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

Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 219 posts

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#51

Post by foolfoolz »

thayne wrote: post #42
blamazon wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small nit: I can 'jump' (read: charge the battery of) other cars with my model X, as long as the other car is an ICE car. In the frunk there is a panel that pops off and underneath there are (unlabeled) 12V and ground terminals that I can put jumper cables on. However, I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging station before, I really deeply wish I could have received a jump then.

> I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging station before It really seems like EVs should have easily replaceable batteries, so that in situations like that you can just have roadside service bring you a charged battery and swap it out. Or for that matter, charging stations could pre-charge batteries, and you pay to swap your drained battery for a charged one.

it’s been done

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company)

they were probably 25 years too early

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#52

Post by blamazon »

foolfoolz wrote: post #51
thayne wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging station before It really seems like EVs should have easily replaceable batteries, so that in situations like that you can just have roadside service bring you a charged battery and swap it out. Or for that matter, charging stations could pre-charge batteries, and you pay to swap your drained battery for a charged one.

it’s been done https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company) they were probably 25 years too early

It's today a popular and I think ubiquitous thing in Taiwan for scooters:

https://youtu.be/87T6okeKu3A

https://www.gogoro.com/

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#53

Post by WaxProlix »

blamazon wrote: post #46
thayne wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging station before It really seems like EVs should have easily replaceable batteries, so that in situations like that you can just have roadside service bring you a charged battery and swap it out. Or for that matter, charging stations could pre-charge batteries, and you pay to swap your drained battery for a charged one.

In that case I was towing a U-haul trailer, which leads to another thing that probably should exist: trailers with supplemental EV batteries. Not sure if the extra capacity is made up for by the extra weight though. (For context my car uses maybe ~1.5 - 4.0 times as much power when pulling the various sizes of U-haul cargo trailers)

Aerodynamics are at least as bad as weight when it comes to trailers iirc. And there are at least leisure trailers that come with battery packs in them. The Lightship and Boulder come to mind for instance. I suspect it's a matter of time for more utility trailers, if it's not already a thing. Batteries are expensive though.

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#54

Post by prepend »

candiddevmike wrote: post #50
marak830 wrote: post #29

I'm sorry I have seen the thread leads, and I cannot agree with them and think the replies do not get enough notice. Right to repair should be a full set of instructions for "everything" are available. That's it. Give the full specs for everything. If it's code reliant(which wtf), what does it require to work? That's. Fucking. It. We give you rules to say peeps cannot sell what you made, you make it so we can repair…

Right to repair eventually runs head first into security and encryption--how do you allow right to repair and TLS, encryption, secure computing, etc to coexist? Get rid of IoT black boxes like Google Homes? Allow Linux on Xbox? How do you create secure platforms while also giving consumers the keys to their devices? (FWIW I'm not advocating against right to repair, I actually hope it helps to get rid of black box IoT…

This is pretty simple to engineer.

With TLS it’s just authing the server, accept any income connections. Support basic authentication.

For home devices don’t require TLS. I don’t run TLS on my home network. I’m remote, I get devices, I accept that risk. TLS is not required for security.

For encryption just design so customers can swap out keys.

The biggest problem is designing cloud in the loop so they can mine data. This needs to stop.

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#55

Post by FloatArtifact »

candiddevmike wrote: post #50
marak830 wrote: post #29

I'm sorry I have seen the thread leads, and I cannot agree with them and think the replies do not get enough notice. Right to repair should be a full set of instructions for "everything" are available. That's it. Give the full specs for everything. If it's code reliant(which wtf), what does it require to work? That's. Fucking. It. We give you rules to say peeps cannot sell what you made, you make it so we can repair…

Right to repair eventually runs head first into security and encryption--how do you allow right to repair and TLS, encryption, secure computing, etc to coexist? Get rid of IoT black boxes like Google Homes? Allow Linux on Xbox? How do you create secure platforms while also giving consumers the keys to their devices? (FWIW I'm not advocating against right to repair, I actually hope it helps to get rid of black box IoT…

Think of it as like Android and unlocking the bootloader. There's a warning that it's running on modified system.

