put an aftermarket stereo and speakers in it and I was set. Only reason I sold it was beca…

Counterpoint, I'm not a car guy and I think too many people own them. But when I'm in a car my priorities are safety, mileage, seat comfort, climate control, sound quality, and smartphone support. I don't really care how much it costs to maintain, and I haven't changed my own oil in over a decade. Modern cars are fine in the UX for what I do. I'd rather not own a car than drive manual, and even vehicles from 10 years…

I find it more stressful to drive automatic. You need to be more careful with the gas pedal to get just the right amount of acceleration, since too much will make the car shift down and rev up. Also there is the risk of uncontrolled acceleration by mixing up the gas and brake pedal and not having the clutch as a double safe.

Re: Software is eating the car

#488

Post by vondro »

dylan604 wrote: post #193
jonplackett wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the exact same stupid thing that happened with DSLR cameras. Old SLR cameras had a ring around the lens for f-stop and another dial on top for shutter speed. New DSLR cameras even now hide all that stuff in a menu on the touch screen, as if it isn't something you want to change ALL THE TIME - and develop instant muscle memory for.

Which DSLR no longer has an aperture and shutter speed knob? I know the MFT mirrorless lost most of the controls, but did the latest Canon/Nikon really do this? My DSLR is eons old, so this is just baffling to me.

Some MFT's have plenty of physical controls (buttons/knobs). See Olympus OM-D line of cameras.

Re: Software is eating the car

#489

Post by lelanthran »

fomine3 wrote: post #453
northwest65 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> mechanical door lock Power central locking doesn't need a microcontroller, code, or a touch screen, or updates. > manual windows Electric windows doesn't need a microcontroller, code, or a touch screen, or updates. > no car stereo Car stereos do not need a microcontroller, code, or a touch screen, or updates. > no power steering Power steering doesn't need a microcontroller, code, or a touch screen, or updates. Hel…

> * doesn't need a microcontroller, Really?

Yes.. I had a 1986 BMW that had central locking, electric windows, radio, power steering, cruise control and a thermostat (which, as OP said, mechanical anyway).

No microcontroller on that car[1]; it was a very reliable car too (bought it with 50000km, sold it with 270000km and only ever did services. Nothing broke in that time).

Bosch k-jetronic fuel injection, no microcontroller needed.

Re: Software is eating the car

#490

Post by oldgradstudent »

fomine3 wrote: post #468
oldgradstudent wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) can be dangerous, but these systems are being put into cars with the flimsiest data to support them. No serious trial has been performed to test whether the benefits outweigh the risks.

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/evidence-mounts-for-effecti...

> https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/evidence-mounts-for-effecti...

Exactly what I said. No serious trial (or any trial).

What they describe is an observational study where they compare the same make or model with different levels of safety equipment.

The obvious confounding is that they're comparing people who care enough about safety that they are willing to pay for additional safety features, compared with people that are not willing to pay.

There's a reason we have double blind randomized controlled trials in medicine. The alternatives just don't work.

Post reply on HN