Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | flounder3's commentslogin

WiFi. Flip it on for an update, then leave it off.

> do dealers have any way to update control modules besides OTA?

Yes.


I kinda assume the dealer does this as part of any service they do. Either that, or they update some other way. My software notices went away when I had my service done, even though I’ve opted out of everything (and verified again after).

WiFi is, err, still OTA, although it does answer the eSIM question. I assume the truly concerned/paranoid wouldn't want to connect to WiFi either, since presumably telemetry / tracking metadata could be uploaded at that time too.

Anyone concerned about preventing telemetry from being uploaded would probably also be concerned about taking it to the dealer for an update, though. Because how do you know the dealer won't just do an update by turning the car's e-SIM back on, then turning it off before giving the car back to you? Which would then allow the car to upload all the stored telemetry you're concerned about. (Note: generic "you" meaning "the person concerned about telemetry", not bri3d in particular). Or, as long as they've connected a device to the car that can upload data, how do you know that that device won't also download stored data, which the dealership can then upload over their own WiFi?

I believe the truly concerned/paranoid will not want to take their car to the dealership for updates at all. Which would, IMHO, be a mistake: having known security holes in your car's software is more likely to lead to a privacy invasion (via getting your car hacked at some point) than letting the dealership get their hands on it for a few hours.

(I should note that all of this is theoretical for me: I drive a car that's old enough it doesn't have any software).

EDIT to add this P.S.: Actually, I can think of one category of people who would be concerned enough to turn off the car's ability to connect to the Internet, but feel fine about taking it to a dealer for updates. That would be people who want to turn off the car's Internet connectivity not because of privacy concerns, but because they don't want anyone to be able to disable the car (either via hacking or via "legitimate" means, i.e. the manufacturer does it) while they're driving. Such a person would care a lot about the car's Internet access being completely off while they are driving, but not care about it being turned on while it is at the dealership.


I read an article recently where there was a satellite outage and all porsche cars in the area would not start. They have some satellite based anti-theft system. (wonder what happens if your garage is shielded)

Personally, I wouldn't want this intrusive system (or telemetry).


This is the exact mindset that has amused me for years with computers. People use an OS with which they have a seriously hostile relationship. Why would you continue to pay a lot of money for a product you consider to be your adversary?

can you leave it off? Tesla wifi can be turned OFF, but will flip to ON next time the car is used. same with bluetooth. deliberately promiscuous.

Muscle memory for folks who have been doing it since before -i was an option. I still instinctively type `sudo su -` because it worked consistently on older deployments. When you have to operate a fleet of varying ages and distributions, you tend to quickly learn [if only out of frustration] what works everywhere vs only on the newer stuff.

`sudo su - <user>` also seems easier for me to type than `sudo -i -u <user>`


How many hours have you spent with the latest Tesla FSD in congested neighborhoods or unprotected left turns at sunset? It may be "good," but it's not even remotely close to the current Waymo experience, especially when it comes to abnormal situations. I am continually blown away by how Waymo behaves (spent 3 hours in them this past week). I'm rooting for Tesla, but it is nowhere near Waymo as of today.


OP's 9to5mac article states:

  Also under the agreement, Google’s model will reportedly run on Apple’s own servers, which in practice means that no user data will be shared with Google. Instead, they won’t leave Apple’s Private Cloud Compute structure.
Bloomberg states:

  The model will run on Apple’s own Private Cloud Compute servers, ensuring that user data remains walled off from Google’s infrastructure.


You must have worked in a very odd and isolated department. I never heard that rhetoric, even once, throughout my tenure. Nor have any of my old colleagues who still work there and are quite well known internally (notorious patents, features / tentpole DRI, etc).


From your post history, you left Apple in 2018, so I doubt you have up to date knowledge.


Correct. You’re also assuming I have no friends…


I was there 2010-2015 and I corroborate. The ambitions PM types were always quite critical of Woz, because they were all in on the Koolaid and he is not.


TSMC building outside of Taiwan is a big deal these days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#Arizona https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#Washington https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#Germany

From the article:

  "about 30 percent of our 2-nanometer and more advanced capacity will be located in Arizona"
.. so it's interesting that they are moving forward with domestic 1.4nm given the geopolitical climate.


A recall means “PAY ATTENTION! Something may still be broken!”

The recall will mention how to get it fixed, regardless of a OTA update or service visit.

The lack of a mere download could mean the difference between life and death.


It’s the law. OTA updates are not instant nor are they 100% guaranteed, so consumers must be notified.


So just to be clear:

- they knew the assist was dangerously broken - while people drove around with this dangerous code running they worked on improving the code so they could say it is now "fixed" - released the update

I see how this is the most... efficient... way to handle the situation, from a monetary perspective. But this is not how I, or anyone I know, would handle life-critical code. Not to bring politics into yet another thread, but this is not a smart or human way to handle things.

First, you disable the damn road assist. It's an optional feature, FFS!


I think "power steering assist" here is another technical term that misleads people who aren't car nerds. It's not some kind of lane assist feature, it's the system that makes the steering wheel easy to turn at low speeds. Anyone who's used to driving cars built after 1950 or so would not consider it an optional feature.


Sounds efficient.


It's not meant to be efficient; it's meant to be thorough, and auditable, and if required, able to be litigated in court.


It's also used in warranty claims in the private market.


To notify consumers of safety issues using the existing rails that are used to notify consumers of safety issues?


The economy of thought that you brought to that comment could be seen as impressively efficient, depending on the outcome you want to optimize for given inputs.


Was about to say the same thing. It was already blazingly fast, with a typical album only taking seconds.


I’m a backer and can’t wait to receive the 8TB upgrade!

I had to buy an off the shelf M1 Studio due to a hardware failure, so I couldn’t wait for the lead time for one with more RAM and storage. It has been borderline unusable due to so many things requiring local storage — can’t even symlink to an external NVMe. (Many apps, but also Backblaze metadata and iMessage attachments)


You can’t symlink, but you can hardlink. I do that for iPhone backups.


Does APFS support hard links across volumes? I don’t think I’ve heard of any other file system doing that.


I am referring to “mount -bind” which may not be exactly a hardlink. I don’t think FS support is needed for bind mounts.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: