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

Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

insideevs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 848 posts

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#371

Post by moduspol »

majormajor wrote: post #308
moduspol wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was quite interested in this until I realized: * Bed size is just five feet * Towing capacity is just 1000 lbs * Not AWD None of these can be retrofitted after the sale. Where I live, it'd struggle to be called a "truck" with these limitations.

Meh. Base Maverick is a Not everyone wants to spend 40-80k on a bloated luxury-truck-ized F150 when they only need to carry something oversized maybe once a year.

I think the market for base Mavericks is pretty small. At that point it's really not providing much value over an SUV with rear seats that fold down. I agree not everyone wants to spend 40-80k, but that doesn't mean they want to spend $20k for a small no-frills EV in the shape of a truck with not many other similarities.

I like the "starts out cheap, then upgrade it later" premise of Slate, and I like that it's electric, but it'll only really be a toy with the limitations I specified.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#372

Post by nyarlathotep_ »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #170
blueflow wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is safe to say that Computer Engineering has a problem with enabling knowledge transfer.

Yes! But it's also obvious that the industry doesn't have a prayer to ever reform. Stuck between proprietary and NDA's chips everywhere, using proprietary and NDA's toolchains and development kits, to product proprietary DRM'ed products. This is an industry that is about as far from the light of science & enlightenment as it is possible to get, ensnared as deeply in the entangling anti-human anti-science Intellectual…

I can find 1000s of posts or blogs or whatever on every React nuance, Rust thing, LLM trend, or whatever, but nothing even describing what "real" embedded programming looks like in any fashion (I'm not counting blinking an Arduino LED here).

What does writing ABS module software look like? I'd actually love to know--it's not an area where you can "vibe code" your way to a 'working' product.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#373

Post by j-a-a-p »

gerdesj wrote: post #321
latchkey wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I wish they would install tiny horn buttons on all the vehicles in Vietnam! In that country, the horn is a method of communication, much to the ire of literally everyone trying to exist.

Excessive horning (made up word) is not just a Vietnamese thing. Italy is probably Europe's worst offender, with Greece a close contender. I'm not so familiar with Asia, but I get the impression that the entirety of Indian and most of Chinese drivers feel the need to lean on the horn with gay abandon (fnarr). In Britain the horn is generally reserved for "fuck that was close: I think you are a bit of a tosser" or "yo…

Italy pales in comparison to Vietnam.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#374

Post by nyarlathotep_ »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #7
tehjoker wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure this is exactly the problem. It sounds like turning the car into a platform with changeable parts has caused both organizational and technical problems. To be fair, im still not sold that this is an advancement except maybe in simplifying the number of components. I'd prefer the car to work without "updates" and DLC. Why does my car need a firewall??

It's not practical to produce a car that never needs updates. That would be a bug-free system, which is impossible. Since they're going to ship updates anyway, a lot of focus is on minimizing the cost and hence OTA. For what it's worth, I work in this industry and the general rule of thumb is that every increase in validation from QM (standard quality) up to the various levels of safety critical code has up to 10x th…

> It's not practical to produce a car that never needs updates. That would be a bug-free system, which is impossible. Since they're going to ship updates anyway, a lot of focus is on minimizing the cost and hence OTA.

What was wrong with ECU and ABS etc software prior to the OTA era that we're now apparently entering?

I've had plenty of cars--too many--and outside of a few warranty repairs involving re-flashing ECU/ABS(maybe), this was a very rare occurrence.