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#56

Post by kec »

blamazon wrote: post #23
Retric wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the exact use case where solar roofs on EV’s become very useful. However you can “jump” EV’s, supply power to their 12v system and then charge off of another cars 120v plug, or a portable generator etc.

Similarly, I've always thought it's a no brainer for any ICE car to have a solar roof. At a minimum it can keep a 12v battery from dying over long parking durations or high parasitic drain, and at best it could like, keep a container refrigerated or something.

Continental America averages on the order of 4.5kWh/m^2/day total solar irradiance.

A clean, car roof sized solar panel in direct sunlight all day would be good enough to offset parasitic drain with maybe enough left over to charge a phone or two but not much else. Not worth the cost (or the variance given you’re not always going to park in direct sunlight for 8+ hours).

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#57

Post by runnerup »

Retric wrote: post #47
runnerup wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d rather pay $2,000 less for my Honda HR-V than get a solar roof. But I agree it seems like a very nice option for those willing to pay more for their vehicles.

2k is IMO a poor price point as it’s too much for the minimal utility but not enough for meaningful power. IMO solar roofs are useful at the low end for ~400$ ICE cars could top off their battery and run a solar fan to keep the temperature down when parked in the sun. Not a huge deal, but still a nice luxury feature. Or a significantly more expensive solar roof could add meaningful highway mileage per year. You both…

I'd be surprised if solar panels in the roof were less than $2,000. An android-auto enabled head unit is like $500. Heated seats are often $1000 and that's "just" resistive wire. A cover for your truck bed is like $700. Premium carpet mats are $250. Unlocking your tailgate using a remote beeper instead of a physical key costs $300.

> IMO solar roofs are useful at the low end for ~400$

So I agree with this, but I don't believe that would be an option, at least without some DIY aspect.

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#58

Post by [deleted] »

FloatArtifact wrote: post #55
candiddevmike wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right to repair eventually runs head first into security and encryption--how do you allow right to repair and TLS, encryption, secure computing, etc to coexist? Get rid of IoT black boxes like Google Homes? Allow Linux on Xbox? How do you create secure platforms while also giving consumers the keys to their devices? (FWIW I'm not advocating against right to repair, I actually hope it helps to get rid of black box IoT…

Think of it as like Android and unlocking the bootloader. There's a warning that it's running on modified system.

[deleted]

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#59

Post by raisedbyninjas »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #24
fipar wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question out of ignorance: what does it mean to jump start an EV? I know what it is for an ICE (and I have a jump-starter-battery always in the trunk, with usb ports it doubles as a phone charger if you’re somewhere without power), but for an EV, I’d guess you either have enough battery charge for it to run, or you need to charge, right?

If you need to jump start an EV you need to charge it basically. I cant think of a case where it would be needed with an otherwise filled battery.

I just learned that my ICE vehicle can drain the 12v battery overnight if it fails to turn off the accessories circuit. No lights or infotainment etc. were left on. In my case, it was the switch on the park gear flaked out. I imagine a variety of similar faults could cause the same issue in an EV.

Re: Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for ‘Right to Repair’

#60

Post by bonestamp2 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #50
marak830 wrote: post #29

I'm sorry I have seen the thread leads, and I cannot agree with them and think the replies do not get enough notice. Right to repair should be a full set of instructions for "everything" are available. That's it. Give the full specs for everything. If it's code reliant(which wtf), what does it require to work? That's. Fucking. It. We give you rules to say peeps cannot sell what you made, you make it so we can repair…

Right to repair eventually runs head first into security and encryption--how do you allow right to repair and TLS, encryption, secure computing, etc to coexist? Get rid of IoT black boxes like Google Homes? Allow Linux on Xbox? How do you create secure platforms while also giving consumers the keys to their devices? (FWIW I'm not advocating against right to repair, I actually hope it helps to get rid of black box IoT…

In automotive, we've had to conform to Right to Repair laws for 10+ years. We handle encryption by facilitating access to tools that allow users to encrypt/unencrypted the data so they can make the repairs, but without exposing how the data is encrypted/unencrypted.
Post reply on HN