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

Cybertruck's Many Recalls

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 463 posts

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#421

Post by lapcat »

alkonaut wrote: post #416
lapcat wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it won't see as a relief by me that I managed to fix it before it spontaneously caught fire, I'll still see it as a frustrating failure by the manufacturer. In this respect, there's no difference between OTA updates and dealership repairs.

No, the frustration comes from taking time in my schedule. OTA are a stain on the safety record. Physicall recalls are a chore.

Taking time out of your schedule is indeed frustrating, but manfacturer defects that could kill you, maim you, harm your car, or make it malfunction are also frustrating, regardless of how the defects are fixed.

Think about non-vehicle software bugs, like in your computer operating system. Those are frustrating, even though they can be fixed OTA.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#422

Post by schiffern »

lapcat wrote: post #273
schiffern wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot here about technical and legal definitions, but from the customer's perspective what they mostly care about is the inconvenience associated with a physical recall. Most people are accustomed to our phones and devices (auto-)updating, so software recalls just get mentally bundled in with that. The reporting seems dishonest because (in the mind of most readers) the headline exaggerates the inconvenience o…

> There's a lot here about technical and legal definitions, but from the customer's perspective what they mostly care about is the inconvenience associated with a physical recall. No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. If there wasn't a safety issue, then customers could safely ignore the recall notice and experience no inconvenience.

> No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles.

People can (and do) care about both safety and inconvenience, to varying degrees. The exact degree depends on the level of safety risk and the level of inconvenience.

Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense.

I see you didn't even try to refute that the article will predictably mislead the average reader (classic "lie without lying") about the level of inconvenience for owners.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#423

Post by s1artibartfast »

WindyMiller wrote: post #410
s1artibartfast wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an interesting point. What IS a criticism of fashion, and how should it be taken? "I dont like how this looks" isnt a universal truth, and isn't a prescription for others. It seems like with the CT, there is a vocal group of people who seem upset that others like them and that they exist at all. I seems to extend from "I dont like how it looks, and you cant either." I think they look cool and fun. Cos…

That doesn't explain why the Cybertruck bothers people more than other expensive things. And the rich have always been ready to express horror at the tastes of the poor (and even more so, the tastes of the slightly less rich). It can't all be about feeling hard done by. I think people tend to be grumpier about things they consider ugly if those things take up a large amount of public space. People get similarly riled…

I wasn't indending to explain the whole CT phenomenon. I was mostly intending to explore the concept of fashion/taste criticism in general. Namely what people expect it to communicate, and what people expect as a response. With fashion, you often dont want or care about others adopting your taste. It can be about control, but isnt always.

I think the CT hate taps into something more deeper than fashion for most people, relating to politics and culture conflict. It makes people angry in a way at more expensive and even less practical Maserati doesn't.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#424

Post by lapcat »

schiffern wrote: post #422
lapcat wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a lot here about technical and legal definitions, but from the customer's perspective what they mostly care about is the inconvenience associated with a physical recall. No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. If there wasn't a safety issue, then customers could safely ignore the recall notice and experience no inconvenience.

> No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. People can (and do) care about both safety and inconvenience, to varying degrees. The exact degree depends on the level of safety risk and the level of inconvenience. Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense. I see you didn't even try to refute that the article will predictably mislead the avera…

> Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense.

This is a bizarre interpretation of my comment. Of course people care about inconvenience. But obviously the people who bring in their cars to a dealership for a recall care more about safety than about inconvenience, because ignoring the recall notice entirely would be much more convenient.

> I see you didn't even try to refute that the article will predictably mislead the average reader (classic "lie without lying") about the level of inconvenience for owners.

The article didn't even mention inconvenience. That's a red herring. On the contrary, the article said this:

Most Cybertruck buyers pay scant attention to longevity estimates, believes Edmunds’ Drury, and plenty probably aren’t exercised by recalls, OTA or otherwise, he said. “Cybertruck customers are in it for the stares and glares—they don’t care about how many times [this vehicle is] going to be recalled over 30 years,” says Drury. “They’re buying this car for now, with zero thought to the future.”

