This is an amazingly different country than the one I grew up in.
10 thoughts on “Automakers To Gearheads”
There is a free market solution to this problem. Only buy cars from companies which permit modification.
Read your Hayek and come back here when you are finished . . .
The article quotes a rep for an auto maker that if they don’t get this law, they may “rethink or remove” electronics controls over critical functions in the car.
This is a problem?
It would be a problem…for them. Auto makers are under regulatory pressure to not only have low emissions but high gas mileage while also meeting crash survival requirements that drive up weight, while at the same time buyers want power. Many of those electronics systems make these conflicting requirements possible.
Not “stop repairing your own car”.
“Stop reprogramming the ECU”, which is something that I’ve never heard of being a “repair”.
(Oh, they have no real business demanding nobody touch the ECU, but if they want to stop that they don’t need the law to do it; they can just use a public-key encryption system to make sure nobody else can do anything to it.
I just want accurate headlines; ain’t none of this about not being able to “repair” your car.
It’s much more about “pay US for chipping the engine, not Joe Thirdparty”.
[As usual, the EFF’s comments make me want to oppose them; the EFF has amazing abilities in that regard, since my normal instincts and reflexes are generally aligned with their policy goals.
And the Autoblog author thinks “GM ignition switch!” is a counter-point? Well, there’s a reason I stick to TTAC rather than Autoblog or Jalopnik.])
I expect this debate to continue and intensify as self-driving cars become common.
When the time comes that governments no longer trust citizens to drive their own cars, due to potential human error, how likely is that that they will trust those same citizens to modify the software that drives their cars?
By that time they won’t trust people to decide for themselves where or when to travel.
Travel is already starting to be locked down. I expect soon you’ll have to file a travel plan and get a permit to go through some congested areas.
Govt. has always been an adversary of the people. Controlling the people is its whole purpose (privilege to itself being a given.)
Ownership doesn’t actually mean you own it, silly.
Did I just hear the dinner bell ring for liability lawyers? Not being able to repair your car without endangering yourself and others on the roads? I bet you could swing that as callous disregard to a sympathetic jury.
There is a free market solution to this problem. Only buy cars from companies which permit modification.
Read your Hayek and come back here when you are finished . . .
The article quotes a rep for an auto maker that if they don’t get this law, they may “rethink or remove” electronics controls over critical functions in the car.
This is a problem?
It would be a problem…for them. Auto makers are under regulatory pressure to not only have low emissions but high gas mileage while also meeting crash survival requirements that drive up weight, while at the same time buyers want power. Many of those electronics systems make these conflicting requirements possible.
Not “stop repairing your own car”.
“Stop reprogramming the ECU”, which is something that I’ve never heard of being a “repair”.
(Oh, they have no real business demanding nobody touch the ECU, but if they want to stop that they don’t need the law to do it; they can just use a public-key encryption system to make sure nobody else can do anything to it.
I just want accurate headlines; ain’t none of this about not being able to “repair” your car.
It’s much more about “pay US for chipping the engine, not Joe Thirdparty”.
[As usual, the EFF’s comments make me want to oppose them; the EFF has amazing abilities in that regard, since my normal instincts and reflexes are generally aligned with their policy goals.
And the Autoblog author thinks “GM ignition switch!” is a counter-point? Well, there’s a reason I stick to TTAC rather than Autoblog or Jalopnik.])
I expect this debate to continue and intensify as self-driving cars become common.
When the time comes that governments no longer trust citizens to drive their own cars, due to potential human error, how likely is that that they will trust those same citizens to modify the software that drives their cars?
By that time they won’t trust people to decide for themselves where or when to travel.
Travel is already starting to be locked down. I expect soon you’ll have to file a travel plan and get a permit to go through some congested areas.
Govt. has always been an adversary of the people. Controlling the people is its whole purpose (privilege to itself being a given.)
Ownership doesn’t actually mean you own it, silly.
Did I just hear the dinner bell ring for liability lawyers? Not being able to repair your car without endangering yourself and others on the roads? I bet you could swing that as callous disregard to a sympathetic jury.
I think I’ll keep driving my old chipless Jeep.