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

Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

blog.substrate.tools

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#41

Post by JumpCrisscross »

kelp wrote: post #28
gambiting wrote: post #25

To be fair, Volvo did the same thing recently, so it's not just weird American startups that do this - Volvo never released the numbers on how many cars were affected, but I'm a member of several facebook groups for Volvo owners and it was just like an onslaught, people were posting daily warning others about not applying the latest software patch or it had a good chance of bricking your car. Absolutely no idea how t…

I hadn't heard about the Volvo one! I had a 2022 Volvo C40 before I got my Rivian R1T. When I first got the Volvo the GPS and LTE connection would periodically stop working for a day or two. They pushed a fix for it. Later they added CarPlay, which wasn't there when I got the car. Good updates. But not as frequent at Rivian. Was Volvo able to fix it with another OTA or did people have to go in for service?

> had a 2022 Volvo C40

I tried to buy one, but the dealer in Montana was such a pain about it! How did you like it as a car?

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#42

Post by aranchelk »

> With the botched 2023.42 update Rivian explained that they pushed the wrong build with the wrong certificates to customer vehicles. This made me immediately think they probably don’t have a canary fleet of vehicles that they roll out to first.

Sounds to me like they certainly could have a canary fleet, but if they do, they didn’t have sufficient process controls to only allow updates to the public after having gone through canary testing.

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#43

Post by kelp »

aranchelk wrote: post #42

> With the botched 2023.42 update Rivian explained that they pushed the wrong build with the wrong certificates to customer vehicles. This made me immediately think they probably don’t have a canary fleet of vehicles that they roll out to first. Sounds to me like they certainly could have a canary fleet, but if they do, they didn’t have sufficient process controls to only allow updates to the public after having gone…

Repeating what you said in my own words to ensure I understand it.

I think you're suggesting they might have a canary fleet, but there wasn't anything/enough that preventing a mistake from bypassing the carry fleet before going to production?

Could be!

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#44

Post by aranchelk »

kelp wrote: post #43
aranchelk wrote: post #42

> With the botched 2023.42 update Rivian explained that they pushed the wrong build with the wrong certificates to customer vehicles. This made me immediately think they probably don’t have a canary fleet of vehicles that they roll out to first. Sounds to me like they certainly could have a canary fleet, but if they do, they didn’t have sufficient process controls to only allow updates to the public after having gone…

Repeating what you said in my own words to ensure I understand it. I think you're suggesting they might have a canary fleet, but there wasn't anything/enough that preventing a mistake from bypassing the carry fleet before going to production? Could be!

Exactly.

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#45

Post by rokkitmensch »

ohthatsnotright wrote: post #37
earthscienceman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being rich enough to buy high end cars every year and worry about OTA updates. What a world.

Beats being so poor you can't afford a car, or the only car you can afford is slowly rusting itself away or one no-longer-mass-produced part away from making a repair out of your financial reach. I'd take bad OTA updates anyday.

GP is referencing the "having the being stolen from stolen".

Nevermind that the wealthy ain't fretting for one second over OTA updates. Imagine a personal vehicle budget where the Porsche is technically your daily driver, but you never drive it because you're driven everywhere.

A /personal IT team/.

A boy can still dream!

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#46

Post by kelp »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #41
kelp wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't heard about the Volvo one! I had a 2022 Volvo C40 before I got my Rivian R1T. When I first got the Volvo the GPS and LTE connection would periodically stop working for a day or two. They pushed a fix for it. Later they added CarPlay, which wasn't there when I got the car. Good updates. But not as frequent at Rivian. Was Volvo able to fix it with another OTA or did people have to go in for service?

> had a 2022 Volvo C40 I tried to buy one, but the dealer in Montana was such a pain about it! How did you like it as a car?

I liked it a lot. Not great range, but new ones improved that and I still road tripped it all up and down the west coast. Sometimes regret selling it.

Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong

#47

Post by applied_heat »

ohthatsnotright wrote: post #37
earthscienceman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being rich enough to buy high end cars every year and worry about OTA updates. What a world.

Beats being so poor you can't afford a car, or the only car you can afford is slowly rusting itself away or one no-longer-mass-produced part away from making a repair out of your financial reach. I'd take bad OTA updates anyday.

Seems like this batch of half baked cars receiving OTA updates are more likely to be the ones that are in repairable in the not so distant future, whereas parts for a 1990s toyota gmc or ford anything can be found cheaply and installed by any ambitious teenager.
Post reply on HN