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

Jailbreaking Used Teslas

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 296 posts

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#281

Post by judge2020 »

tehjoker wrote: post #211
bookofjoe wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once read that the test of whether or not you own something is, "Can you sell it?" In this vein, movies and TV shows you "buy" from Apple, Amazon, etc. are not yours.

I don't think that's the right test. The question is do you control it? Can it be modified? Can it be defended? Transferred or loaned to someone else? Copied? The movies and TV on streaming services are not yours because you don't control them and they can be removed at any time. Market salability is another question entirely. There are items you can own you might be prohibited from selling on an open market, such as…

Of course “when applicable”. You can’t copy a physical object physically, and technically can’t even copy a physical object by recreating it without violating some trademark or the maker’s copyright.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#282

Post by stale2002 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #244
stale2002 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would be happy to enter into a contract with Tesla It is not Tesla's car. They don't own it anymore. The liability would be the same for any other car. > this would be covered by the car's insurance, right Yes. Which has nothing to do with Tesla. > then I can accept Tesla not wanting to be held liable Tesla does not own that car. The car would be the same as any other car that Tesla does not own.

A defect that is the fault of the manufacturer is certainly a way to sue Tesla for 'cars they don't own'. Happens all the time. Daily. And after you jailbreak your Tesla and cause an injury accident, who's to know? Just say you didn't, and it was Tesla's defect. Of course Tesla is concerned.

> And after you jailbreak your Tesla

The Tesla belongs to the user. It no longer belongs to Tesla. That is all that matters.

> Of course Tesla is concerned.

Their concern is of no importance to me regarding things that they no longer own. I simply do not care what their concern is on anything that is no longer owned by them.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#283

Post by m4rtink »

ydlr wrote: post #60

How long until Tesla (or any manufacturer) remotely disables the ignition on all used cars until the new owner pays them to turn it back on. Its only fair. After all, the new owner just bought a hunk of metal from the previous owner. They still need to purchase a license for features like starting the car.

I really do hope Tesla prevents ignition - remotely or by any other means!

You know, it's an electric car, ignition is something you don't want to ever encounter with it.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#284

Post by jatsepter »

vaccinator wrote: post #133
GhostVII wrote: post #103

The worst part isn't even listed in the article - Tesla is remotely disabling fast charging on all salvage cars across all networks, regardless of what the actual damage is. If it was just limited to the supercharger network I would somewhat understand, it's their network and I don't think it's a huge deal to disallow salvage cars on it. But they are removing the ability to charge even at third party chargers, basica…

But it is impossible to get a car that is not connected to the internet today, unless you find out how to disconnect it yourself. This near-7-year-old link[0] always make me laugh. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-exec-gps-2014-1

There are still excellent cars without cellular links, like Mazda --still with refined driving and excellent reliability.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#285

Post by dundarious »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #275
dundarious wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I can agree with that. And we can also be critical of Tesla for it. It does run somewhat counter to their environmental mission.

Tesla has an environmental marketing, not an environmental mission. An environmental car is something like a LEAF.

Agreed about it being marketing, I should have said something like purported mission.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#286

Post by fomine3 »

fastball wrote: post #245
lights0123 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was 8 years ago. Mountain Lion came out before even Windows 8, where even Microsoft was charging for upgrades too before releasing the final version (major version, not build version) of Windows.

Doesn't MSFT still charge for every OS update?

Windows 10 is the last Windows for client in current plan. MS continuously upgrades features on Win10 instead.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#287

Post by bsagdiyev »

dogma1138 wrote: post #272
nickserv wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some (many?) cases, performance is limited on a motor by the ECU because the hardware is unable to cope with the extra wear. For example same block, heads and intake but different (cheaper) pistons, valves, springs, injectors, etc ... Sure you can easily dial up the power on the cheaper engine to match the expensive one, but at a higher risk of breakdown.

