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

Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 659 posts

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#71

Post by nathancahill »

zcw100 wrote: post #48

So the way I'm reading the post is Tesla swapped out a battery pack for a 60 with a 90 and enabled the 90. Tesla, years later, discovers that even though the hardware for a 90 was installed it should have been software limited to be a 60. (I'm assuming that Tesla only made the owner pay the cost of the 60 battery swap even though they replaced it with a 90). They go and "fix the glitch" and set it back to the 60. Sin…

Reminds me of Office Space "We fixed the glitch".

> We, uh, we fixed the glitch. So he won't be receiving a paycheck anymore, so it'll just work itself out naturally. We always like to avoid confrontation, whenever possible. Problem is solved from your end.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#72

Post by ajconway »

pkulak wrote: post #37
nr2x wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well said, I’m potentially in the market for a car and this is like reason #5 I’m ruling out Tesla.

Same, though there were about a dozen previous reasons, starting with "pedo guy". This won't help, but I was pretty much long gone as a customer.

Tesla is also thousands of brilliant engineers that transformed the industry, and not just one guy who tweets a lot.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#73

Post by gnicholas »

AlexandrB wrote: post #55
duncan_idaho wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla wants you to buy a new one

Why would I buy a new one if no one will want to buy it from me in 5 years? Sounds like Tesla wants me to buy a new Ford.

Tesla's not the only one who pulls shenanigans like this. BMW was charging annually for CarPlay for a while, and now they're testing the same for heated seats. If this trend continues, people will actually want a checklist of things to ask about, and perhaps a contract that says what features were paid for, how, and whether there are any transfer fees so the new owner can use them. Sad state of affairs.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#74

Post by failTide »

AlexandrB wrote: post #51
duncan_idaho wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this is a great reason to not a used one. Which Tesla doesn't care about at all and probably want to discourage.

That seems short-sighted. Having a healthy secondary market makes purchasing a new one more appealing since you can recover some of the purchase price later. It also allows the superfans to buy the latest and greatest model more often.

Agreed. They're giving the middle finger to people who can't afford a new one but were still interested in Tesla. Could have been a good opportunity to create loyal customers who are on a budget now, but could afford to spend more later in life.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#75

Post by Verdex »

TheLoafOfBread wrote: post #35

Reason 547 why you should not connect your car to the internet. Today it is limiting range because mistake several years ago, tomorrow it will be mandatory ads every time when you start a car.

Verdex presents: A Plausible Future

Driver: Okay Car are you ready to go?

Car: Sure thing driver, let's just hook up to the T-Network. Okay, we're in! Where's our destination?

D: Well, first thing is that I'm going to want a Mocha Frappe from the local Starbucks.

C: Sounds great! Off we go.

D: Wait, Car what are we doing at McDonalds?

C: McDonald's offers a wide variety of cafe style drinks at competitive prices. This includes your Mocha Frappe. 9 out of 10 baristas actually prefer the smooth taste of McDonald's Mocha Frappe to that of Starbucks. Have you had your break today?

D: No, I wanted Starbucks. Oh well, I guess we're already in line.

Menu: Welcome to McDonalds! What can we make for you today?

D: I would like a Mocha Frappe.

M: Oh, I'm sorry, but I'm afraid out frappe machine is broken. What else can we make for you?

D: Really? I just wanted the Mocha. Okay Car, can you take me to Starbucks now?

C: Sounds great! Off we go.

D: No, Car, you just left the McDonald's parking lot and then came right back. They don't have any Mocha Frappe's here. They said their machine is broken.

C: McDonald's offers a wide variety of cafe style drinks at competitive prices. This includes your Mocha Frappe. 9 out of 10 baristas actually prefer the smooth taste of McDonald's Mocha Frappe to that of Starbucks. Have you had your break today?

D: I guess their frappe machine isn't the only broken machine here.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#76

Post by crooked-v »

hristov wrote: post #40

This has got to be one of the worst clickbait headlines in HN history, and this is an achievement. This is what happened. Person A has his tesla serviced, tesla increases his range by mistake. Person A puts a wrong decal on the tesla and illegally and fraudulently sells it as a car with an increased range to person B. The car eventually gets to person C, who takes the tesla to service where they correct the mistake.…

> illegally and fraudulently

How so? The car clearly had increased range at the time of sale. Tesla clearly approved of it at the time or they wouldn't have let it happen, and companies sure as hell don't get to take back stuff after years of condoning it because it was "by mistake".

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#77

Post by horsawlarway »

nr2x wrote: post #15
AinderS wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software locks themselves are nefarious. Is it the owner's car, or Tesla's?

It’s a rental car, you just don’t know that when you “buy” it.

This fucking exactly.

I'm fucking over it. If I "own" the device - legally I should own a key to EVERY fucking lock inside it. Digital or physical.

This attitude that it's acceptable to put a little green man inside of something you sell, and then retain control over that sold item using your little green man is insidious and immoral. I want it fucking banned yesterday, and it's rapidly becoming one of my strongest political opinions.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#78

Post by teawrecks »

galdosdi wrote: post #34

I don't think this kind of behavior is going to impact their sales, because frankly, they long ago passed the point where you have to be willing to completely drink the koolaid and not care about your privacy/independence and treat your car as just another SaaS software product you essentially rent, even if you did pay upfront. Much like how Lay's will not lose any customers if it's revealed they actually are slightl…

I think it hurts the resale value of their vehicles IMO. How much that hurts the retail value is dependent on the customer base. Like you said, if the base is like the classic apple user who just wants the newest shiniest tech, then they already expect the cost of the vehicle to be sunk. But Apple's goal isn't market penetration, exclusivity is part of their brand. Tesla on the other hand seems to have a goal of replacing as many gas cars with EVs as possible. I think marketing exclusivity conflicts with the goal of market penetration, and the only reason it hasn't become a problem yet is because everyone assumes their car is losing value already.

But if Tesla wants to sell a car to the other more frugal 90% of the population, they're going to have to cut this shit out.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#79

Post by giarc »

zcw100 wrote: post #48

So the way I'm reading the post is Tesla swapped out a battery pack for a 60 with a 90 and enabled the 90. Tesla, years later, discovers that even though the hardware for a 90 was installed it should have been software limited to be a 60. (I'm assuming that Tesla only made the owner pay the cost of the 60 battery swap even though they replaced it with a 90). They go and "fix the glitch" and set it back to the 60. Sin…

The odd part is the OP said it was "badged as a 90" which to me implies Tesla also removed the physical badges on the car and replaced them to indicate it was a P90. That, to me, really implies they wanted to make this a P90 car.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#80

Post by bambax »

> To be extra clear, I don't post this stuff because I hate Tesla or anything. In fact, it's just the opposite. I hate seeing Tesla derail themselves with this kind of nonsense.

I respect the OP for saying this. But I have a hard time respecting people buying Teslas, or anything from Musk. Is it not obvious that the guy is a charlatan? (and that the fish rots from the head?) How likely is it that you won't be robbed blind if you try to do business with him or any of his ventures?

Post reply on HN