Tesla forced an update of my P85D to 2019.16.2

[HankLloydRight]

. If you don't like that or don't want that, then disconnect from those services. You still have a perfectly functioning car that you still own

Not exactly. According to Tesla's own privacy policy, here's what happens if I decide to "opt out" of data collection:

If you no longer wish us to collect telematics log data or any other data from your Tesla vehicle, please contact us as indicated in the “How to Contact Us” section below. Please note that if you opt out from the collection of telematics log data or any other data from your Tesla vehicle (with the exception of the Data Sharing setting detailed above), we will not be able to notify you of issues applicable to your vehicle in real time. This may result in your vehicle suffering from reduced functionality, serious damage, or inoperability, and it may also disable many features of your vehicle including periodic software and firmware updates, remote services, and interactivity with mobile applications and in-car features such as location search, Internet radio, voice commands, and web browser functionality.

"reduced functionality, serious damage, or inoperability" surely doesn't sound like a "perfectly functioning car". But you're right, at least I still own it.

I'm done with this argument. My position is clear. Choose to agree or not, I really don't care. I've got better things to do with my life then argue with you about this.

 

[sublimejackman]

Not exactly. According to Tesla's own privacy policy, here's what happens if I decide to "opt out" of data collection:



"reduced functionality, serious damage, or inoperability" surely doesn't sound like a "perfectly functioning car". But you're right, at least I still own it.

Yes. Yes you would. I mean if you disconnected from Tesla network and you couldn't charge and/or drive the car; then you would probably have a pretty good legal case. I think that isn't case since Rich Rebuilds and that Tesla drag racing dude have done it and those cars still drive. I think inoperability refers to the features listed.

Again, I get your position. I agree with some of the interface issues you brought up. I would be pissed if my phone was just updated without me explicitly authorizing it. But I think in this case, if I was sitting at Tesla and had to make a choice, I would have done the same thing.

 

[MXWing]

Who is being a fanboy? I repeatedly complain about bunch of annoyances I have with Tesla's software. I'm just being the adult thinking about running a multi-billion startup that makes 2 ton, 80mph rolling projectiles. This isn't hacking your iphone or Playstation. 90% of Tesla owners don't even know the difference between V8 and V9. If you want to be a superuser or want different software or don't want to use a service that puts 500,000 vehicles safety ahead of the font type you don't like; then disconnect. Warning owners about the update to 2019.16 with notes that include "some autopilot features will be limited in the EU" would mean that many of those owners would have opted out or disconnected from wifi to prevent it. In the EU TESLA WOULD HAVE STILL BEEN LIABLE FOR THOSE VEHICLES. This is not mention the battery fire issues they fixed. I'm not a "fanboy" or an "authoritarian" as I've been categorized as several times. I'm an adult and realize that the whole existence of the brand and literally people's lives are on the line. Thinking past my knee jerk reaction of "no fair, you should have told me."

FFS, I thought I was the only adult in the room and it was getting frustrating. I'm glad I'm not and my sanity is actually intact. Thanks for reaffirming that.

Argument went full retard (the verb, not the noun) when "fan boy" was thrown out. No one has time to play "fan boy" games when we are discussing matters of life and death.

Tesla needs to end the madness and go Oprah on the owners. Every brand new car needs a signed document that says they can and will update your car as they see fit. Patch is rated E. E FOR EVERYONE.

People are fools if they think they even own their own children. They don't. You can't be in the public areas that are gated like schools if you don't vaccinate.

As a TSLA share holder I would rather NOT sell a car to someone who refuses updates.

They can go somewhere else. I hope they do.

 

[wk057]

This is not mention the battery fire issues they fixed.

False. You must have missed this post: Tesla forced an update of my P85D to 2019.16.2

I'm not sure they've even publicly claimed to do so, either... if they did, it's PR nonsense. If they haven't, it's incorrect fanboy assumptions being spread as fact.


To my knowledge, the only actual safety issue Tesla has ever fixed OTA was the early Model 3 braking issue... in which case, yeah you probably should take that update. Other than that, the rest of the claims of being a hazard in some way by not taking updates is just hand waving by people who have no idea what they're talking about. (Edit: Sorry, somehow didnt finish that last sentence before hitting post.)

Edit: Yes, there are "security" updates... but um, all of these to-date have been to keep people out of the vehicle's software, and all of them required some physical access in the first place to achieve anyway. Basically the "security" updates are Tesla tightening their grip on your car.

