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

281–290 of 463 posts

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#281

Post by lotsofpulp »

qwerpy wrote: post #62
lttlrck wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh did they fix the rusting issue from the beginning of the year?

I think that story turned out to be media sensationalism. I’ve owned one for over half a year, in the distinctly not dry PNW. No rust at all.

The PNW is distinctly dry during the summer, which would compose at least half of the months you have owned it.

Also, in my experience, it’s road salt/ice melt chemicals that really exacerbate rust rather than just rain. I assume that is why I see a lot more old cars everyday in PNW compared to the northeast.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#282

Post by rsynnott »

stackghost wrote: post #66
LeoPanthera wrote: post #4

The article notes that the most recent recall was a physical one, not a software update, and implies that that was unusual. I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then?

>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…

> but the mirrors are insufficient to back the vehicle up safely without the camera.

I'm quite surprised that that is allowed at all. Seems like an unnecessary risk.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#283

Post by friendzis »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #4

The article notes that the most recent recall was a physical one, not a software update, and implies that that was unusual. I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then?

> I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then?

Why would you? A recall is part of *safety* process, where company internal safety lifecycle failed to a level that adults had to step in and say "this is actually unsafe, fix your shit or it gets pulled out of market".

The fact that issue can be remedied with software update is irrelevant, because in the end the core issue is that an unsafe product was distributed to the market.

The fact that you put recall into quotes is telltale sign how Tesla managed to undermine public safety concerns drawing a divide between software-only and hardware fixes.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#285

Post by thinkcontext »

alt227 wrote: post #280
thinkcontext wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All credible lifecycle ghg emissions analyses have found that EVs have substantial reductions vs ICE. It is true that they have more emissions from manufacture but this is overcome, on average, in a few years. This is true even on carbon intense electric grids. And their emissions drop as the grid gets cleaner. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/driving-cleaner The Cybertruck is a likely exception. It's manufacturing e…

If we all dump our vehicles and buy EVs, the energy required to to scrap/recycle 1.5 billion ICE vehicles far outweighs any savings we would make and will take decades to recover. On top of that they have massive chemical battery packs which are horrible to mine the resources for, are useless after 10 years, and cannot be recycled. The report you quoted confirms all of this. Simply putting synthetic fuel into our exi…

The ICEs traded in for EVs don't get scrapped, they get sold as used cars. It's unclear if or how much the transition to EVs will shave off their expected lifespan. It will play out over decades.

Also batteries aren't useless after 10 years. They can be used for grid storage for years after being retired from EV service.

Synthetic fuel schemes are very expensive and haven't proven to be scalable.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#286

Post by 0xEF »

ryandrake wrote: post #275
0xEF wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the gist is "recall" is the same saying "safety issue that needs to be fixed in the software or hardware" since we don't have a word for software issues, which carry a bit more weight on a fly-by-wire vehicle like the Cybertruck. Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's…

> Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's issues. Being pedantic over a single word out of 100 is HN's bread and butter. How many times have you read a comment here that boiled down to "The author's entire article is invalid because in paragraph 3, word 65 he used the wrong wor…

I suppose that is probably true, but I hate to generalize...then again, I am guilty of generalizing and being pedantic, myself.

We do kind of exist in a strange space where the meaning and intention of words matter for the sake of clarity, but to ignore the dynamic nature of language results in less clarity. If that makes any sense?

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#287

Post by rsynnott »

YZF wrote: post #7

I saw my first Cybertruck the other day. It looked less weird in person than I expected it. It's a very different and new design. How many of the 91% we're comparing to are completely new designs. What's the correct benchmark? Let's rewrite the headline. "A radical new EV design from Tesla, the Cybertruck, is already ahead of 9% of all 2024 vehicles in quality as it just ramps up production". I'll likely never own th…

> Let's rewrite the headline. "A radical new EV design from Tesla, the Cybertruck, is already ahead of 9% of all 2024 vehicles in quality as it just ramps up production".

Today in damning with comically faint praise...

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#288

Post by croes »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #4

The article notes that the most recent recall was a physical one, not a software update, and implies that that was unusual. I wonder if you exclude "recalls" resolved by software updates, for all cars, where it would rank then?

If you’re a victim of one of these errors does it matter it was later fixed by a software update?

Recall mean an error the manufacturer to fix, the how doesn’t matter at that point.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#289

Post by ponector »

austin-cheney wrote: post #231
tremarley wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To you it may be hideous but to many, it’s one of the most attractive cars on the road

Even if it were the most beautiful thing ever built would you still spend 5x more for something that doesn’t work?

Doesn't work? You definitely can drive it.

Why people buying it? To show off. Why people are buying Mercedes G-wagon? Or several expensive watches?

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#290

Post by croes »

Aeolun wrote: post #116
imiric wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The recall doesn’t know how the fix is applied it’s just the fix is mandatory for manufacturer and he to inform the customers
Post reply on HN