11–20 of 773 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they don't own the license to use the software (Full Self Driving). I agree with you about the heated seats though.
Hmm, is the code already present? Would enabling it be putting unexpected load on Tesla's servers? If it's just a local feature (like the heated seats) that's shipped turned off, I'd say enabling it doesn't feel especially different to me (trusting it to drive you around of course is different).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they don't own the license to use the software (Full Self Driving). I agree with you about the heated seats though.
I'm ok with charging subscription fees for services with ongoing costs (things like cell connectivity for remote monitoring or something), and I'm ok with charging one time fees for unlocking features that are already there, since it allows for price discrimination, cheaper and more efficient manufacturing, and better prices to the customer overall (potentially at least). But the flip side of that is that...if you pu…
(registered security researcher for my rooted Teslas)
Freedom fighters.
"Hacking" carries quite a lot of negative connotations in most realms. These are people making sure you are able to make full use of your own stuff. There shouldn't be anything contentious about that.
I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.
IBM and I'm sure others have shipped enterprise hardware for years that was partially locked. You might get a machine with 16 cpus but you only paid for 8, for example, but you could license the rest as you grew. It seems a little similar and it was in no way underhanded, everyone knew what the deal was.
However I'll echo what another poster said. I say Tesla should be free to sell whatever they want, but if the end user finds a way around it too bad.
I'm torn. On one hand, I absolutely think that a capability available in the vehicle/device when you purchased it should be available for you to use, and not behind a software lock (heated seats, etc). On the other hand, an "upgrade" or 100% new software delivered via OTA (self driving, etc) seems a little more like it should be a separate thing.
Good. People who buy things should own the things they buy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they don't own the license to use the software (Full Self Driving). I agree with you about the heated seats though.
Hmm, is the code already present? Would enabling it be putting unexpected load on Tesla's servers? If it's just a local feature (like the heated seats) that's shipped turned off, I'd say enabling it doesn't feel especially different to me (trusting it to drive you around of course is different).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they don't own the license to use the software (Full Self Driving). I agree with you about the heated seats though.
I'm ok with charging subscription fees for services with ongoing costs (things like cell connectivity for remote monitoring or something), and I'm ok with charging one time fees for unlocking features that are already there, since it allows for price discrimination, cheaper and more efficient manufacturing, and better prices to the customer overall (potentially at least). But the flip side of that is that...if you pu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they don't own the license to use the software (Full Self Driving). I agree with you about the heated seats though.
Hmm, is the code already present? Would enabling it be putting unexpected load on Tesla's servers? If it's just a local feature (like the heated seats) that's shipped turned off, I'd say enabling it doesn't feel especially different to me (trusting it to drive you around of course is different).
no point to this, just thinking out loud