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#425

Post by stackghost »

imiric wrote: post #107
stackghost wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then? Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? It gives the impression you think this makes it somehow lesser. The cybertruck, for example, was subject to a recall because the rearview camera wouldn't come up, but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera. That's a safety issue, irrespec…

The problem is that those issues shouldn't happen on a public road vehicle to begin with. Tesla's approach is shipping beta software to customers, and using them as testers. This is an insidious practice in modern software development, but is criminal when that software is running a 3-ton vehicle, regardless if it can be fixed with an OTA update or not. There are reasons why strict car safety regulations exist. You c…

I agree, and this is why I do not own a Tesla. Unfortunately my kids can still get killed by one.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#426

Post by liontwist »

mrguyorama wrote: post #408
liontwist wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the info. Yeah the cost is negligible if you are already planning to have a screen running chrome on Ubuntu server, but I hope it was still an option not to have that.

Uh no. Pretty much every single backup camera on every single vehicle is the exact same little module that produces analog video and literally just runs a component cable to the head unit which has a standardized analog video input. Zero software required.

If that’s true I feel much more at peace.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#427

Post by m463 »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #94
m463 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla now offers wraps.

Are those from Tesla itself or a third party? Can you get any color?

It was on the ordering page, but... that has changed?

Hmm... ordering a cybertruck was different a month or two ago. For example cyberbeast used to come with full self driving and the home power interface. It also talked about wraps (which you had to order through the app?) and which would schedule at the service center.

Now the website has changed, fsd is 8k, and no mention of wraps during cybertruck ordering.

I see mentions:

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-six-cybertruck-wrap-colors/

https://electrek.co/2023/11/30/tesla-cybertruck-comes-in-two...

but no longer on the tesla website?

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#428

Post by liontwist »

imiric wrote: post #417
liontwist wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also bad for preservation because the disc doesn’t actually have the playable game anymore.

Physical media is almost entirely dead, and will not exist in a few years anyway. So, yeah, the move to digital releases, pervasive DRM, and live service games make preservation difficult. I hope industry heads realize that they're actively pushing consumers towards piracy. These days you often get a better experience with a pirated game than a legally bought one: it runs better without DRM and doesn't infect your sy…

Right but physical media is not dead because of consumer demand. PS4 physical games were huge.

In the US there are still a lot of regions where a 50-100 GB download is just not reasonable.

I know console manufacturers hate retail and the used market, and want that sweet direct income. but it would be a powerful brand move to set higher standards for the physical release. I believe Nintendo has gone this direction.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#429

Post by bigfatkitten »

daghamm wrote: post #136
Aeolun wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree, but saying it's a 'recall' when your car sits in your driveway still feels entirely wrong.

"recall" is a legal term, it means the vehicle is not road-legal and requires immediate action. Doesn't really matter if it hw, sw or maybe even the owners manual that needs to be changed ASAP.

> "recall" is a legal term, it means the vehicle is not road-legal and requires immediate action

No it doesn't. Sometimes it does, but certainly not always.

I drive a Ford Everest (SUV version of the Ranger). It has an open recall at the moment for a software issue where if you obstruct the power windows while they're closing, they may not detect the obstruction and stop automatically.

I can continue to drive the vehicle, I just need to get the issue rectified when I next get it serviced.

https://www.vehiclerecalls.gov.au/recalls/rec-006100

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#430

Post by saghm »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #388
Topfi wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] point is that it makes it seem like it's a financial and logistical nightmare to come, but clicking on headline, it's just a software update. If we go by what "it seem[s] like" (to a layperson), we could reasonably argue that the word (scientific) "theory" should be changed because a significant part of the populus confuses that with the definition of hypothesis. This also, again, ignores that, long before OT…

Not German. Okay, from other side of the view. Why not change it? It's clearly confusing a lot of people, and with such an important topic, where people would have to pay attention. > but don't claim that yours is the original definition, when it isn't. Especially since terms like these are regulated to ensure companies cannot weasel around them. I'm not claiming it's an original definition. It's just a very confusin…

In general, I think trying to replace a word gets increasingly hard the longer the replacement is than the original (in terms of letters for writing and syllables for speaking). I have a hard time imagining people being bothered enough by the current term to be willing to say something four times as long (or using five times as many characters-worth of space on the page in an era where online news is already struggling to keep people's attention).
Post reply on HN