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

771–780 of 848 posts

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

#771

Post by Marsymars »

majormajor wrote: post #411
moduspol wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 elect…

AWD is only standard on the fanciest Maverick trim and not an option picked by the couple of folks I know with them. But that + the bed length doesn't seem to be stopping them from loving their trucks. Tacos also start at 5' IIRC. But if you have even just those once-a-year "need a truck bed" needs the gap between "SUV with fold down seats" and "actual truck" is pretty substantial. I think the set of truck buyers wit…

FWIW the Maverick handles 4x8 sheets fine - they go on the wheel wells and the tailgate with some straps to hold them in place.

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

#772

Post by bitwize »

jmb99 wrote: post #427
bitwize wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are not willing to pay what the people who know embedded deserve. $150,000, $200,000 and up for a JavaScript webshit "engineer", $100,000 max if you work in embedded, unless you have a super specialist knowledge maintaining software on NASA's remaining PDP-11s or whatever that they can't afford to lose .

Fortunately that is incorrect. I mentioned in another comment, but I’m well over $100k USD equivalent in salary alone as an embedded engineer, working in a relatively low cost of living area in Canada, graduated 3 years ago. Working for a “regular” company. Maybe things just really suck for embedded in the states? But since my last year of university I’ve been inundated with recruiters for embedded positions, and I’v…

That's good to hear. Maybe Canada's got its head screwed on straight when it comes to assigning value to software roles.

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

#773

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

pydry wrote: post #599
DanielHB wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked in similar systems and you are 100% right. 80% of the time was spent on communication protocols between the different boards and microcontrollers. QAing and solving issues from short-sighted dozens of unique custom protocols that worked in non-standard ways (every time a component needs to talk to another component a new protocol was invented). When you have dozens of communication lines required between dif…

This makes it sound like the problem is that they either lack a person with architectural responsibility for the cars' electronics as a whole or that person lacks the skills necessary to do their job.

Bear in mind that all the electronics on a particular car are not specific to that car: there is a lot of reuse across product lines. And there are multiple vendors, each of whom is probably also selling the same, or similar modules to other manufacturers.

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

#774

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

analog31 wrote: post #713
numpad0 wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car OEMs are modern day colonial plantation owners, they know cost structures of suppliers and schedule their price cuts. They already have an annual cost saving quota. Prices don't just go down but go down just-in-time. It would make zero sense if I drive to a Walmart and demand they sell to me with monotonically lowering prices as function of date since registration of my reward card, but in cars they do.

Ironically, this method of managing suppliers was perfected by Wal-Mart.

LOL. That's what I was thinking too.

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

#775

Post by rconti »

catigula wrote: post #709
dingaling wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ADAS is generally considered 'adverserial software', few drivers welcome it and many switch it off at ignition. So unfortunately regardless of Toyota's possible prowess in the field it's unlikely to receive many plaudits for focusing its efforts there.

I understand, but that's partially caused by compliance software being problematic. Now with tightening federal regulations and lawsuits for faulty ADAS manufacturers are tightening the belt. Investment must be substantial for the 2029+ regs from all manufacturers. Toyota is just ahead of the game currently as of their latest offering and shows you their value as a company in being so. To be honest, though, I'd be in…

Drivers consider it adversarial because it not only "takes away control" but also because it messes up their feedback loop.

I'll give two examples.

From a recent Toyota rental (~2024 RAV4): The lane departure system (which seems to have 2 stages?) gently corrects your steering if you get anywhere NEAR a line in the road. It's not a clearly-artificial buzzing in the wheel or a tug at your hands, it feels extremely subtle, like driving over a seam in the road. Every time I drove that damn thing I found myself second-guessing the surface and wondering if there was something I hadn't noticed in the road.

From a few years ago, some other rental: Automated brake force increase thing. If you abruptly lift off the throttle and quickly move to the brake pedal, it felt something like doubling the brake force. Why? Because apparently studies have found in many collisions, the driver didn't come close to using all of the braking force, because they don't know how to drive. Okay, so it makes you safer, but no can no longer know how much braking force you're going to get from moment to moment?

Do these systems not create a dependency loop where the very senses the driver is _supposed_ to rely upon to safely and smoothly operate a vehicle are blunted (seemingly) arbitrarily by some computer system?

It can both be true that this makes cars safer, while at the same time making drivers hate the systems. I don't disable ABS on my car because it does something I cannot do (high frequency brake control of each individual wheel), but I sure disable ADAS whenever I get a chance!

