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

201–210 of 219 posts

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

#201

Post by blamazon »

blamazon wrote: post #187
lelanthran wrote: post #169

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. "Jump" isn't the same as "charging the battery" of other cars. You can charge a 12v car battery with as little as 4A if you're willing to wait. Jump starting…

Another commenter already pointed that out about the word jump, you can reference that comment for my reply. On the second point, I can comfortably pull 50-100 amps for an inverter from those terminals. I believe the DC-DC is 2500W on my car - I have an early model X which is over specified in many regards. It does not take long to charge an ICE battery enough to be able to turn a starter.

And to clarify: I don't try to start the ICE with my Tesla hooked up, mostly out of superstition. I don't see why it wouldn't work given there's also a regular old 12v sealed lead acid battery behind the frunk.

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

#202

Post by anaganisk »

rnk wrote: post #82
anaganisk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jump start? Pfft. The stupid car, got stuck with AC stuck on full heat, with a blacked out screen. Unresponsive to resets. I couldn't even open the damm frunk to remove the fuses, yeah okay I don't carry a 12v battery around with me to jump the frunk.(how difficult is it to give damm manual overrides for critical stuff) It was a rental so no access to Tesla app. Tesla Customer service refused to help, since it's a re…

I agree these situations can be dangerous and frustrating. There is a manual trunk release on the tesla, here's a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1bJ0F3R0Nc . I have a rivian and the 12v battery died on it while I had it plugged in charging at home. In the manual I found the emergency trunk release (access from underneath the car), and then there was a manual release for the charging port inside the frunk. My…

Not the trunk, the frunk. That's where the fuses are located on the Tesla Model Y isn't it? Or were the videos I watched were wrong?

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

#203

Post by avar »

mypastself wrote: post #172
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.

The latter is already the case in some jurisdiction, and it's quite reasonable.

You can't just declare that any modification of the product voids the warranty, you need to show that the consumer's modification caused the warranty claim.

E.g. you won't get anywhere claiming that replacing the car seats caused the engine to lock up.

You can already intentionally ruin your seats, or use olive oil for your engine. So manufacturers already need to diagnose warranty claims in more detail, without considering modifications to the car itself.

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

#204

Post by DrFlipper »

sangnoir wrote: post #138
DrFlipper wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom is the key component of capitalism, in the purist sense. Including the freedom to trade the "right to repair" for other benefits, such as a superior vehicle due to higher integration, reliability and peace of mind knowing that any work will have been done by authorised repairers, lower up-front cost afforded by vendor lock-in, etc. If people wish to voluntarily trade vehicles without the "right to repair", th…

> Freedom is the key component of capitalism, in the purist sense. Competitive markets and price information are also key components of capitalism - and the "right to repair" enhances both. Empirically, manufactures don't like competing for repairs, and they also obfuscate the cost of those repairs so customers would never know the total cost of ownership ahead of time. State intervention does not violate capitalist…

Yes, coercion of any kind is anti-capitalist, yet you advocate for coercion by the state.

No coercion (voluntary transaction, no state involvement): "I'll sell you this widget, but only if you agree to bring it to me for any repairs." "Ok."

Coercion (state intervention): "Hi, I see you are about to sell your widget to that other guy who would like to buy it, knowing only you can perform any future repairs. If you go ahead, I will use the full force of the justice system to punish you, up to and including death."

I realise this is unrealistically ideal. The language is very important to get right though. You are advocating for coercion for the common good, not the absence of it. The state is impotent without violence, you don't need to shy away from it. State == force.

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

#205

Post by mypastself »

avar wrote: post #203
mypastself wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The latter is already the case in some jurisdiction, and it's quite reasonable. You can't just declare that any modification of the product voids the warranty, you need to show that the consumer's modification caused the warranty claim. E.g. you won't get anywhere claiming that replacing the car seats caused the engine to lock up. You can already intentionally ruin your seats, or use olive oil for your engine. So man…

But if you do change your seats on a tractor to more comfortable ones, you might further exacerbate the hazards of an already potentially dangerous piece of machinery, to the extent that the manufacturer wants to avoid such liability.

But even so, as long as the customers aren’t legally obligated to use a particular manufacturer’s equipment, any competitor should be able to win them over by avoiding a particularly unpopular practice.

