• @jabjoe@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10510 months ago

    Without right to repair, there will be planned obsolescence.

    My Citroen EV developed an on board charger fault. It wouldn’t charge. The part was a “coded part” which meant it had to specifically programmed with my EV’s ID by Citroen at manufacture. It took months to finally be fitted and ready. So basically, not only does the coded parts system make service shit, but also means when the manufacturer is done making the part, the car is dead. You can’t swap parts between cars and there is no third party parts. It’s meant to be about car theft, but it’s very convenient it blocks competition and long product life…

    • @derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      If it was a carburetor (which EVs do not have), I’d be okay with a DRM. But boards? Is there an organized crime group that steals EV boards? Next time it will be funking wipers with DRM.

      • @jabjoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        910 months ago

        They DRM it all if we let them. We must not. It should going the other way. More open, repairable and upgradable.

    • noughtnaut
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4010 months ago

      Cars should just come with a big open socket up front, where I can buy (or build) my own infotainment system to install there.

      …which is precisely what we used to have, before auto makers decided to insist that they should be enclosed in a swooping dash.

      • @BigPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1010 months ago

        I mean, the DIN hole was a standard size but it certainly wasn’t a ‘socket’ and anyone who had a Ford Focus that needed a Mercedes-Benz writing harness to plug up their aftermarket radio knows what I’m on about.

    • @Omniraptor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      I may be weird but why would you need an infotainment system at all? I have all the infotainment I could possibly want in my phone, the car is only needed as a Bluetooth speaker and for standard playback controls.

      • @boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        510 months ago

        The car screen is significantly bigger than the phone screen, making it quicker to glance at it for driving instructions.

        But now we’re just coming back to Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. I just want a big screen with physically touchable controls for those. My previous car did exactly that, but now I’ve gone near two decades older so I now get a fancy screen with no functionality beyond FM radio and DVD video lol

    • @AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      610 months ago

      That was also the point of Apple CarPlay/Android auto. Let the manufacturer provide the hardware but your phone can run the infotainment. Let actual software companies do that, instead of the horrible mess that car manufacturers make out of software

  • mox
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’m disappointed to find this article is mainly about losing premium subscription features that use mobile internet, which I see as little more than expensive spyware. I don’t want them in the first place, and although I believe that some people might, it doesn’t seem like one of the important issues around car technology or transportation in general.

    The promise is a “smartphone on wheels”: a car that automakers can continue to improve well after an owner drives away from a showroom.

    I feel a more worthwhile discussion would be about how a long a “smartphone on wheels” will remain useful compared to one that doesn’t depend on continually updated software. How much more often will they need to be replaced? How much more will that cost people? How much more waste and pollution will be generated because of shorter car lifetimes? What sort of right-to-repair laws do we need here?

    Seems like a missed opportunity.

    • @kalleboo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      310 months ago

      Naw, I live in a hot as hell country I’m super jealous of people who can remote-start the air conditioning in their cars.

      It should be an open interface like OBD2 though where you can choose the hardware/provider instead of being locked to the car manufacturer deprecating everything in 3 years to sell you a new car.

      • @sheogorath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        810 months ago

        You don’t really need connected cars for that. My car has no smart features but still has a remote start capability. It uses the car remote to trigger it instead of cellular connection.

      • @boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 months ago

        Two way alarm systems with remote start have been a thing for pretty long and don’t all require cellular connection. Some are just super long distance key fobs.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        I cannot remote start my car. If it’s really hot or really cold, I go outside for a few seconds to start the car and then go back inside. It’s really not that big a hardship.

    • @0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      310 months ago

      Crash-detection systems can use cellular to alert medical authorities, that and theft are about the only practical use cases i see for that.

      • @ThePrivacyPolicy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        I feel like these days the tech should be there to just leverage our cell phones for this. Most drivers have their phones paired to their cars now anyway, and perhaps some sort of emergency protocol could be created where a car could even connect through a nearby non-paired phone for an automated emergency call too. As for tracking - make cars have something like an air tag type function built in that can share both android+apple tracking networks. This is all a pipe dream anyway - there’s money to be made on connected car services so the shareholders won’t be for modernizing the approach anytime soon.

  • @fubarx@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4810 months ago

    It’s not just cars. Anything with electronics (appliances, smarthome devices, healthcare, transportation) that is designed to last more than three years will hit a wall.

    The host devices are designed to last 10-15 years, but the electronics will be out-of-date in 3-5 years.

    The processor manufacturer will have moved on to new tech and will stop making spare parts. The firmware will only get updated if something really bad happens. Most likely, it’ll get abandoned. And some time soon, the software toolchain and libraries will not be available anymore. Let’s not think of the devs who will have moved on. Anyone want to make a career fixing up 10-yo software stack? Where’s the profit in that for the manufacturer?

    So as an end-user, you’re stuck with devices that can not be updated and there’s still at least 10-20 years of life left on them. Best of luck.

    Solution: go analog. Pay extra if you have to. They’ll last longer and the ROI and privacy can’t be beat.