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

#776

Post by therein »

mschuster91 wrote: post #540
therein wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oops somehow a switch has attached itself to the fuse of the LTE module in my vehicle.

Won't work if the cellular modem is powered directly off the ECU's fuse or is embedded in the ECU itself.

Yeah, would not. I am glad my 2025 vehicle has a fuse for the telematics module.

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

#777

Post by catigula »

rconti wrote: post #775
catigula wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand, but that's partially caused by compliance software being problematic. Now with tightening federal regulations and lawsuits for faulty ADAS manufacturers are tightening the belt. Investment must be substantial for the 2029+ regs from all manufacturers. Toyota is just ahead of the game currently as of their latest offering and shows you their value as a company in being so. To be honest, though, I'd be in…

Drivers consider it adversarial because it not only "takes away control" but also because it messes up their feedback loop. I'll give two examples. From a recent Toyota rental (~2024 RAV4): The lane departure system (which seems to have 2 stages?) gently corrects your steering if you get anywhere NEAR a line in the road. It's not a clearly-artificial buzzing in the wheel or a tug at your hands, it feels extremely sub…

I just want to outline my overarching concern off the bat with similar sentiments I see expressed exactly in this vein by people: there's a very strong potential for serious cognitive biases, and, frankly, simple flawed logic, to be operant in the statement, "I do not need emergency assistance because I am skilled driver".

The fallacy is that simply because a low-probability event hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean that you wouldn't benefit from assistance if it did. It seems to be a combination of optimism bias/competence bias/dunning-kruger. Systems that can mitigate "human error" are extremely critical and desirable, even by highly skilled/talented/trained machine operators like airline pilots.

Anyhow, it feels like your specific critiques apply to proactive systems, which actually don't really fall under the umbrella of what I'm outlining per se.

Proactive systems are either very intentionally engaged (i.e. lane centering or adaptive cruise) or highly theoretical and not widely implemented, for example, proactive driver assist in TSS3, if enabled (which it isn't fresh out of the factory for reasons you likely outline here), makes subtle corrections to the driver's experience, e.g. engaging brakes when cars ahead slow down or on curves. I have strong hopes for technology like this as being a good bridge between the challenges of full driver assistance and current technology, which, at the cutting edge, is undoubtedly impressive. They may very well not be there yet, which is suggested by Toyota's reluctance to make this the default experience on their equipped vehicles.

Conversely, reactive systems like AEB are widely tested by regulators and, for example, the IIHS, and should only ever genuinely engage in emergency situations. Certain systems do this better than others, which is software/sensor based. Some do exceptionally. Some do not.

Quick note:

(~2024 RAV4): Uses TSS2.5, not TSS3. There appears to be a large difference here in competence. I haven't driven with either system extensively.

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

#778

Post by timewizard »

vv_ wrote: post #675
timewizard wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ISO 26262. That is a piece of paper. > Software for steering or braking systems is of high quality. There's literally no way for me to know that before I trust my life with it.

I don't understand the reasoning you are making here. Cars have had advanced safety features like emergency breaking for a long time now (e.g. Toyota Crown Majesta 2003). Furthermore, there are many safety features that are controlled by software (e.g. airbags and seatbelts) that exist in all cars manufactured today.

Well.. just Google "unintentional airbag deployment."

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

#779

Post by awongh »

jollyllama wrote: post #712
awongh wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For american cars at least, I read that one of the reasons this process exists is because car companies want to work around union rules for manufacturing by outsourcing components of the cars to subcontractors that they can make deals with. Ultimately it's a price control strategy to pit these suppliers against each other to lower costs. But it means that designing these electronic sub-systems isn't just a question o…

You'd think the overhead of managing the supplier relationships would be more expensive than well-managed vertical integration. I'm guessing it's a failure on the part of admin to count their own costs.

Those employees might not be unionized, though.

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

#780

Post by throw0101d »

vv_ wrote: post #670
throw0101d wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's your objection to LTE? Tracking, phoning home (with related privacy issues), etc : * https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/09/flaw-in-kia-web-portal-... * https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/10/five-...

You're not using a smartphone?

> You're not using a smartphone?

I have an iPhone with no social media apps. Mainly use it to check e-mail, Maps, weather, and SMS/RCS.

I feel confident that there is minimal third-party tracking, and that Apple themselves are relatively honest.

Post reply on HN