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

841–848 of 848 posts

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

#841

Post by chipsrafferty »

jorvi wrote: post #684
DanielHB wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to add one more thing to your point, if embedded devs work really hard and make the code work faster/better all reward you get is an _even_ more underpowered chip for the next version. Hardware procurement is cut-throat, sometimes they have mandates to reduce component costs and the procurement people WILL reach them. Often procurement > product in the power dynamics so no matter how bad the product gets those p…

I hate the penny-wise pound-foolish attitude both in embedded and Android phone development. For years now, Samsung has used a 'virtual proximity sensor' in everything but their premium stuff. Sensors like that are a few cents. Degrading the entire experience on the phone for a few cents cost savings. Say you do that for 25 components, saving 4 cents each. You've now saved $1 on a BoM of $100-$200, whilst making the…

I don't think that's about saving pennies as much as a reason to make premium models stand out.

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

#842

Post by owenversteeg »

cyberax wrote: post #804
owenversteeg wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, your comment is incorrect again. The most recent version of CEN 15722 requires the two most recent locations before the incident location. The modem does not have to passively track the mobile networks; it can do what it wants. The common OEM implementation these days is that the physical device that does eCall does several things, including eCall, over the same cellular radio. There's nothing stopping the OEM…

> Sorry, your comment is incorrect again. The most recent version of CEN 15722 requires the two most recent locations before the incident location. I have the standard open, and I don't see it. > The modem does not have to passively track the mobile networks; it can do what it wants. Sure. So just choose an automaker that doesn't provide data subscription services and/or don't pay for them. The eCall requirement in i…

I can't believe I'm still responding to this, but your comment is incorrect. Again. If you are reading a version of CEN 15722 where the two most recent locations before the incident location are not required, then you are reading an outdated version from over a decade ago, which has been withdrawn in favor of a more recent version for some years now. The year is displayed prominently on every page of the standard, and the validity is _required_ to be indicated before you even open it, so I have some doubts if this is a genuine mistake.

It's been a while since I've seen the pro-surveillance argument of "well, you can just do this uncommon or difficult thing if you want to evade surveillance!" In several European markets, for several vehicle types, there _are_ no vehicles without OEM-connected cellular radios. Some OEMs don't even advertise it; it is used for activating features, or "security." Other OEMs will not _fully_ disable cellular connectivity even if you stop paying. If you're an OEM mandated by EU law to include a cellular modem and a location recording device, you might as well make some use of that - and they do.

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

#843

Post by poulsbohemian »

smcin wrote: post #828
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…

If that was a main factor, surely then Mexico should be ground zero for next-generation car electronics design? Like, Tijuana or Ciudad Juarez.

I can't speak to car electronics design or anything about the capabilities of Tijuana or Ciudad Juarez, but your comment had me reflecting that in the mid/late 90s those of us who were in b-school went from all about Mexico to all about China overnight. With NAFTA et al, American manufacturing was going to be all about developing factories in Mexico and moving good back and forth between the US and Mexico for design and finishing. Then once China joined the WTO it was absolutely an instantaneous pivot to China instead. Maybe all that's old is new again?

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

#844

Post by mortos »

shostack wrote: post #317
anon7000 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mazda has done a great job at this so far, very minimal screen which automatically just shows CarPlay, and buttons for all the normal car stuff, which also isn’t overdone. The only flaw is the scroll wheel to interact with the screen, which is just slightly too clunky in apps with too many options

Generally agree but they are laying the path to enshitification. You see you can get turn by turn directions on the HUD, but only through their app where they want you to pay $10/mo for the privilege. Same for inputting addresses into their crappy nav system. So I only use Google maps with Android Auto now, but cannot put the turn by turn display on. Also, who knows what telemetry Mazda is sending home on me without…

I believe I've heard the newer Mazda 3s have added the navigation into the HUD for Android Auto and Carplay. It's not in my 2020 though which is annoying.

As for selling your data, yes absolutely. It goes to Connected Analytic Services which is an affiliate company of Toyota Insurance. Toyota Insurance Management Solutions (TIMS) is another name to look up. Subaru sells your data to them as well.

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

#845

Post by mortos »

femto wrote: post #214
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #48

Remove the LTE chip and all functionality related to ads, support wireless CarPlay and android auto, and use physical buttons. You’ll win every award in the industry.

The Nissan Leaf is (was?) what you describe, apart from the LTE chip. The LTE doesn't seem to do much without NissanConnect (which was actually written by Bosch).

Nissan tracks you and sells your data. Pretty much every manufacturer does, if your car has a modem rest assured that your car is collecting and selling data from you.

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

#846

Post by pbasista »

the8472 wrote: post #645
pbasista wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not intentionally conflate the two concepts. Connectivity is one thing. Using connectivity for surveillance is another. If a car is connected to the internet, it does not automatically mean that it is also collecting car data and sending it somewhere.

Is the modem always on or does it only get activated on an accident? If it's the former then cell towers log your location.

Yes, that is correct. But it is a different concept. The mobile network operators do that. Not the car. The car does not even have any way to stop that apart from going offline.

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

#847

Post by the8472 »

pbasista wrote: post #846
the8472 wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the modem always on or does it only get activated on an accident? If it's the former then cell towers log your location.

Yes, that is correct. But it is a different concept. The mobile network operators do that. Not the car. The car does not even have any way to stop that apart from going offline.

First of all, you didn't directly answer my question, it wasn't a yes/no question. I don't know how these systems work. If they're almost always offline it would be a lot less concerning.

Secondly, the government makes both regulations (cell tower data retention, emergency calling). So in combination the government regulated user tracking. Where exactly it happens isn't really that important. Once the data is being collected it'll end up being used. Usually it starts with major crimes and anonymized statistics, once the automated infrastructure has been created it'll be abused either illegally by police overreach or legally by a tough-on-X government changing the rules. It's not like this is some novel pattern...

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

#848

Post by smcin »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #843
smcin wrote: post #828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that was a main factor, surely then Mexico should be ground zero for next-generation car electronics design? Like, Tijuana or Ciudad Juarez.

I can't speak to car electronics design or anything about the capabilities of Tijuana or Ciudad Juarez, but your comment had me reflecting that in the mid/late 90s those of us who were in b-school went from all about Mexico to all about China overnight. With NAFTA et al, American manufacturing was going to be all about developing factories in Mexico and moving good back and forth between the US and Mexico for design…

Right. The unwritten story of the last three decades is the Mexican people in general have lost out on the huge generational opportunity they theoretically should have from being a (comparatively) low-wage manufacturing and R&D option on the US's doorstep ("friendshoring").

On paper Mexico reaped enormous gains from NAFTA(/MCA) but those went to a small slice of the population, and people on fixed incomes/not in manufacturing/services objectively got worse due to inflation and rising cost-of-living, property prices. The share of GDP effectively lost due to corruption is also an issue.

Post reply on HN