In many cases due to how the supply chain is structured there aren’t any “quality” differences the wear and tear as you’ve mentioned is simply amortized in the cost of the car. BMW is probably the biggest offender in this regard and you can buy the “unlock cables” for the older ( https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-E60-Sport-mode-unlock-cable-w... You can also tell there is no difference in the valves, pistons or pretty m…

That doesn’t unlock extra power out of the car, it tightens up the power steering to give more road feel, changes the shift points and messes with the drive-by-wire throttle sensitivity. Sure it shouldn’t be a paid for feature to you, but I think it should be. If you pay for tightened up steering and more sensitive throttle thinking it is a power increase, that’s your money I guess.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#288

Post by londons_explore »

hated wrote: post #237
dheera wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if one were to unplug the cellular antenna and prevent an update from happening? Or does the car detect that condition and yell at you? Reminds me of DJI drones which every now and then ask you if you want to update the software, but updating the software only would cause you to have more restrictions on your flight, not less.

You don't need to leave the antenna unplugged as that could trigger detection or burn up the antenna signal amplifier. You can put a dummy load on the antenna connector instead, nothing whatsoever will be able to detect it, and the radio hardware will never send or receive any signals.

> burn up the antenna signal amplifier

No need for a dummy load. A cell modem that never received any signals never transmits.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#289

Post by mkhpalm »

busterarm wrote: post #280
mkhpalm wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, a newer thing that gets lots of remarks like that is the Security Gateway Module (SGM) from FCA (Chrysler) on 2018+ models. Everybody thinks its getting locked away from end users except read access. Less understood is along with this change they now they sell their micropods for $1800. (obd2 wifi dongle) Meaning, for under 2k you literally have the same tool the dealers have to use. And you can pay for 3 d…

I mean, with my 30+ year old car I can buy a Haynes manual for $10 once and I have the wiring diagrams and guides for how to make specific repairs forever. Plus you only get those subscription services for as long as FCA decides they want to sell them to you. Will they still offer that 10 years from now? 20? Consider me extremely skeptical.

I understand the skepticism and you're right certain things remains to be seen. Specifically that they keep techauthority open to aftermarket. Less so that they'd drop support for 20 year old cars on their dealerships.

WiTECH isn't entirely brand new here. This release (WiTECH 2.0) is a continuation of WiTech 1.0 (installed software) that has existed for decades with full support for all OBD2 model years up to 2017. v2.0 is all web based so you can print off whatever you feel is important while you have an active subscription.

You can still get a haynes, chilton, etc manual but I feel we're comparing apples to oranges there. Those sorts of things are not shop manuals + dealer tools even on a 30 year old car. I'm pointing out that the dealer tools are starting to be within grasp of a shade tree mechanic and they're letting YOU service the modules. You don't have to settle for a reverse engineered manual based on a teardown or 3rd party tools. But they aren't stopping you from using those either. I appreciate it with how computerized cars are getting. Who else lets aftermarket flash modules with OEM firmware updates? This is the exact opposite direction tesla has been going in.

All that said. I very much respect a carbureted vehicle that only needs a dull spark on 6 out of 8 cyls to get you down the road. No question about it.

Re: Jailbreaking Used Teslas

#290

Post by JoeAltmaier »

stale2002 wrote: post #282
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A defect that is the fault of the manufacturer is certainly a way to sue Tesla for 'cars they don't own'. Happens all the time. Daily. And after you jailbreak your Tesla and cause an injury accident, who's to know? Just say you didn't, and it was Tesla's defect. Of course Tesla is concerned.

> And after you jailbreak your Tesla The Tesla belongs to the user. It no longer belongs to Tesla. That is all that matters. > Of course Tesla is concerned. Their concern is of no importance to me regarding things that they no longer own. I simply do not care what their concern is on anything that is no longer owned by them.

Good for you. But society has rules and laws, and Tesla is indeed responsible for failures in design or manufacturing. As evidenced by hundreds of lawsuits of other manufacturers, for a century.
Post reply on HN