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

#206

Post by tegmark »

callalex wrote: post #130
tegmark wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is the ignorance that drives these silly headlines. building these things is very hard. theres all kinds of crazy solvents and adhesives. the pack is structural. the product that tesla builds is fundamentally not well suited to repair or modification and tesla isnt under any obligation, on any level, to prioritize people who like to imagine they could repair or build a tesla over building the most excellent and…

Take it easy on the paint fumes there bud. You are aware that other electric vehicles exist and work just fine, right?

would someone please flag this comment?

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

#207

Post by tegmark »

kelnos wrote: post #190
tegmark wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is the ignorance that drives these silly headlines. building these things is very hard. theres all kinds of crazy solvents and adhesives. the pack is structural. the product that tesla builds is fundamentally not well suited to repair or modification and tesla isnt under any obligation, on any level, to prioritize people who like to imagine they could repair or build a tesla over building the most excellent and…

Being responsible for making EVs popular does not give them the right to do whatever they want. Tesla didn't push EVs out of the goodness of their hearts. They did so because they thought they could build a profitable company. Tesla's execs and shareholders are being compensated quite well already for their investment of money/time/work. No need to give them a blank check to do anything we (as a society) don't want t…

yeah it does. the EV market wouldnt exist if they hadnt stuck to their guns. people were adamant that EVs could never be real cars before the roadster and model s. when somebody invents something, we allow them to have a monopoly on that invention for a time. it incentivizes innovation but it also gives power to people who actually have the right idea, see things as they could be rather than just follow the herd. tesla definitely invented the modern EV market and the modern EV drivetrain. and now the same people who called me an idiot in 2011 are here saying that tesla is morally obligated to make their cars “hacker friendly” or whatever nonsense? all i can say is if youre so smart then why werent you asking for this in 2012 and 13? you could have asked musk directly at the shareholder meeting.

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

#208

Post by 1970-01-01 »

dundarious wrote: post #143
1970-01-01 wrote: post #10

>Among the auto blogs that covered the announcement, few pointed out the hollowness... Regurgitation via a Google news search link cites absolutely nothing. Its the sloppiest journalism I have ever seen on any tech website.

What makes you think looking at that google news search was the extent of the research they did to justify that assertion? Journalists typically do not show all their workings (though they could always show more). To me, the link is obviously just a moderately useful stepping stone/prompt for people to research the point themselves.

I didn't say that. I'm saying the hyperlink used to cite their sources is dynamic by design and therefore extremely sloppy.

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

#209

Post by javajosh »

DrFlipper wrote: post #204
sangnoir wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Freedom is the key component of capitalism, in the purist sense. Competitive markets and price information are also key components of capitalism - and the "right to repair" enhances both. Empirically, manufactures don't like competing for repairs, and they also obfuscate the cost of those repairs so customers would never know the total cost of ownership ahead of time. State intervention does not violate capitalist…

Yes, coercion of any kind is anti-capitalist, yet you advocate for coercion by the state. No coercion (voluntary transaction, no state involvement): "I'll sell you this widget, but only if you agree to bring it to me for any repairs." "Ok." Coercion (state intervention): "Hi, I see you are about to sell your widget to that other guy who would like to buy it, knowing only you can perform any future repairs. If you go…

History is driven by theory tempered by pragmatism. The market cannot set its own rules, and standardization helps markets thrive by reducing the risk to the participants. It sounds like you've recently read Ayn Rand, so perhaps you're not ready to hear this, but an unregulated market will quickly fall apart because of rampant fraud. In a way there is a market for markets, and buyers and sellers both generally prefer a regulated market to an unregulated one. Not for ideological reasons, but for practical ones.

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

#210

Post by j33zusjuice »

Fluorescence wrote: post #39
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…

I found the JerryRigEverything project converting an ex-military hummer to an EV interesting despite not really being into cars/evs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxkPuEmIX4U&list=PL0vZL9uwyf... Despite the untold expense and full on car workshop... it felt very accessible and possible. Ridiculous hubris on my part obviously hah! I doubt I could change a tire on humvee without help.

That channel is super cool. Thanks for the link!
Post reply on HN