Nothing else they've done in updates could be considered an actual safety issue. Definitely a lot of cover-their-ass BS in the updates, though, which make the car less functional... and I'm definitely not cool with that.

Edit: I don't consider autopilot improvements to be solving a safety issue, either, since there are similar technologies out there that do not get OTA updates that function just fine. The addition of nags and other crap also is not an improvement and does not improve safety in the slightest, as proven by the fact that we still have crashes/deaths/etc to "blame" on autopilot even with them. More CYA BS they've forced on us to protect their image, not to protect customers or improve the vehicle.

If you want something to be true about Tesla, despite facts, laws, and other information contradicting what you're wanting or claiming... and you still continue to defend that position, that is fanboyism. Is there another word for it? Alternative facts? Just because you want Tesla to be allowed to do whatever they want to other people's vehicles doesn't make it acceptable, permissible, or legal.

 

[wk057]

Every brand new car needs a signed document that says they can and will update your car as they see fit. Patch is rated E. E FOR EVERYONE.

This contract does not exist, and likely can not exist under existing consumer protection laws.

 

[MXWing]

(If a software development house can't manage multiple stable branches, well, that's kind of scary because that's pretty standard stuff in the industry.)

As @sublimejackman pointed out in another post. We are dealing with 2 ton vehicles going at 80MPH and sometimes with the driver on the phone and an orange attached to the wheel defeat the nag.

I bet there is a high correlation between people who attach oranges to their wheel and those who refuse to update their car, vaccinate their children, etc.

When DYNDNS pushes some change that brings down 25% of the global internet for 2 hours, there is a good chance no one died.

All it takes is one unfixed bug in the most random of corner cases for someone to die and for Tesla to be in the headlines.

Everything caries opportunity cost. When you are negative cash, you don't divert engineers to work on v8. You just don't.

All hands on deck for v9.

When it's end of quarter push, all those v9 engineers are delivering vehicles.

This contract does not exist, and likely can not exist under existing consumer protection laws.

Tesla needs to find a work around for this. Somehow separate the vehicle from the software.

Make it a SAAS platform. If Microsoft decides to rearrange my icons in Office 365, there isn't a thing I can do about it other than write angry things in a comment box.

No one is forcing you or anyone to buy a Tesla. A fan boy would convince you to buy a Tesla no matter what.

Even as a shareholder I recommend against it if you are so negatively inclined to deal with the nature of a software product with 4 wheels.

 

[P85_DA]

sometimes with the driver on the phone and an orange attached to the wheel defeat the nag.

 

[swegman]

I think people are talking past each other. The OP is NOT saying he refuses to accept an update. He specifically stated he understands the need for Tesla to force an update at times. All he is asking for is for Tesla to notify him ahead of time before Tesla initiates a forced (required) update. That’s a reasonable request.

I think this is where the disconnect is. We do own our cars. We do not own the service that Tesla is providing. Like the LTE and the my tesla api and the phone app.

Actually, I respectfully submit you are incorrect. Tesla does not own the LTE. I own the LTE receiver in the car. I paid the $500 cost to remove the 3G receiver that came with the car and have an LTE receiver installed in the car. This is akin to someone going to Verizon, ATT, et al (or a corner independent cellphone dealer) and purchase a cellphone. Further, to be technical, the LTE system (network) does not belong to Tesla, but rather belongs to AT&T (cell service provider to Tesla). By your logic, Verizon, ATT et al could update the software on the phone you and I purchase merely because the phone is connected to the network. They can’t. Similarly, while the Tesla mobile app may belong to Tesla per their license terms, it is not necessary to use Tesla’s app to “enjoy” your car. Many owners, like me, use a third party mobile app to access our cars.

In any event, I think this thread has reached its conclusion. Install updates if required for security concerns, safety concerns, or whatever reason. Just tell the car owner that a required update will be forced onto the car. The car owner shouldn’t be surprised. That is the gist of what the OP is saying. Even Microsoft notifies you beforehand that an update will be installed and gives you the option to install the update immediately or to schedule the installation of the update. At least they do on my Win 10 computers.

 

[wk057]

I bet there is a high correlation between people who attach oranges to their wheel and those who refuse to update their car, vaccinate their children, etc.

