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

451–460 of 659 posts

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

#451

Post by oittaa »

henkslaaf wrote: post #386
oittaa wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Nitpick: the modifications aren't illegal. Driving with some modifications is illegal You can modify your car to your heart's desire and put it in a garage or drive it on a race track. You just cannot go into a public road with them. Totally sensible.

Yeah, that's a better way to put it. But the end result for an average person is that on public roads you know that the vehicles are at least somewhat standard. You just can't go around trying to kill pedestrians or bicyclist because "muh freedom". [1]

[1]: https://i.redd.it/e9n15wjtad411.jpg

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

#452

Post by misiti3780 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #445
misiti3780 wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a tesla owner, this story does not make me want to unhook my car from the internet (Tesla did what was legally in their right to do, this is a nothing-burger.) I would imagine 99% of other Tesla owners feel them same. You feeling nostalgia for the good old days with MapQuest?

> Tesla did what was legally in their right to do, this is a nothing-burger. Put me in the 1%. I won't buy another Tesla ever, until there is an ironclad guarantee that what's mine is mine. I did not license the car from them, I bought it outright. > You feeling nostalgia for the good old days with MapQuest? Everybody but Tesla has CarPlay. Most have 360* cameras, too, and physical switches and knobs for certain comm…

sure they arn't .... let's revisit in 2025

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

#453

Post by rootusrootus »

jimt1234 wrote: post #366

Are there any new EVs that aren't 4-wheel iPhones? Heck, it feels like all new cars are like this (vehicle is "managed" by the car company). I'd love to buy an EV that was basically like the original Tesla Roadster: four wheels, a bunch of batteries, and that's it. The only way I know to get this is to do your own EV conversion. Not 100% sure, though. ???

I'd wager that most EVs are pretty similar to the ICE equivalent from the same manufacturer. Teslas are relatively unique with the smartphone-on-wheels concept. My wife drives a Bolt, and it's just a car which happens to use electric motors. Infotainment and everything else is normal.

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

#455

Post by gridspy »

ipqk wrote: post #439
mikestew wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Also, not buying a new car (EV or not) is the most environmentally friendly choice you can make.

That doesn't sound true.

Every car I've had was used, I DO like that the ecological "cost" of the car is paid by the previous owner.

However if you buy a new car and drive it for its entire life (15 years) that seems similar to buying a used car. Especially if by doing so you put your old ICE car off the road.

Better of course if you can live with less cars and use public transport instead.

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

#456

Post by rootusrootus »

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 agree, I don't think in the near term this affects their sales. They've cultivated a myth of technological superiority that works with less sophisticated consumers, while at the same time offering fewer features than all of the competition. I mean, heck, even a Nissan Rogue has a 360* camera that Tesla doesn't offer. Auto wipers that actually work. CarPlay, etc.

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

#457

Post by Ajedi32 »

AinderS wrote: post #418
kube-system wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, a better example is modifications to homes. Those are restricted in many places in the US. I can't replace a circuit in my homes wiring, even if I follow every code.

But even in that case, the restriction comes from law, not an arbitrary decision made by a private company.

And there are a number of competing, qualified, third party electricians who can make the change for you. You aren't locked-in to contracting with the company which originally built the house.

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

#458

Post by lovecg »

jabbany wrote: post #429
jtbayly wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry, in what world is having an actual 90 physically installed by Tesla, and enabled physically by Tesla, able to be used and reported as such in the Tesla UI less relevant than some row in the Tesla sales db? Tesla did put in the 90 and enable it! The fact that there isn’t a receipt proving that anybody paid for it is irrelevant. It could have been a gift, a reward, a thank you, a bribe, a reasonable business…

> in what world In our world? Based on the thread, Tesla did a battery service on a model of car with a 60 battery. Unless it was stated as upgraded, after the service it is still a 60 car to the manufacturer. A 60 car that just happened to be able to run at the performance level of a 90 version. They then state this is a bug and fixed it. It's immoral on Tesla's side, for sure, but the previous owner selling it as a…

Who installed the pirated copy in this hypothetical? If it was Microsoft itself for whatever reason, then yeah - it’s on them to make the customer whole.

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

#459

Post by rootusrootus »

malwarebytess wrote: post #391

I have a Tesla (M3.) But it's stories like these that will make my next electric not a Tesla. From the failure to deliver FSD, to the inability to quickly fix their out-of-factory fitment problems, to anti-customer policies like these they're quickly souring in my mind. At least the car is a blast to drive. edit: FWIW looks like Tesla decided to do the right thing, > While I don't think it's ideal to need a huge soci…

I'm with you. I had a P3D. What a blast it was to drive. But one of the reasons I sold it was uneasiness about the level of control Tesla maintained over the car and their apparent willingness to use that control later -- and not in my best interest.

I'm going to stick to cars from manufactures that don't seem inclined to do this to me. So definitely not Tesla. And maybe not BMW, they're giving off strong vibes of wanting to play this same game with their cars.

It helps that Tesla has fallen way behind in actual features, so I don't really want what they're offering. I can get lane following and adaptive cruise from anyone else, CarPlay is more valuable to me than Tesla's tiny little garden, and all the other standard car features Tesla doesn't want to offer. Wipers that work, door handles that don't suck, 360* camera for parking in tight places, stuff like that. Tesla doesn't have a monopoly on fast EVs any more, and before much longer they won't have the best charging network either. That was what drew me to the P3D.

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

#460

Post by rootusrootus »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #288

Yet another example of why we need open-source information about how to find the LTE modem in cars and disable it. Longer term, we need firewalls and deep packet inspection devices we can install inline with the LTE modem, so people can still get maps and traffic info, but reject all software "upgrades." We need ublock origin for cars.

We need regulation from the government that flat out prevents this kind of behavior to begin with. Customers shouldn't need to keep up on the latest technological countermeasures just to maintain ownership of a car they purchased.
Post reply on HN