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

291–300 of 659 posts

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

#291

Post by jabbany »

thereddaikon wrote: post #284
jabbany wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no, they can't lock it down to 3080 level 3 years later with a software update I think the problem is that there are 2 different types of "can't": can't as in technologically impossible, and can't as in legally disallowed. In the past, the former was usually the case. Vendors literally could not technologically take away features because things either were not controlled by software or software could not tell the h…

>Heck, they could even cut down all legitimate 3080Tis to what would be 3080 or even 1060 performance via drivers after 3 years and you'd be able to do nothing besides complain on social media -- you still have exactly the amount of hardware sold, and they never promised any performance levels (just check their site, you only get things like compute units, clock speed, ram etc. not performance guarantees like FLOPs o…

Assuming this refers to Batterygate, the loss was only in the EU where they do have better consumer protections.

They actually settled in the US to avoid setting precedent...

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

#292

Post by HWR_14 »

cameronh90 wrote: post #219
10000truths wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of justification would never fly if we were talking about modding ICE vehicles: * Illegal to replace your own brake rotors or pads, as faulty ones can cause safety issues. * Illegal to replace your own headlights, as bad ones could be too dim or too bright and cause safety issues. * Illegal to change your own oil, as bad ones could seize up your engine in the middle of the road and cause safety issues. * Il…

In the UK, many modifications are restricted. For example, if I was to replace my halogen car headlights with LED ones, the car would be technically illegal, uninsured and fail inspection (if they notice). Exhausts can't be noisier than factory, which means in practice all aftermarket sports exhausts are illegal. At some point, I assume modifying drive-by-wire systems will become legally restricted.

Are those modifications illegal or is driving it on public roads after those modifications illegal?

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

#293

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

jabbany wrote: post #227
gambiting wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> (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) It says right there that it was done under warranty. If my RTX3080 breaks, and Nvidia sends me a 3080Ti as a replacement(because maybe they don't have any 3080 in stock) then no, they can't lock it down to 3080 level 3 years later with a software update. And yes, I'm allowed to sell it on as a 3…

> no, they can't lock it down to 3080 level 3 years later with a software update I think the problem is that there are 2 different types of "can't": can't as in technologically impossible, and can't as in legally disallowed. In the past, the former was usually the case. Vendors literally could not technologically take away features because things either were not controlled by software or software could not tell the h…

> Yeah, morally, but we need to start working to make this guaranteed legally.

I'm not sure I disagree with you, but the invocation of the word "morally" here really reminds me of the software licensing debates from twenty-something years ago. Twenty years later most people seem resigned on the software licensing issue (although I doubt their opinion has changed), and they seemed resigned on limiting their ability to run custom software on hardware they paid for (jailbreaking an Apple phone), but there is still plenty of grumbling for software that limits access to hardware features. Tesla limiting the battery capacity is not really different from Apple limiting which OS's you can install on their hardware. Unless I'm missing something?

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

#294

Post by _ea1k »

10000truths wrote: post #123
slg wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this is a controversial opinion here, but I think software locks aren't inherently bad in a car that can be driven by software. I don't really trust Tesla's self-driving software as is, I certainly don't trust some random person's hack of already questionable Tesla code. This isn't an iPhone. Someone mucking about in the software can kill people.

This sort of justification would never fly if we were talking about modding ICE vehicles: * Illegal to replace your own brake rotors or pads, as faulty ones can cause safety issues. * Illegal to replace your own headlights, as bad ones could be too dim or too bright and cause safety issues. * Illegal to change your own oil, as bad ones could seize up your engine in the middle of the road and cause safety issues. * Il…

Sadly, a lot of people disagree with you and do want much heavier regulations for a lot of those things.

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

#295

Post by reedjosh »

oittaa wrote: post #263
10000truths wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of justification would never fly if we were talking about modding ICE vehicles: * Illegal to replace your own brake rotors or pads, as faulty ones can cause safety issues. * Illegal to replace your own headlights, as bad ones could be too dim or too bright and cause safety issues. * Illegal to change your own oil, as bad ones could seize up your engine in the middle of the road and cause safety issues. * Il…

In EU many modifications are illegal and you'll get huge fines and/or lose your vehicle.

Gross.

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

#296

Post by tdiggity »

Tesla after-care is amazingly bad. Falling through the cracks will leave you up a river without a paddle.

You have to be an astute Tesla purchaser to avoid all the “easy” pitfalls. Which simply summarizes to: Don't buy anything that has a weird option. Don't expect to be retro-fitted for anything, and get whatever it is in writing.

With my Model 3, I bought one used from Tesla and it originally came with premium connectivity forever. However, when I purchased mine, it was supposed to only be active for a year (this was the standard deal for used car purchases from Tesla at the time). I still have it 2 years later. They probably have a filter/cutoff by vin # that says who gets premium forever and doesn't filter for sold/resold by Tesla..until they fix that glitch. It’ll happen one day, I’m sure.

The latest pitfall is service. If you have a problem, the only way to talk to someone is to go to the service center. If you have a problem afterwards, you’ll end up as a ticket in the system and no one will get back to you in a timely manner.

Service story time; I had my car serviced for a bad LTE board. It took them several days to diagnose this. When I picked up the car, they had taken apart the panels in the trunk. My mobile connector was in the trunk, and they forgot to put it back in when re-assembling the car. I didn't realize this till the day after I picked up the car. I called as soon as I found this out and could not get a live person at the service center. The call center could only put a ticket in and they'd get back to me in 72 hours. In cases like this, time is of the essence, the more time that's passed, the more likely that my mobile connector would go missing. Anyway, after a lot of calling, no one could get me in touch with someone at the service center. no one. I couldn't drive back down there myself for 5 days. When I finally got there, the service advisor didn't even go ask the tech who worked on my car where the connector was. He just gave me a new one. Very frustrating.

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

#298

Post by freerobby »

mikestew wrote: post #124
Enginerrrd wrote: post #10

I'll spare the moral judgements against Tesla for this: The real moral of the story here is that if your business plan and practices is creating occasional weird issues and huge cognitive dissonance in your customers, it's the wrong business plan. Also... the number of people this applies to is likely so low that Tesla really screwed up by not erring on the side of the customer. (They didn't buy from Tesla, but they'…

As one who bought TSLA when it was in the low double digits, I thought for sure that we'd one day own a Tesla (we sure made enough off TSLA to justify one). But this situation is but one of many little duck bites that have now put us off the brand. Sure, a duck doesn't bite all that hard, but enough of those little nibbles can cause some harm. And so "pedo guy", "taking TSLA private", "no, FSD does not transfer to th…

FSD does transfer to next owner with any private sale.

If you sell it to Tesla, they often remove FSD and resell without it; but that's no different than anyone else modifying a vehicle they own and then selling it in its new state.

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

#299

Post by phkahler »

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…

>> Sounds like all around bad decisions.

Disagree.

>> The previous owner shouldn't have sold it as a 90 or at least disclosed that, "It's a 60 but Tesla swapped out the batter with a 90 and left it configured as a 90".

Yes, they should have said that and did. You agree with this decision when you say 'Why not get some good will out of it? "Hey sorry about your battery. We only had a 90 so we threw that in there. Enjoy.'

Tesla, being notified, should have just enabled the 90 and made the customer happy.

Tbey did. Not a bad decision.

The only "bad" decision was to revert it from a 60 to a 90 and stick to that. Hardly "all around bad decisions" but a very bad one at the end.

Post reply on HN