Comment by jlokier

Comment by jlokier 4 hours ago

16 replies

> - You're basically at risk of your Jeep going limp (power loss, unable to safely make it to the shoulder) and being stranded on the highway, even as I write this.

This seems extraordinary.

I was going to ask: Are you really saying they kill the vehicle's power system, effictively the engine, while the vehicle is being driven on the highway?

But no need to ask, the article says yes, that's what is reported:

> Instead, the failure appears to occur while driving—a far more serious problem. For some, this happened close to home and at low speed, but others claim to have experienced a powertrain failure at highway speeds.

Wow.

pinkmuffinere 4 hours ago

Ya, that is shockingly scary. It makes me think we need some new standards about software updates to vehicles in general (or perhaps these already exist but were missed for some reason?). I can totally imagine that software used to be this ancillary selling point that didn't need such tight regulation, but as it becomes core infrastructure for the vehicle this is less of an IoT toy, and deserves stricter standards.

  • jacquesm 4 hours ago

    How about: you get to say whether you want to update and when and manufacturers are required to very explicitly list all of the changes in an update? That would seem to be an acceptable minimum.

    • pavel_lishin 2 hours ago

      I don't think that Jeep would have sent out a message saying that one of the changes would brick your machine.

      It seems that the ability to trivially roll back any update would be a better choice, at least for this. (But I'm sure there are downstream effects I haven't thought about if that were implemented.)

      • conductr 2 hours ago

        How do you roll back a fatal car accident caused by the faulty update?

        Giving user’s control over when the update runs allows them to be in a safe and secure setting when that update happens. Allowing them time, gives them and Jeep the ability to slow roll the update so they can halt it if initial feedback is negative.

        I say this as a Mac user who does not allow auto updates for MacOS. I wait a week or so until the chatter validates it as non-breaking. They pushed an OS update several years ago that broke a few things I rely on. So I don’t trust them now, but these things just happen on OS’s with third party software. I expect it. But, I also don’t want to be forced to deal with the headaches immediately. I’d rather let the third parties run updates and advise how to deal, before I have to dive into fixing things. With car firmware, there’s really no excuse for this except poor engineering / processes.

      • rurp an hour ago

        It's not perfect but seems reasonably easy to implement and would certainly help. If the user needs to approve each update and can see what the changes are most updates will either be skipped or delayed long enough that catastrophic bugs will only hit the small subset of cars that update immediately.

        I would bet most updates, especially from a company this bumbling, will be more along the lines of increasing telemetry or pointless UI changes than releasing actually useful features and bug fixes.

      • danielheath an hour ago

        You might not accept an update with a bunch of changes that didn’t sound relevant to you.

        I certainly wouldn’t accept one while I was still driving the car!

        • skywhopper 10 minutes ago

          The update didn’t happen while people were driving. Rather, the bug took time to occur, well after the update had been applied.

  • throw74845858 4 hours ago

    There is no need to invent new regulations. We already have criminal liability, endangerement from gross negligence, and manslaughter!

    I do not see reason, why CEOs of big companies should be exempt from this!

    If bus driver makes mistake, or someone drives drunk.... They get punished. This is the same thing!

    • dabockster 19 minutes ago

      > There is no need to invent new regulations.

      The current regulations are written for a time where cars didn't have rolling computers in them. And even then, the regulations don't account for Tesla-style linked systems. So I say we do need new regulations.

    • imglorp 2 hours ago

      Yes and we have the NHTSA (unless it's already been neutered by the chaos) who can accumulate statistics and issue recalls.

      • AlotOfReading 41 minutes ago

        NHTSA's power is simultaneously very broad and narrow. They're empowered to investigate potential safety issues after the fact, but this may not be a safety issue in the very pedantic sense often used. NHTSA can proactively set standards, but the standards they've set (FMVSS) largely ignore modern electronics. So on and so forth.

  • [removed] 4 hours ago
    [deleted]
worik 4 hours ago

>> - You're basically at risk of your Jeep going limp

This has happened to me twice with a Nissan Leaf. I paid money to get a read out from the computer system, and there were no timestamps on the screens of data.

Modern cars "computers on wheels" are dreadful.

Is it possible to disconnect the power from the radios used for "over the air" nonsense? Then at least they would be stable.

  • reaperducer 2 hours ago

    Is it possible to disconnect the power from the radios used for "over the air" nonsense? Then at least they would be stable.

    I've read online that for some cars, you have to dig deep inside to disconnect the cellular antenna.

    I'm a little more lucky. On my car, you can pop out the SIM card from a slot in the ceiling, behind the rear-view mirror.

    This assumes you haven't given your car access to your home WiFi. (Some people do this so they don't have to pay for a data plan for their car, and it kinda sorta "syncs" when you get home.)