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

341–350 of 463 posts

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#341

Post by avar »

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…

    > There are reasons why strict car safety regulations exist.
They exist? Then why isn't Tesla getting fined in amounts that make this practice unprofitable?

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#342

Post by btbuildem »

jmward01 wrote: post #36
lukah wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car panels are convex on nearly all other cars for very good reason. Flat panels are structurally susceptible to damages which wouldn’t mark a standard panel. Adding a highly reflective surface was another great move.

I wonder what tests car companies generally do to predict how durable a style choice is (how scratches, corrosion, etc will impact the look). Protecting your brand is also about what people will see in the future, not just what is on the showroom now. If 5 years from now all of these vehicles look terrible that won't help sales for any of their models.

You ever notice how all cars look like all the other cars? There's rarely an exception, they mostly just copy each other. They seem to stick to a design, then someone makes an enormously brave move of slightly changing some small thing, and next year they all copy it.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#343

Post by coldpie »

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.

[flagged]

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#344

Post by ssl-3 »

thrw42A8N wrote: post #302
imiric wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Back in the day it was a major milestone for video game projects to "go gold". It meant that the rigorous QA process was passed, and that retail copies were ready to be manufactured. Since that involved significant costs and physical logistics, companies certainly didn't want major bugs shipped at this stage. There were some exceptions, but ultimately this led to much higher customer satisfaction. Removing t…

I get it's wrong in cars. But who the hell cares about games? So your game updates after a month with a fix. So what? It's not like you pay for the update.

Who cares about a $183bn industry, indeed.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#345

Post by losvedir »

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…

Well, "recall" implies both a safety issue and a convenience issue. Pre-Tesla OTA updates a "recall" was a logistical nightmare, meaning you had to take the day off work, wait at the dealership all day, sometimes deal with a loaner car, etc.

To a lot of folks, maybe older than the average HN user at this point, the reason recalls were such a hated thing was not primarily that it implied a safety defect, but because they were super inconvenient.

For example, I had a recall on my Tesla having to do with the automatic window closing being dangerous. That is a safety issue, and I do have kids, so I realize that there's a very small chance they could damage or lose a finger with it, so I do want it fixed. But because it was fixed OTA, I don't really mind it or hold it against them. In contrast, if fixing it meant taking it into a dealership and losing a day, it would be a hugely negative thing! I ascribe a negative sentiment to the fact that there was a safety issue in proportion to the chance of damage and how severe it was, so: minor.

In other words, I know why it's called a "recall" and it makes sense. But on the other hand, you have to realize why people put it in scare quotes, too. The plain denotation of the word hasn't changed, but the connotation is really disproportionate to the experience of someone with a Tesla.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#346

Post by cglace »

jmward01 wrote: post #5

Completely unrelated to safety, these vehicles don't look like they are aging well. They are all completely new but the ones I am seeing on the road already look a bit beat up. That finish on them and their general styling emphasize every minor blemish.

Almost all of the cybertrucks I see are wrapped

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#347

Post by ragazzina »

alt227 wrote: post #200
aucisson_masque wrote: post #142

[flagged]

You seem to be really derogatory and dismissive of people whos opinion you dont agre with.

>people whos opinion you dont agre with.

"I don't like broccoli" and "I don't care about the life of the pedestrian I might run over" are different kind of opinions.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#348

Post by imiric »

avar wrote: post #341
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…

> There are reasons why strict car safety regulations exist. They exist? Then why isn't Tesla getting fined in amounts that make this practice unprofitable?

Because car industry regulations haven't caught up with cars being software on wheels yet. Most regulations in general haven't caught up with software eating the world and the "move fast and break things" mentality. This is not just an arguably bad mentality, but when human lives are at stake, it's a very dangerous one as well.

Besides, companies the size and influence of Tesla can lobby their way out of regulations. With Musk now becoming more politically involved, it's doubtful we'll see any of this change in the next 4 years at least.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#349

Post by cglace »

pbreit wrote: post #9
jmward01 wrote: post #5

Completely unrelated to safety, these vehicles don't look like they are aging well. They are all completely new but the ones I am seeing on the road already look a bit beat up. That finish on them and their general styling emphasize every minor blemish.

Could not disagree more. They are the freshest looking vehicles on the road.

I like that I laugh every time I see someone driving one. No other car makes me do that.

It never gets old how ridiculous they look.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#350

Post by mst »

bboygravity wrote: post #15
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 that's indeed it, I would rank the article as worse than 91 percent of ordinary boring Elon and Tesla bashing in 2024. I guess on a positive note they stopped posting that Tesla is almost bankrupt for the 1000th time because Elon.

It isn't, this time.

I've seen plenty of articles, contemptuous tweets, etc. that conflated OTA updates that were classified as 'recalls' by the safety authorities with physical issue recalls.

And I'm annoyed that the article didn't provide the answer itself.

But per https://www.cars.com/research/tesla-cybertruck/recalls/ 5/6 of the recalls for the cybertruck to date have been physical, only the immediately previous one was resolveable by an OTA update.

(I'm in the "I think Elon is a dick but Tesla is pretty cool and SpaceX is awesome" camp personally, so bad criticism of Tesla annoys me not just on a basis of hating bad criticism of things in general but also because I get doubly annoyed when somebody criticises somebody I believe *is* worth of criticism and then manages to do it inaccurately ... you're in a target rich environment! Stop shooting at squirrels instead!)

Post reply on HN