As ridiculous as that sounds, would love to see actual data on that. Citation needed? I suspect you're actually way off, as this is totally unrelated to anything being discussed here. More hand waving. (IMO: The people who refuse to vaccinate their children are idiots influenced by other idiots and generally have no critical thinking skills whatsoever to separate out FUD from fact.) I don't see how this even remotely relates to improving the user experience of a driver assist feature.

For the record, I have electronic nag defeats on every one of my Tesla vehicles, and have well over 100,000 miles of nag free AP driving under my belt personally, with even more between my vehicles and other drivers. The "orange" (or in my case, electronic defeat device) doesn't lower safety at all, because the unneeded nags never improved safety in the first place. The only nags that were improving the usefulness of the system were the ones originally in v7.0, which appeared only when actually needed (when the car was about to be unsure of the path). The timed nags are completely pointless and do nothing whatsoever to improve safety. It's "safety theater" on Tesla's part.

Tesla needs to find a work around for this. Somehow separate the vehicle from the software. Make it a SAAS platform.

I think we're a long ways off of this being possible with titled assets such as vehicles... and a good thing too.

 

[eladts]

They'll point to the fact that this was a mandatory public safety update, game over. The fact that they don't have safety updates for older versions of the software is just a crappy product feature which you may not like (I don't) but not a defect.

Remember Dieselgate? People had to to come for service to get an update that made their engine less powerful and increased their fuel consumption. Supporting V8.0 with safety patches just doesn't make economical sense for Tesla. This will require a lot of resources only to please a handful of people. Would you be willing to pay thousands of dollars to get V8.1 updates?

 

[sublimejackman]

I think people are talking past each other. The OP is NOT saying he refuses to accept an update. He specifically stated he understands the need for Tesla to force an update at times. All he is asking for is for Tesla to notify him ahead of time before Tesla initiates a forced (required) update. That’s a reasonable request.




Actually, I respectfully submit you are incorrect. Tesla does not own the LTE. I own the LTE receiver in the car. I paid the $500 cost to remove the 3G receiver that came with the car and have an LTE receiver installed in the car. This is akin to someone going to Verizon, ATT, et al (or a corner independent cellphone dealer) and purchase a cellphone. Further, to be technical, the LTE system (network) does not belong to Tesla, but rather belongs to AT&T (cell service provider to Tesla). By your logic, Verizon, ATT et al could update the software on the phone you and I purchase merely because the phone is connected to the network. They can’t. Similarly, while the Tesla mobile app may belong to Tesla per their license terms, it is not necessary to use Tesla’s app to “enjoy” your car. Many owners, like me, use a third party mobile app to access our cars.

In any event, I think this thread has reached its conclusion. Install updates if required for security concerns, safety concerns, or whatever reason. Just tell the car owner that a required update will be forced onto the car. The car owner shouldn’t be surprised. That is the gist of what the OP is saying. Even Microsoft notifies you beforehand that an update will be installed and gives you the option to install the update immediately or to schedule the installation of the update. At least they do on my Win 10 computers.

Yes. ATT and Verzion can install updates on your phone without notifying and they do it all the time. Not only that, they are constantly collecting a large amount of data off your phone. Same with Roku and Samsung TVs .

 

[wk057]

We really need to stop with the misinformation here and just accept that there are no actual safety improvements between v8 and v9 for the Model S/X, and nothing that could even remotely be classified as a safety improvement (because I know people will erroneously argue the AP side of this) has been done between v8 and v9 for non-AP2 S/X.

There is no "we forced this update for safety reasons" because there were no safety related changes/improvements to @HankLloydRight's vehicle.

 

[AWDtsla]

As @sublimejackman pointed out in another post. We are dealing with 2 ton vehicles going at 80MPH and sometimes with the driver on the phone and an orange attached to the wheel defeat the nag.

I bet there is a high correlation between people who attach oranges to their wheel and those who refuse to update their car, vaccinate their children, etc.

When DYNDNS pushes some change that brings down 25% of the global internet for 2 hours, there is a good chance no one died.

All it takes is one unfixed bug in the most random of corner cases for someone to die and for Tesla to be in the headlines.

Everything caries opportunity cost. When you are negative cash, you don't divert engineers to work on v8. You just don't.

All hands on deck for v9.

When it's end of quarter push, all those v9 engineers are delivering vehicles.



Tesla needs to find a work around for this. Somehow separate the vehicle from the software.

