[flagged]
Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
231–240 of 356 posts
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Whilst cranking, an ICE car will drop to around 6 volts (then maximum power is extracted according to thevenim's theorem). > That means all computers etc will work at 6v. Not necessarily all of them. Plenty of stuff will drop out while cranking; hopefully not the computers that run the fuel injection and ignition, though.
Interesting. I now know why my windshield wipers quit for a sec when my vw auto stop/start kicks back on.
Ignition switches were turning off the wipers and other such extras in the 1980s. Probably longer but I'm not old enough to remember
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
People have been modifying their cars since cars have existed, an electric car shouldn’t be anything new.
Given electric cars are responsible for much bigger responsibilities than combustion cars (avoid driving into that bicyclist), there are new concerns here which beg extra consideration.
I actually think we should be asking more of safety regulations here with regards to the design of electric/computerized cars.
Think of it this way: every concern you have about a teenager having root on their electric car is the same as any sociopath hacker (AI enabled for modern nightmare fuel) who finds a root vulnerability and decides to not be a good person with it. If a teenager can mess with the collision avoidance, e.g. Israel can modify it to murder anyone who talks shit about Israel in the car. Or the CIA could turn it into a weapon. Or one day some dev could push a bad OTA update. Et cetera. Our safety regulations should mandate design features to prevent a malfunctioning computer from posing any greater safety risk than any other modified part in the car.
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> The underlying tension is that "you own the car" means something very different from "you own the software running the car." How is this different from the 2000s, or the 90s, or even before, when the normal thing to do with commercial software was to purchase a license to use said software and a physical medium containing a copy? You'd also then not "own the software", but you owned the right to install a copy on y…
In 1990 Ford couldn't turn off your Mustang because you plugged a TwEECer into the J3 port and screwed around with the tune. Best they could do was void your warranty and deny you further upgrades (i.e. tunes flashed as part of a recall or TSB).
These days unauthorized access tends to lose you effective use of the hardware you bought because the hardware requires software features to work and that software often unnecessarily phones home so if the OEM toggles a field in a DB somewhere you lose access to back up assist or whatever other fancy tech features that you a) paid for b) don't strictly need to have dependencies that phone home to work but do "because reasons".
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#235[flagged]
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All that is to say, this space is ripe for some open hardware/software love. There's just so many computers and what-not in modern cars that this is a very tall ask. You'd need a project on-par with HomeAssistant to get anywhere.
Yeah, it seems like more modern technology has settled on standard protocols (maybe a naive impression--someone will shout at me if that's the case) but there's probably a very long tail of bizarre false starts if you want full coverage of models back to the early 90s when computers became more commonplace.
After 2006/2007 nearly everyone did CAN. I think that is even mandatory in the US, though I have no clue how to look that up (I assume there are details and exceptions) However before then everyone did their own thing. Often with custom chips that haven't been made since 2004 (or even 1999): good luck finding one that works if it breaks. CAN is cheap and allows a lot of power while hiding most of the protocol complexity. The things before that were often not as powerful as CAN, while being in practice a lot more complex because the complexity wasn't hidden.
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
I spent the last week successfully reverse engineering my car / various scan tools to get the right information to diagnose a fuel pump problem (and to do so without the incredible awkwardness of many of the tools) It's pretty amazing what Claude + Ghidra + knowledgable coaching can accomplish. It was basically just setting direction, setting up an incremental workflow with the right kind of documentation, and questi…
Wait, why wouldn’t you post it/ write it up?
If you release it people expect you to support it an answer questions. Some of them are not even nice about it. It pays to release this only if there is a group of people who will be constructive in helping make it better, otherwise it is a thankless effort.
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The underlying tension is that "you own the car" means something very different from "you own the software running the car." How is this different from the 2000s, or the 90s, or even before, when the normal thing to do with commercial software was to purchase a license to use said software and a physical medium containing a copy? You'd also then not "own the software", but you owned the right to install a copy on y…
In 1990 Ford couldn't turn off your Mustang because you plugged a TwEECer into the J3 port and screwed around with the tune. Best they could do was void your warranty and deny you further upgrades (i.e. tunes flashed as part of a recall or TSB). These days unauthorized access tends to lose you effective use of the hardware you bought because the hardware requires software features to work and that software often unne…
Have a lawyer look up the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act for you if that happens. What Ford can do is legally limited.
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Tesla is the same pattern applied to consumer vehicles" It really isn't. Unlike John Deere, Tesla is actually pretty good on right-to-repair. All of their technical and repair manuals are available for free to anyone. The service/diagnostics software ("Toolbox") is also available to anyone, albeit for a (not entirely unreasonable) fee. (There is also a service mode built in to the car which can do many basic diagn…
> All of their technical and repair manuals are available for free to anyone. That should be the bare minimum. Ford charges you 40 dollar an hour for it and unless you know exactly what you are looking for you will spend several hundreds on it. Too bad ford killed their old site, the print form was unauthenticated and you could print the entire schematics to pdf if you knew the internal model number. Or do what I did…
Any chance someone ripped that old site? Do you remember the URL? I don't have a Ford, just always curious about this stuff.
Re: Running Tesla Model 3's computer on my desk using parts from crashed cars
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? Which car manufacturer officially provides you a root access to your vehicle?
It’s almost like there’s no market for this because it’s a silly thing that practically nobody actually wants enough to vote with their wallet. That, or no company wants to assume liability. In which case, go whine to your local representative. That’ll be hilarious for all involved.
Even as a well trained software engineer who works on transportation software including ECUs (heavy equipment not cars), I'm not sure there is much I could do with root. IF I had full source code to my car's radio I might try to add android-auto back in (it has android-automotive so I know it can do it), but if that isn't easy I'd probably give up. Without source code and a lot of time doing anything is impossible - as anyone else who works on complex software knows.