    • @wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2010 months ago

      The problem isn’t analogue Vs digital, or even software controlled or not. It’s about the design assuming:

      1. The manufacturer will always exist
      2. The manufacturer should be the only one to maintain the device.
      3. The manufacture will define what the owner will do with the device.

      An analogue device can be at fault too. Proprietary parts. Construction techniques which don’t allow for dissambly without destroying things. All that stuff.

      …but you’re right. Buy the items that let you service them, that don’t rely on cloud servers and software updates, that use standard parts, etc, etc. Right to repair legislation is good too, but the companies understand purchasing power more. So educate those around you too.

      • @AnarchoSnowPlow@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Analogue doesn’t have firmware that can reject a device based on id.

        So you can reverse engineer a replacement part if you absolutely have to.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      210 months ago

      Yes and no. My “smart” TV is still doing just fine a good decade since I bought it… by never connecting it to the internet.

  • @Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4710 months ago

    Locked bootloaders should be illegal. Manufacturers should have to provide enough specs that third parties can write code that runs on the hardware.

    • @0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      Manufacturers should have to provide enough specs that third parties can write code that runs on the hardware.

      “But Crowdstrike” would probably be an argument against.

      • @Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        “Security” as an excuse for self-serving bullshit isn’t new.

        Sure, there’s a risk of breaking things. I can do that with a hacksaw and a soldering iron too, and it’s widely recognized that it isn’t up to the manufacturer of the thing to keep me from breaking it. We need the same understanding for devices that depend on software.

  • skulblaka
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4510 months ago

    I dream of an open source car. Something simple but reliable, say a legally-distinct 2004 Honda Accord, bog standard, no frills, no detail package options, just A Cheap Car with standardized parts and open source software. It’s the only car the company makes, you can buy one for 10k or build your own for 6k out of parts and a couple months worth of weekends, car nerds will fork the software for infinite tuning customization, and it doesn’t report your location back to headquarters. Parts are standardized across every car we’ve ever made so your local parts store will have them in stock. The new model year is the same car as last year, we just built some fresh ones for people to buy new.

    I have no way of making this dream a reality. But I dream of it nonetheless. American car culture has gone off the rails, and the number of people I see already driving around old 5-owner Hondas and Toyotas and Buicks tells me that there is definitely a market for a cheap basic car that runs.

    • @InFerNo@lemmy.ml
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      810 months ago

      That would have been the Sono Sion, but there was too little interest. Not enough preorders meant they ran out of money to continue development.

      • e$tGyr#J2pqM8v
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 months ago

        Off topic: I’d argue Love Exposure by Sion Sono is the best movie ever made.

    • @frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      610 months ago

      Creating a FOSS EV is all do-able right now with off the shelf motors and batteries. Welding a frame would take some skill. How to title it would depend on the local government rules; many states in the US have a kit car designation for this sort of thing, but not all do.

      If it’s built rigid like a race car with a roll cage, four-point harness, and at least a DOT rated helmet for everyone inside (if not Snell), it could be safer then most cars on the road. If it’s not very large, then it’s probably safer for pedestrians and bicycles, too.

      I don’t expect air bags to be viable. It takes a lot of tuning to get them right, and they can be worse than nothing if not done right (they’re basically a controlled explosion). However, the race car-like design above, plus helmets, would keep you safer than any air bag. Road cars converted to track cars often disable or remove the air bags. The rules of the event may even require it. They’re counterproductive dead weight when you’re packed in this way.

      Other creature comforts are going to be what you put into it, but keep in mind that many of the things we take for granted in modern cars–A/C, stereos, padded seats, etc.–add a whole lot of weight.

      What also adds weight is how many passengers you want to carry at once. Two passengers won’t add much weight, but four or more would. All that extra frame material adds up.

      Building a traditional frame would take some welding skills. I have just enough welding skills to make some shelves, but anything structural (which my tutor defined as “anything where somebody’s life depends on the weld holding”) is not something I’m comfortable doing. That is to say, it’ll take more than a quick tutorial and a little practice.

      However, one interesting possibility is epoxy. Lotus did this for the Elise, and I once tracked down the epoxy manufacturer they use (I’d have to search around to find it again, though). The instructions for it didn’t seem to need anything particularly out of reach for a hobbyist (doesn’t need a big autoclave or anything like that). Lotus did reinforce certain sections with bolts/rivets. It will take some knowledge to design a frame around this, but it’s one time design work by an engineer and then everyone can copy it.

      One advantage Lotus had over a welded frame was thinner material. A weld itself is very strong, but it weakens the metal around it (meaning you usually get breaks around the weld, not on it). You have to use thicker metal to compensate for that. Since Lotus was using an epoxy, they could use thinner material for less weight, and it was stronger in the end.

      Since it’s also getting rid of a whole lot of weight around the frame, the range you get out of those batteries could be extreme. It could also be extremely quick with a modest motor.

      This is basically all to say that you can have any three: safe, creature comforts, enough space for passengers, range.