Make it a SAAS platform. If Microsoft decides to rearrange my icons in Office 365, there isn't a thing I can do about it other than write angry things in a comment box.

No one is forcing you or anyone to buy a Tesla. A fan boy would convince you to buy a Tesla no matter what.

Even as a shareholder I recommend against it if you are so negatively inclined to deal with the nature of a software product with 4 wheels.

S/N ratio: 0

 

[sublimejackman]

False. You must have missed this post: Tesla forced an update of my P85D to 2019.16.2

I'm not sure they've even publicly claimed to do so, either... if they did, it's PR nonsense. If they haven't, it's incorrect fanboy assumptions being spread as fact.


To my knowledge, the only actual safety issue Tesla has ever fixed OTA was the early Model 3 braking issue... in which case, yeah you probably should take that update. Other than that, the rest of the claims of being a hazard in some way by not taking updates is just hand waving by people who have no idea what they're talking about. (Edit: Sorry, somehow didnt finish that last sentence before hitting post.)

Edit: Yes, there are "security" updates... but um, all of these to-date have been to keep people out of the vehicle's software, and all of them required some physical access in the first place to achieve anyway. Basically the "security" updates are Tesla tightening their grip on your car.

Nothing else they've done in updates could be considered an actual safety issue. Definitely a lot of cover-their-ass BS in the updates, though, which make the car less functional... and I'm definitely not cool with that.

Edit: I don't consider autopilot improvements to be solving a safety issue, either, since there are similar technologies out there that do not get OTA updates that function just fine. The addition of nags and other crap also is not an improvement and does not improve safety in the slightest, as proven by the fact that we still have crashes/deaths/etc to "blame" on autopilot even with them. More CYA BS they've forced on us to protect their image, not to protect customers or improve the vehicle.

If you want something to be true about Tesla, despite facts, laws, and other information contradicting what you're wanting or claiming... and you still continue to defend that position, that is fanboyism. Is there another word for it? Alternative facts? Just because you want Tesla to be allowed to do whatever they want to other people's vehicles doesn't make it acceptable, permissible, or legal.

Please go back and read why they did this. Check out the part about the EU. I've said it like 10 ways. Unfortunately we in the US are now subject to a bunch side effects from recent EU regulations. One is that EU law differs greatly from traditional US common law. I don't want to type it all out for the fifth time but Tesla pretty much had no choice but to release 2019.16 without any upfront release notes. Please go back and read that.

 

[wk057]

Please go back and read why they did this. Check out the part about the EU. I've said it like 10 ways. Unfortunately we in the US are now subject to a bunch side effects from recent EU regulations. One is that EU law differs greatly from traditional US common law. I don't want to type it all out for the fifth time but Tesla pretty much had no choice but to release 2019.16 without any upfront release notes. Please go back and read that.

Nah, that's absolutely ridiculous.

First, Tesla clearly and easily already partitions updates for various regions. Their entire internal update system is designed around the ability to get the correct updates to different vehicles based on whatever variables they decide, and they use this frequently. That alone makes this claim nonsense.

Next, I wonder how other platforms are going to handle this new regulation who don't have OTA updates? I haven't heard about any recalls of other brands with lane keeping features. Pretty sure there is no provision that required existing vehicles to be retrofitted to comply with whatever the EU regulation is.

Finally, and again for the umpteenth time, @HankLloydRight's car has nothing to do with the changes in the EU, and no changes to AP1 were made. No improvements, safety or otherwise, were done to his vehicle with a forced update.

Edit: For AP1 and prior owners, I'd go as far as to say every update since early versions of v7.0 has been pretty consistently making the user experience worse with every update.

 

[eladts]

I think it's a defect when the newer software takes away functionality that was in the older version of the software. For instance, I use V8 with camera on top and map on the bottom, as I have for all previous versions for over six years. V9 doesn't support that configuration, and that's a problem.

You are free to sue Tesla over this loss of functionality, but don't expect a huge payout if you win. Sony took the possibility to run Linux on the PS3 with a mandatory software update and was sued, as this feature was advertised back then. Each plaintiff in the class-action got $65, if they manage to keep their old PS3 for eight years.

Ever buy an original PS3? Sony may owe you $65

 

[sublimejackman]

Nah, that's absolutely ridiculous.

