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

Honda is killing its EVs

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 919 posts

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#441

Post by slg »

rjp0008 wrote: post #429
slg wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you worried about someone cutting your brakes? A lot of times these hypothetical fears are disconnected from reality. Security is important, but people generally don't engage in destruction for destruction's sake so improving default safety levels has been a clear net positive for society so far. Maybe I'm being shortshighted and a future security exploit will change that, but it's not somethin…

Cutting someones breaks requires physical access to the hardware. Changing: if (brakeDepressed()){ engageBrake(); } To: if (brakeDepressed() && currentTime < '5/6/26 4pm EST'){ engageBrake(); } Can be deployed to thousands of vehicles, and would stop brakes from working during peak commute time on the East Coast.

Someone who can write out that code with that specificity should know there are countless technical and procedural ways to help prevent that sort of thing from actually making its way into consumer vehicles (or that OTA updates would be the only avenue to accomplish that). In a properly designed system, the only real fear here is a state-level attack. And I just don't think getting every Honda to crash at 4pm is a vulnerable enough attack vector to make this hypothetical worthy of much thought.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#442

Post by direwolf20 »

dahart wrote: post #412
rkagerer wrote: post #308

Honda is setting itself up for failure on the second disruption sweeping the automotive industry: the software-defined vehicle (SDV), which has core capabilities that can be upgraded and improved over time. No thank you. Not sure why the author frames this as a good thing. They've been bamboozled by the automakers and have got it backwards - you're buying a vehicle that already has the capabilities, but are disabled,…

> you're buying a vehicle that already has the capabilities, but are disabled, then paying rent (or a fee) to turn them on. I'm much more likely to buy from a manufacturer that doesn't play these games. Ongoing subscriptions for access to physical hardware features like seat warmers* seems obnoxious at first glance, but a fee is more reasonable and you might find that there aren’t many auto makers that don’t do this…

It's legal to cut the seat heater relay out of the circuit and wire it to your own, right?

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#443

Post by LoganDark »

slg wrote: post #415
metaphor wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all motherhood and apple pie, but I'm sorry: the reality that we live in and incentives at play are such that if a capability can be exploited, then it will be exploited to the detriment of the consumer. Full stop.

It's interesting how many complaints I see on HN that are framed as if they're complaints about a specific piece of technology when they are really complaints about capitalism. I'm all ears if you want to criticize our entire economic system, but I think it's silly to have that conversation specifically in the context of car software rather than at a societal level.

Those against capitalism are going to speak out against what capitalism will lead to be exploited. I don't consider it "silly" to be against something that will lead to disaster, even if the disaster is systemic. Like, so what? Honestly. You can be against giving bad actors new tools without the tools having to be bad themselves. That's the premise of gun control for example.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#444

Post by direwolf20 »

ggm-at-algebras wrote: post #349

In Shenzhen for a tech meeting. The streetscape is quieter, despite high traffic levels and I hear not only MORE birdsong, but the birds do more complex songlines. The air is clean. For sure some of this is because it's a coastal city and has fresh sea breezes, but I've been in other Chinese coastal cities in times past and the air was significantly less clean. There are social upsides for an almost-all-EV city. This…

[flagged]

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#445

Post by uniq7 »

hnav wrote: post #402
shnock wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a classic example of slippery slope fallacy, and not in the spirit of intellectual curiosity for which this forum exists

But it's true? How does an automaker that doesn't engage in those tactics compete when the rest of the market does?

Like sugar-free, gluten-free, dairy-free, nut-free food, where the lack of something is sold as something positive.

I'd love to buy an ad-free, subscription-free, tracking-free, touchscreen-free car.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#446

Post by boringg »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #419
boringg wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can somewhat change the profile by price signals -- however if all vehicles are EVs there is a good portion of that demand that is inelastic. You will also need to be able to handle larger volumes of demand for faster charging stations and that entire effort of infra. Its all doable but it is not as a simple as every plugs in at home. Its a large co-ordinated infrastructure effort. You also brought up some other…

So if EV's cause electricity demand to go up by less than 1% per year, it'll cause inelastic demand to go up a small fraction of 1%. If operators can't expand at that low a rate, we have bigger problems.

Full fleet of EVs would be 20-30 % of our annual electricity. Ain't no way we can acomodate for that on any near term timeline especially if you add in all the additional demand on electricity from AI/compute.

Now if had money as a country and had a recent history of building actual physical things for a reasonable cost. Yes may we could get there -- but current state of affairs - broke and limited manufacturing ability.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#447

Post by thehappypm »

direwolf20 wrote: post #444
ggm-at-algebras wrote: post #349

In Shenzhen for a tech meeting. The streetscape is quieter, despite high traffic levels and I hear not only MORE birdsong, but the birds do more complex songlines. The air is clean. For sure some of this is because it's a coastal city and has fresh sea breezes, but I've been in other Chinese coastal cities in times past and the air was significantly less clean. There are social upsides for an almost-all-EV city. This…

[flagged]

Universities

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#448

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

slg wrote: post #417
scj wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "At a societal level, cars that can automatically fix a "recall" with an over-the-air update..." If an over-the-air patch can have that kind of impact, then what happens if security is compromised and that power is used for ill?

When was the last time you worried about someone cutting your brakes? A lot of times these hypothetical fears are disconnected from reality. Security is important, but people generally don't engage in destruction for destruction's sake so improving default safety levels has been a clear net positive for society so far. Maybe I'm being shortshighted and a future security exploit will change that, but it's not somethin…

Software has an atrocious track record for security. Doubly so for hardware manufacturers. It only takes one smart cow to disable millions of vehicles vs a local knave cutting brake lines.

I yearn for the days of wrapped software where developers had to make a gold pressed release. Not, “we can patch it later”.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#450

Post by bryanlarsen »

boringg wrote: post #446
bryanlarsen wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if EV's cause electricity demand to go up by less than 1% per year, it'll cause inelastic demand to go up a small fraction of 1%. If operators can't expand at that low a rate, we have bigger problems.

Full fleet of EVs would be 20-30 % of our annual electricity. Ain't no way we can acomodate for that on any near term timeline especially if you add in all the additional demand on electricity from AI/compute. Now if had money as a country and had a recent history of building actual physical things for a reasonable cost. Yes may we could get there -- but current state of affairs - broke and limited manufacturing abil…

The timeline is decades, since fleet turnover takes decades.
Post reply on HN