      • @boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        110 months ago

        For legal reasons it might be easier to take an existing car, throw out all the tech, and add your own. You won’t own the chassis design, but you can at least use open source software everywhere.

        Difference between getting a modification certified, vs a self build.

    • @markon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      410 months ago

      Yeah I want my autonomous electric town car to be fully open. We should be able to have sustainable cars if any cars at all. Cars you can’t easily repair or maintain are not sustainable.

    • @ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      I assume car manufacturers would try to stop this by saying people would just load up video games or netflix on their dashboards while they drive. Even though you could probably do that now already, if you really wanted to.

      • Laurel Raven
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        Hell, I could just bolt a laptop to the dash if I really wanted that

    • @NegativeInf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      Supported in the sense that “We will update your device and deliberately slow it, break it, or brick it because fuck you.”

    • @jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      710 months ago

      By communities, but not the manufacturer. Custom ROMs is the only way to keep it up to date for long enough for the hardware to become too old to be worth it.

      No custom ROM for cars anytime soon.

      • Dave.
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        There’s plenty of custom ROMs for cars from all major manufacturers, you just don’t know where to look.Google “ECU remap” or “dpf delete” for an idea. ECU remapping has been done by bold individuals ever since there were programmable ECUs, around 1985.

        Apart from engine/drive line tinkering, there are also plenty of third party software that can tinker with body computers for “lifestyle” adjustments.

        Is it easy and accessible? No. Because of environmental laws - and vendor lock in - you can’t generally and easily dick around with the control software in your car. But it does exist.

        • @jabjoe@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          210 months ago

          I know, but there us as quiet war going on between the chippers and manufacturers. EV is a new battle front and we the consumers are losing right now.

          Law makes need to join this century and get involved ensuring competition and longer product lives.

      • Jesus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        510 months ago

        Many now. Up until recently it was pretty common for manufacturers to leave you SOL after 2 major Android releases.

  • @AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    29
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’ve been screaming about this for years and no one listens. My old car will run longer than my new one because I can change the head unit in the old one

  • NutWrench
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2310 months ago

    When you car can connect to the Internet, it becomes a data-mining tool that tells everyone your business. Companies would LOVE to have all that juicy location data that only Google has right now (from your phones). Insurance companies would LOVE to know your driving habits to have any excuse at all to jack up your premiums.

  • @fury@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2210 months ago

    How is the 3G sunset not solvable by just swapping out a modem module for an LTE or 5G one and maybe installing some new modem firmware? A lot of cars are running a Linux kernel under the hood, so I’d think it’s pretty well swap and go

    • @boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1310 months ago

      Ah, if only car hardware was modular and standardized… And if you had access to your infotainment system beyond touching the pretty buttons…

      • @fury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        410 months ago

        Imagine something as outlandish as user serviceable infotainment systems. Like they used to have in the old days. I’m hanging on by a thread to my basic 2014 car which still has a double DIN slot I can put my own system into…some day

        • @boonhet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          210 months ago

          I’m lucky enough to never have owned a car without buttons - My newest car was a '19 Benz and they LUCKILY were pretty slow about hopping onto the touchscreen bandwagon

          However, in my comment I meant on-screen buttons anyway, as that seems to be the norm nowadays :(

          • @pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            210 months ago

            Hopefully that’ll change, iirc the EU discussed about requiring physical buttons for the highest safety rating a few months ago. Idk how that turned out but if it passed there’s hope

            I love it when politicians in a democracy are doing things for the people.

    • @jwt@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      410 months ago

      I think the question is not if it’s solvable, but ‘who pays for it?’ and ‘who can be held accountable if things go awry?’

      • @fury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        The company that didn’t see the 3G sunset coming, I would think. I know auto moves slow, but damn…4G was out for what, 4-5 years before development likely started on the 2019 model year?

        • @jwt@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 months ago

          I’d think so too, but (I assume) you and I don’t have a small army of lawyers and lobbyists on retainer.

    • @BilboBargains@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1910 months ago

      Vehicle control systems are overwhelmingly programmed in C, mostly from graphical design tools such as MATLAB Simulink via an automatic process. These are real time control systems which are quite different to an interrupt based operating system such as Linux. The many individual controllers must work in concert according to a strict architecture definition and timing schedule that defines the functionality of the vehicle. It’s not at all like a PC or phone, whose OS become irrelevant over time, with respect to their environment of other systems. The vehicle environment is the same environment that we inhabit i.e. the one with gravity, friction, charge and the other SI units. This is slowly changing with advent of self driving but, yeah.

      • @0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 months ago

        These are real time control systems which are quite different to an interrupt based operating system such as Linux.

        You do know you can operate the linux kernel in real time, right?

        • @SapientLasagna@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          310 months ago

          It’s not a hard real time OS though. Real Time Linux would be appropriate for some subsystems in a car, but not for things that are safety critical with hard timing constraints, e.g. ABS controllers.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        010 months ago

        This is correct. If using an OS, an RTOS like the Linux Foundation Zephyr OS is the right choice here.