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

171–180 of 219 posts

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

#171

Post by michaelmrose »

forgottenlogin9 wrote: post #135
sinistersnare wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we no longer have that right. We don't live under capitalism but 'necrocapitalism' that only gives rights to those in the in-group. We must fight for our rights now, they have been alienated from us.

Where do your rights begin and another’s end? If they wish to build a product in a way that you dislike, does it not impede their rights for you to inflict your will on them against their wishes?

This is easier than you think. If more people are apt to be disadvantaged by your actions than not why shouldn't they simply vote your rights away?

As a business person in any industry this is already true in 1000 mostly reasonable ways that mostly derive from outrageous behavior of prior actors in your space. In that context it seems ridiculous to argue against 1001 on principle unless the specific regulation is itself ill advised. The only justification it needs is for it to be a net positive.

Basically why do 338 million people give a fuck if a handful of people want to do user hostile things. Do them somewhere else.

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

#172

Post by mypastself »

javajosh wrote: post #3

Rather than us fighting for the right to repair, shouldn't manufacturers be fighting for the right to limit our ability to repair? Isn't "right to repair" the default state? The right to repair, modify, disassemble, recombine your own property is a key component of capitalism, is it not?

To my understanding, you do have the right to repair a device or a piece of equipment yourself, but you don’t have the right to force the manufacturer to make it easier or to keep your warranty.

If you use the former definition, it’s already the default state. If you use the latter, “right to repair” becomes a reasonable-sounding term for a concept that’s not quite as reasonable.

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

#173

Post by snovv_crash »

more_corn wrote: post #160
echelon wrote: post #4

Since EVs are mechanically simpler, I'd really like to see a return to kit cars. Perhaps you could buy the preassembled chassis and modify the rest of the car as you'd like. Maybe you could tear down the whole thing and rebuild it. In theory this should be super accessible. You might see a whole community spring up over it. It's potentially a huge market ranging from teenagers to retirees. Lots of people love cars an…

Problem is the battery packs. These kits need batteries and the best and cheapest batteries come out of wrecked teslas. If Tesla is allowed to continue locking down their batteries behind proprietary battery controllers the parts aren’t parts they’re intellectual property which Tesla can turn off at their convenience. And it’s super convenient for them to render parts unusable in the secondary market.

The cells are just normal cells. The proprietary bits are the management systems which you could theoretically just bypass.

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

#174

Post by starbase »

revscat wrote: post #165
starbase wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right to repair should be a full set of instructions for "everything" Tesla provides that (and more) for free: • Service Manual, Parts Manual, and Body Repair • Tooling Catalog and Wiring Diagrams • Service Bulletins • Labor Codes and Times • Service Mode Diagnostic Software (on the touchscreen)

Where? I found press releases stating some of this, but none of the actual docs/software.

go to service.tesla.com, sign in, then click the car model at the top of the page

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

#175

Post by softfalcon »

creeble wrote: post #141
softfalcon wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a look at Louis Rossmann’s car repair videos. There is a war going on between government and car manufacturers because they succeeded in side stepping most of the right to repair requirements. Currently, most new car’s OBD2 ports are somewhat useless because they now use a proprietary wireless communicator to transmit error codes. Apparently, the old right to repair laws didn’t say anything about “wireless commu…

I think new cars are still required to report engine codes (ones that cause the CEL to trigger) on the OBD port. That’s still a large percentage of engine problems, and in particular, the ones that prevent you from getting registration renewed in many US states.

There are now Audi, Peugot, and Volvo vehicles sold in the US that don’t have an OBD port. You can’t pull an engine code from a port that doesn’t exist on the vehicle.

Toyota, Ford, and Chevrolet are also rumoured to be removing the OBD2 port with their 2025 line-up. They’re just testing how much they can get away with before committing to it.

It’s going to become very hard to repair or even diagnose our vehicles if we don’t start fighting back.

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

#176

Post by andersrs »

sinistersnare wrote: post #78
javajosh wrote: post #3

Rather than us fighting for the right to repair, shouldn't manufacturers be fighting for the right to limit our ability to repair? Isn't "right to repair" the default state? The right to repair, modify, disassemble, recombine your own property is a key component of capitalism, is it not?

No, we no longer have that right. We don't live under capitalism but 'necrocapitalism' that only gives rights to those in the in-group. We must fight for our rights now, they have been alienated from us.

Capitalism is like a game of Fishy https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/81219

The big fish eat the small fish and the game becomes easier the bigger you get.

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

#177

Post by extraduder_ire »

giobox wrote: post #170
extraduder_ire wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be nice, but the economics would be kinda wack with how much of the cost is in the battery pack. Especially when companies like tesla put the same pack in all their cars and determine your "capacity" in software. I'd imagine that would either change, or people would start buying up the lowest-cost EVs just to pull the battery out of them (like "shucking" external drives) and resell all the other parts.

> Especially when companies like tesla put the same pack in all their cars and determine your "capacity" in software. This is an enormously exaggerated statement, bordering on entirely false. Yes, the company has done this from time to time, including on some current Model S/X models, but the vast, vast majority of Tesla cars sold (the 3/Y) almost always have a different sized battery pack in reality, not just in sof…

Good to know. I must be mistaken from the other incorrect coverage I've seen around the web.

I have no experience with electric cars, much less disassembling/repairing them.

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

#178

Post by forgottenlogin9 »

pixl97 wrote: post #166
forgottenlogin9 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do your rights begin and another’s end? If they wish to build a product in a way that you dislike, does it not impede their rights for you to inflict your will on them against their wishes?

>Where do your rights begin and another’s end? This idea of a nice binary black and white cutoff for rights does not, and has not ever existed. This really is an absurdist American viewpoint. Let's make an example "it's my legal right to pour a cup of water out on my property" And, no one would really disagree with that. "So I'm going to do it with a million cups of water all at once" In which a flood happens destroy…

The concept of rights is not binary, but at a certain point there cannot be multiple conflicting “rights” — 1 must get preference.

The maker starts with a right to make a product as they see best. The buyer has a right to purchase or not. The “public’s” rights are an interesting concept.

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

#179

Post by forgottenlogin9 »

c-cube wrote: post #156
forgottenlogin9 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do your rights begin and another’s end? If they wish to build a product in a way that you dislike, does it not impede their rights for you to inflict your will on them against their wishes?

Rights to impose your will about something, should end at the point where you sell this thing to someone else. That's how it should be. Sadly a lot of companies are trying to rent rather than sell (see: ebooks, anything as a service, etc.) because this way they don't lose control.

What if a buyer wants to lease the product under the seller’s terms. Should it not be their right to enter that agreement?

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

#180

Post by forgottenlogin9 »

michaelmrose wrote: post #171
forgottenlogin9 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do your rights begin and another’s end? If they wish to build a product in a way that you dislike, does it not impede their rights for you to inflict your will on them against their wishes?

This is easier than you think. If more people are apt to be disadvantaged by your actions than not why shouldn't they simply vote your rights away? As a business person in any industry this is already true in 1000 mostly reasonable ways that mostly derive from outrageous behavior of prior actors in your space. In that context it seems ridiculous to argue against 1001 on principle unless the specific regulation is its…

You are advocating for “mob rule”. History is replete with examples of this being a bad idea.
Post reply on HN