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

211–219 of 219 posts

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

#211

Post by sangnoir »

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…

> I'll sell you this widget, but only if you agree to bring it to me for any repairs." "Ok."

I don't see how you don't see how this all-or-nothing approach as coercive. Maybe if I change the actors it'll become more apparent to you:

"You can sell your widget in our jurisdiction, but only if you agree to our laws." "Ok."

The power imbalance and lack of choice is what makes it not great. Clearly, you see the power of the state, but somehow ignoring the power of corporates over individuals; they might not be legally able to end your life, but they can ruin it (e.g. how recently-convicted eBay executives hounded their victim, or thr list of dead companies that "agreed" to work with Apple or Walmart).

I am unashamedly for using state power as a counterbalance to corporate power. Unregulated profit-seeking has never resulted in good outcomes for humans.

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

#212

Post by giobox »

shoelessone wrote: post #194
giobox wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

This is very interesting, I held the same general belief as the person you're responding to. Any chance you have a source for this info?

Just use Google or Youtube... This isn't some secret information, this is widely known among EV enthusiasts. Even reviews that weigh the car will illustrate the different sized packs - the 50kwh cars are of course lighter too. EV fans obsess over the cell form factor and battery chemistry much like combustion car fans know the internals of car engines. Tesla's own presentation videos (also on youtube) talk endlessly about the new battery cell form factors they've introduced too and which products they are applied to.

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

#213

Post by lenkite »

tegmark wrote: post #207
kelnos wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. tes…

Well Musk believes otherwise and explicitly stated Tesla's patent pledge https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pled...

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

#214

Post by DrFlipper »

javajosh wrote: post #209
DrFlipper wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I agree, my point was that the state is coercion/violence, not that it should be avoided.

(I am a fascist, for the record.)

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

#215

Post by MVissers »

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.

Tesla’s batteries are modular, and you can easily repurpose them. Yes, you’ll need a new charge controller, but that’s it.

More often than not, you’d want your own charge controller anyway to for example run at a lower voltage (different series). At least for the Model S/X modules. The 3/Y modules are a little bit trickier to re-use because they are higher-voltage and not as modular.

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

#216

Post by tegmark »

lenkite wrote: post #213
tegmark wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. tes…

Well Musk believes otherwise and explicitly stated Tesla's patent pledge https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pled...

lol. am i supposed to type out a response to this? yes, i am aware of musk opening the patents. it doesnt conflict with or negate anything ive said. it certainly isnt an indication that elon musk believes teslas products should be subject to the will of the idiotic masses.

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

#217

Post by sinistersnare »

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?

Your rights to swing your arms in the air freely end where my face begins.

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

#218

Post by Mawr »

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.

Concrete numbers you could expect (30-40W): https://youtu.be/usqSJ7zbTLQ?t=513

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

#219

Post by FloatArtifact »

ceejayoz wrote: post #148
wizee wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have been repairing their own cars for a century, and the world functioned just fine with it. This locking down is a recent phenomenon. Your car is not going to mow down people just because someone other than the dealer serviced it.

How many of those were capable of self-driving?

Sorry but still doesn't hold water. A user accepts risk modifying their vehicle. However, The burden of proof would be on the manufacturer to show that they modified something that had an impact on the automated systems. To my knowledge there's not a single case of an automated tractor or car due to end user modification related to the automated systems that's caused injury. So right now your argument is by and large hypothetical. John Deere and the right to repair will be the proving ground for a end user modifications of personal vehicles.
Post reply on HN