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

Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#41

Post by hyperpallium »

I have a theory that software is so hard, that internet startups win simply because they can actually do software, and thereby obtain its benefits.

It's not that the start ups have such disruptive business models; but simply that software is great, and incumbents can't do it.

Web startups are good at software because that's what they focus on, and are selected for. So we're in this strange situation where getting software to do it is more important than doing it. It's the flexibility.

I'm afraid even my anecdatum is scanty: taxi calling is terrible. Uber could only be better.

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#42

Post by jacobreg »

grogers wrote: post #14
k-mcgrady wrote: post #9

>> ">> The glitch had been reported by drivers of new Volvos who said the engine could cut out without warning, creating a brief absence of steering and braking." Do they just mean the power steering cuts out and brakes lose hydraulics? Because there's a pretty huge difference between that and 'a brief absence of steering and braking'.

My power steering went out once. The car was drivable, but just barely. Likewise if you've ever pumped the brakes while the engine is off, you know that braking power drops to almost nothing. If that happened suddenly on the road 'loss of steering and brakes' is exactly how I would describe it. Sure it might not be completely accurate, but it is definitely a dangerous situation whatever you call it.

Eh, my car has a finicky engine and I've learned that it's perfectly drivable without power steering or brakes. I've lost power while taking tight turns, and while it was a bit surprising the first time or two I had no trouble keeping it under control. Unless the driver has significantly less strength than the average person, or is unwilling to drop whatever might be in their off hand to get it too the wheel, I'd say it's more scary than dangerous.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't be happy if my new volvo did that; they should definitely be held to higher standards than my $500 beater.

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#44

Post by quicklyfrozen »

superuser2 wrote: post #33
quicklyfrozen wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting this kind of safety-related issue aside, the first purchaser probably won't keep the car long enough to have any real problems (at this price level it's probably a lease). Even if they do, the dealer will give them a loaner (and may even pick up the car) so problems aren't much of an inconvenience. It's much more of an issue for those of us who like to buy several year old luxury cars -- they have become much…

Can you explain "it's usually a lease?" Doesn't it defeat the purpose of signaling wealth if you don't actually own it? How common actually is leasing at this price level?

Not sure where they got their data from, but see https://www.cartelligent.com/blog/which-car-brands-do-people... -- claims 67% leasing for MB, and 70% for BMW.

It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#45

Post by sk5t »

quicklyfrozen wrote: post #44
superuser2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain "it's usually a lease?" Doesn't it defeat the purpose of signaling wealth if you don't actually own it? How common actually is leasing at this price level?

Not sure where they got their data from, but see https://www.cartelligent.com/blog/which-car-brands-do-people... -- claims 67% leasing for MB, and 70% for BMW. It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.

I don't follow the line of reasoning that leasing is cheaper than buying outright. Via a lease you still pay interest on the full value of the asset, plus a negotiated cost having a relationship to depreciation. If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them.

One nice thing that a lease offers is a defined cost. If your luxury sedan turns out to be a basket case, the warranty covers the problems during the lease, and you can simply wash your hands of it at the end of the term. Trying to sell a depreciated-to-$40K car with problems is not easy.

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#46

Post by [deleted] »

quicklyfrozen wrote: post #44
superuser2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain "it's usually a lease?" Doesn't it defeat the purpose of signaling wealth if you don't actually own it? How common actually is leasing at this price level?

Not sure where they got their data from, but see https://www.cartelligent.com/blog/which-car-brands-do-people... -- claims 67% leasing for MB, and 70% for BMW. It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.

[deleted]

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#47

Post by superuser2 »

sk5t wrote: post #45
quicklyfrozen wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where they got their data from, but see https://www.cartelligent.com/blog/which-car-brands-do-people... -- claims 67% leasing for MB, and 70% for BMW. It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.

I don't follow the line of reasoning that leasing is cheaper than buying outright. Via a lease you still pay interest on the full value of the asset, plus a negotiated cost having a relationship to depreciation. If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them. One nice thing that a lease offers is a defined cost. If your luxury sedan turns out to be a basket case, the warrant…

> If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them.

Like 0% financing, it's possible that they're irrational from the perspective of a financial institution but overall good for the manufacturer because more cars get sold.

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#48

Post by quicklyfrozen »

sk5t wrote: post #45
quicklyfrozen wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where they got their data from, but see https://www.cartelligent.com/blog/which-car-brands-do-people... -- claims 67% leasing for MB, and 70% for BMW. It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.

I don't follow the line of reasoning that leasing is cheaper than buying outright. Via a lease you still pay interest on the full value of the asset, plus a negotiated cost having a relationship to depreciation. If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them. One nice thing that a lease offers is a defined cost. If your luxury sedan turns out to be a basket case, the warrant…

Certainly agree that leasing won't be cheaper in the long run in most cases. But in the short run it will get you a lower monthly payment, and that's all many care about.

Also agree that leasing helps fix the cost. Besides reliability issues, you win if depreciation is higher then was estimated up front (the one time I leased, the car ended up worth several thousand less then the final balloon payment so I simply turned it back in).

Re: Volvo recalls 59,000 cars over software fault

#50

Post by airplane »

y04nn wrote: post #19

Is there any coding standards like in aviation (DO-178) for cars?

I don't know too much about vehicle side of things but my understanding is the following:

MISRA is not on the same level as DO-178. DO-178 covers a lot of ground, from testing, documentation, requirements, that sort of thing, and it's made by a government agency which enforces it during certification, where every single hardware and software component in the aircraft related to flight operations is certified individually. So you will actually have engineers from the FAA sit down and look at code coverage, how requirements are written, how they map to tests, see if the tests cover a lot of cases in your requirements, see if the code implements the requirements, that sort of thing.

MISRA on the other hand are treated like guidelines that car manufacturers generally want you to meet when you deliver them a vehicle component.

There is the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards you have to meet on a vehicle as a whole, but I do not know if they have to prove that they meet the following during a formal certification process. http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/FMVSS/

So as far as I know, there's big approval process at the end for vehicles, while there's a formal certification process for all components in an aircraft, as well as a big approval process at the end for aircraft.

Someone please correct and fill in the blanks for the vehicle side of things.

Post reply on HN