(Not counting deliberate tunes or re-flashes for modification purposes)

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#375

Post by jmb99 »

deergomoo wrote: post #231

I want a 7-10” central display that spends 99% of its time showing CarPlay but also has a radio if I need it, the backup camera when I’m in reverse, and lets me change a couple of settings for convenience features like auto locking etc. Everything else can be dials, knobs, and buttons. My Mazda3 is perfect for this and I’m quite sad that I’m almost certainly not going to be able to find anything like it by the time I…

Most cars from the mid 90s until the mid 00s (sometimes later) have this: you replace the double-DIN factory head unit with an aftermarket CarPlay-compatible head unit. $200-$1000 (depending on how much you want to cheap out), easy DIY install or pay another couple hundred bucks to a stereo shop to install it for you. You now have a 7-10” central display that boots to CarPlay but can do radio/bluetooth/aux/satellite, and turns on a reverse camera when you shift into reverse. Climate control and everything else is still physical switches, because car manufacturers were still making cars properly.

Won’t be able to control auto locking and stuff like that though because it either didn’t exist or wasn’t controlled by the factory radio, because it was just a radio.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#376

Post by tqi »

doodlebugging wrote: post #349
garyfirestorm wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in one of the big three - the culture here is more waterfall and less agile. They decided at some point ‘we don’t need to be experts in building systems, we should only be good at spec’cing them and putting them together’ This leads to a mindset of relying on suppliers for changing even one line of code and at their mercy. Talent leaves because they didn’t get to do any of the fun stuff. And you’re left with b…

> They go for cheapest component they can spec for a given feature cutting 4MB memory will save 5 cents per car, we sell half a million cars, that’s big savings! I'm tired. Been out in the sun all day. Explain this to me please. When I do the math I get 500000 * $0.05 = $25000 That's a small drop in a large bucket of their gross income or net profits. EDIT: Harsh sun must've burned a few of my processors. I see now t…

Rinse and repeat across hundreds of components and your team "pays for itself"

"We found $X cost savings" is the easiest path the promotion. It's measurable, cleanly attributable, and immediate, while the downsides are not. Maybe perform is bad bc they skimped on memory, or maybe it's because the software team sucks. Maybe it means future updates are hamstrung, but who cares the bonus checks cleared years ago. Besides, you probably got promoted to a bigger / better role by now, and who can remember who decided what when?

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#377

Post by hinkley »

jccc wrote: post #360

> Tesla was able to fix this with a software update over the air, something no one else could do for a braking system. That was impressive, but the example presented a worrying question: Did engineers not do stopping-distance testing before they shipped the car to customers? I wonder if anyone here can think of an example (or six) of other more worrying questions about this. Before cradling your head in your hands an…

Electric cars can’t even.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#378

Post by nyarlathotep_ »

djoldman wrote: post #107

Somewhere in the last decade I became a curmudgeon who yells at clouds. I'd like a car with zero screens, no internet connectivity possible, and maybe one audio input and a radio. Also I drive a manual, which here in the US seems to be almost unheard of. As an aside, what's next? You can't buy a chef's knife without wifi?

> Also I drive a manual, which here in the US seems to be almost unheard of.

All of my last 5, including my current vehicle are manuals. Almost impossible to find and a dying breed.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#379

Post by phyzix5761 »

ericmay wrote: post #155
phyzix5761 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physical buttons are a huge need. Its so distracting navigating through screens to change the temperature while driving.

That’s interesting - what vehicles require you to do that? I know the usual suspect is the Tesla, which I have, but I never have to navigate through menus to change the temperature while driving. As an aside a lot of people like to levy criticism on the infotainment screens which I think is very well deserved, but then people text and drive, watch YouTube videos, and do all sorts of crazy things too. Instead of levyi…

Doesn't Tesla require you to navigate to a second screen when changing the fan speed?

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#380

Post by ericmay »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #379
ericmay wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s interesting - what vehicles require you to do that? I know the usual suspect is the Tesla, which I have, but I never have to navigate through menus to change the temperature while driving. As an aside a lot of people like to levy criticism on the infotainment screens which I think is very well deserved, but then people text and drive, watch YouTube videos, and do all sorts of crazy things too. Instead of levyi…

Doesn't Tesla require you to navigate to a second screen when changing the fan speed?

The OP said changing the temperature which is what I responded to.

Also at least personally I never change the fan speed but just set the temperature I want.

Post reply on HN