Ignoring the arguments about morality, and who is(n't) in the right, this is a prime example of why I don't trust electric cars! If the manufacturer can do this then you don't own the car, even if you paid for it in full.
Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
541–550 of 659 posts
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#542This is the problem with over the air updates. It gives car companies the ability to disable features at their own will. Another aspect is that software has bugs and an update can potentially also introduce problems in your car, especially when your 10yr model is receiving updates that the software engineer didn't care to test for such old model. I always liked software that runs stable software and keeps running tha…
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> (I'm assuming that Tesla only made the owner pay the cost of the 60 battery swap even though they replaced it with a 90) It says right there that it was done under warranty. If my RTX3080 breaks, and Nvidia sends me a 3080Ti as a replacement(because maybe they don't have any 3080 in stock) then no, they can't lock it down to 3080 level 3 years later with a software update. And yes, I'm allowed to sell it on as a 3…
Except that with something like a Tesla, you are not buying the car. You are buying a piece of paper that grants you specific use of a car. This means that in the future, everyone will need to retain a lawyer conversant in contract law when making any sort of purchase, as what is being purchased may have little to do with the thing you think you have bought, and everything to do with the abstract contract that the la…
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#544Stories like this and BMW selling microtransactions makes me hate technology. I remember being disgusted when the horse armor DLC was released and now that type of monetization is everywhere in gaming. These stories of car manufacturers locking you out of hardware you paid for with software is the horse armor DLC of the future for cars.
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#545I dont like the world being dominated by Software which could be remotely updated. Whether that is a Car or IoT.
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#546Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#547Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Hey sorry about your battery. We only had a 90 so we threw that in there. Enjoy. Tell everyone you know about how awesome Tesla was about fixing the problem and remember that next time you go to buy your next car" That would be such a great solution
Any rational marketer or PR officer would gladly give up that $4,500 to avoid this HN post.
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could just as easily get screwed by GM, Ford, or any other legacy automaker That is purely hypothetical, however -- as far as I know, this kind of stunt has only become a thing since Tesla started doing it. Chevy wants to reduce the capacity of my wife's Bolt by 20%, but they are asking for her permission to do that, not just sending an OTA update to do it against her wishes. When I look at what car to buy, I a…
Curiosity is too strong. For what reason does Chevy want you to volunteer to lower your capacity?
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#549> To be extra clear, I don't post this stuff because I hate Tesla or anything. In fact, it's just the opposite. I hate seeing Tesla derail themselves with this kind of nonsense. I respect the OP for saying this. But I have a hard time respecting people buying Teslas, or anything from Musk. Is it not obvious that the guy is a charlatan? (and that the fish rots from the head?) How likely is it that you won't be robbed…
Tim Dillon said it best. “I met him and guy is a genius. But he’s also a carnival barker.”
Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine Apple replacing your broken Macbook Pro M1 base model with the upgraded model because they didn't have any exact replacements in stock, and then years later deciding to disable two of the CPU cores, two of the GPU cores, and half the SSD space (1 TB to 512 GB). People, especially on HN, would lose their freaking minds. They would also lose their minds if Apple only sold the highest-end model but firmware-lock…
Intel has occasionally done this: https://www.zdnet.com/article/facepalm-of-the-day-intel-char... It tends not to go down well.