First, Tesla clearly and easily already partitions updates for various regions. Their entire internal update system is designed around the ability to get the correct updates to different vehicles based on whatever variables they decide, and they use this frequently. That alone makes this claim nonsense.

Next, I wonder how other platforms are going to handle this new regulation who don't have OTA updates? I haven't heard about any recalls of other brands with lane keeping features. Pretty sure there is no provision that required existing vehicles to be retrofitted to comply with whatever the EU regulation is.

Finally, and again for the umpteenth time, @HankLloydRight's has nothing to do with the changes in the EU, and no changes to AP1 were made.

What?! They do not region lock the cars. You can buy a Tesla in Russia and drive it in China. There is nothing stopping that. Also the EU regulations are in regard to automatic steering deflection range and timing of automatic lane changes. Impacting AP1 cars. Also, summon has to be done via bluetooth in the EU. If there happened to be a crash with a Tesla, using AutoPilot in say Germany and it was found that the steering wheel turned too far; Tesla is liable. REGARDLESS OF IF THE USER BLOCKED THE UPDATE. This is one reason why if I was in Tesla's shoes, I would have made the same choice.

 

[sublimejackman]

What?! They do not region lock the cars. You can buy a Tesla in Russia and drive it in China. There is nothing stopping that. Also the EU regulations are in regard to automatic steering deflection range and timing of automatic lane changes. Impacting AP1 cars. Also, summon has to be done via bluetooth in the EU. If there happened to be a crash with a Tesla, using AutoPilot in say Germany and it was found that the steering wheel turned too far; Tesla is liable. REGARDLESS OF IF THE USER BLOCKED THE UPDATE. This is one reason why if I was in Tesla's shoes, I would have made the same choice.

I actually would have taken it a step further, disabling AutoPilot from being used on EU roads. These regulations are at best dumb and really unsafe. Watch some youtube videos of people trying to use AP in EU on 2019.16, it's scary.

 

[wk057]

Sorry, gotta pick this one apart!

What?! They do not region lock the cars. You can buy a Tesla in Russia and drive it in China. There is nothing stopping that.

No they don't stop EU cars from moving around that landmass, but as soon as you're in a new region, the system sees it, and you'll start getting updates for that region. If you're on a version that has new restrictions for a region, those restrictions go into effect immediately. Just like if you drive a US car to Canada, summon used to stop working when you crossed the border because your "use_region" was no longer "US". (And vice-versa, Canadians could summon while in the US)

Also, US and EU cars are not the same and are essentially region locked. You can't operate one in another region legally, and Tesla's warranty or MVPA even notes this somewhere (can't recall exactly where at the moment, but clearly recall this).

Also the EU regulations are in regard to automatic steering deflection range and timing of automatic lane changes. Impacting AP1 cars.

There have been no changes to AP1... so...

Also, summon has to be done via bluetooth in the EU.

No idea how or if they'll implement this on AP1 cars. There is no app data link via bluetooth to non-Model 3's.

If there happened to be a crash with a Tesla, using AutoPilot in say Germany and it was found that the steering wheel turned too far; Tesla is liable. REGARDLESS OF IF THE USER BLOCKED THE UPDATE.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'd venture to guess this is not actually the case. I scanned through the new regulation and didn't see anywhere that stated it had to be implemented on existing vehicles. Tesla went above and beyond by doing so, IMO, but still had no right to force the update on vehicles already "in the wild", per se.

 

[Droschke]

I ask that an update not “break” critical elements of the car. To me and many others, that means selecting a foreground color/font that is easily readable against a selected background color. Tesla had this correct with versions 6 and 7, but “broke” it starting with version 8. Based on your comments, it sounds like you have no problems reading the screens. At some point your eyesight will change and you will know the difficulties the aging process brings with respect to reading the screens. As much as I like the car and could never go back to an ICE vehicle (I am also a stockholder) I refuse to buy a new one because the only thing I can clearly read on the two screens now with a quick (eg, fraction of a second) glance is the digital representation of the speed of travel. I can no longer read the navigation directions, the distance and time to a destination, etc without spending an inordinate amount of time staring at the screens, and that’s a serious safety issue. The general population in the US, Japan and other countries is getting older and this issue will only get worse over time, especially when the UI is being designed by “youngsters” that have no comprehension of the specific needs of the aging population. I’m not the only person with this specific complaint.

Thank you! Perfectly stated.