-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Taking punitive actions against a customer is never a good idea, especially if you are trying to be unlike the "other" companies are trying to be a leader, and trying to recruit the best Silicon Valley talent.
Ulmo
Active Member
It's his car.
Let's say I buy an apple from a store. Then I start to eat it, in public view, where people can see the color of the apple inside as the partially bitten apple has a bite out of it. While eating it, the shop owner comes over and takes a slice out of my apple and inserts another piece of apple in its place, one with a worm hole no less.
The next day, the shop owner (perhaps a different shop owner) is selling another apple, and someone comes by to buy it. They go and buy it, and as they are leaving the store, they noticed that someone else had just bought another apple that looked better and they asked how much, and they said it was a similar price to the one he just bought. Now, he's mad, and goes back to the store, and the shop owner says a deal is a deal, you bought what you own. That would solve it, except this person decides to go to the King, and the King decrees that the shop owner must be investigated, and this causes a tax levied against the shop owner, and the shop owner must now close on Sundays and go to church, and then he can't afford for his children to go to college, potentially ending his genealogical line. Luckily, five years later, he starts selling better apples, and makes even more money, and is on the road to being able to send his children to college again, even if they were a little malnourished and subsequently got a bit fat due to fear of hunger. The shop owner hears of a shipment of very good apples coming. Someone else comes in to buy an apple, and it is truly a good apple, but the shop owner knows more apples are coming later in the week that are much much better. Someone down at the docks asks if any ships are coming in because he has some dock repairs to do. The shop owner replies he has a very important shipment of apples coming in, and what could he do to get the ship unloaded. The dock owner gracefully arranges for the ship to still be able to come in and dock, and then tells his wife about the apples, and she tells her mother who tells her other daughter who then, coincidentally, in the shop of the shop owner, runs into her boyfriend, a ward of the King, that they just learned of a new shipment coming in, and what it contains, will you believe it, and the shop owner runs over quickly and shouts "STOP!!!!!!!!!!!", takes the lady by the hand to the back room, and explains in dark terms that it is very important to him that his family goes to college. She understands, but feels violated to not be able to tell her boyfriend. In my fairy tale story, I'd like to believe that she assists the shop owner by allowing the apples to make their grand debut without hurting current apple sales, but it is a fiction entirely made up by me, and real life is different when it affects us personally. Some would consider it weak of the shop owner not to stop the woman from talking and divest their investments in the shop. Others would consider it a bad precedent to use force against the woman, even if in implication, and would rather not invest in the shop if it did do what the shop did, to make a more even playing field. Yet others would point out that the real problem that everyone was afraid of was the King, not any of these other things.
The details are in the details, so I can't make any personal determination on this particular issue, but I just wanted to say that there's ample on both sides to make both peace and hay with, and I suspect that the outcome will be beneficial to everyone since the parties are pretty smart. At least I hope so.
Last edited:
rxlawdude
Active Member
Not sure it's intentional, but my wings have been clipped on forums.teslamotors.com. Attempting to log in on the main forum page just returns to that page as if nothing was entered for user ID and password. I have an "alternate" account that gets me in and able to post, but not to see or create private threads.
I've been pretty vocal about the ESA and some recent service center issues. Is this intentional on the part of Tesla? Dunno. Multiple browsers and devices, same result.
Maybe. But I kind of have been meaning to crack the updater anyway. Good a time as any.
Oh, and on that note. Success.
Code:
Mar 5 13:27:14 cid QtCar[274]: [SoftwareUpdateManager] INFO Found update sentinal file staged--XXXXXX
Mar 5 13:27:14 cid QtCar[274]: [SoftwareUpdateManager] INFO GUI_softwareUpdateVersion Set to 2.13.77-U
Mar 5 13:27:14 cid QtCar[274]: [SoftwareUpdateManager] INFO GUI_softwareUpdateProgram Set to General
Mar 5 13:27:14 cid QtCar[274]: [SoftwareUpdateManager] INFO GUI_softwareUpdateDuration Set to 100
Mar 5 13:27:14 cid QtCar[274]: [SoftwareUpdateManager] INFO checkForIndicator complete, [B]update 2.13.77-U is available: true[/B]A company being vindictive and punitive because a customer did something they didn't like is not a good idea. Especially since this was sloppy programming on their part... This is 2016, not 1950.
Apple OS has also had leak about new products in the code, so it isn't as if this is unique method of discovery.
Wait a minute!
Didn't Musk say something about Apple hiring people they fired? Maybe he had it backwards!
This is an impressive response. Tesla made a slip up here. And kudos to Jason for not releasing the info earlier, or more info than he did. There really is a high risk of Osborning the company. Jason did them a favor, both exposing the issue and in not doing more damage. And I also believe the Jason did not expect that his little tweet would be decrypted.
Methinks the feces are impacting the impeller blades within Tesla right now. Hopefully they will find a way to eliminate the possibility of this happening again in the future.
If I understood wk057 correctly, his intention was not actually to publish any information, but only to commit to a certain message, i.e. to be able to later prove that he had discovered something of interest.
But one reason cryptography is difficult is that it is hard to tell when you have made a mistake. So if I had published a hash of a message like wk057 did, then by now I would surely wish that I had added some salt.
Last edited:
Meh.
There is something wrong at Tesla if an "overzealous staffer" could do what was alleged without approval very high up.
Same as that whole ESA issue where stuff was posted and they later said it was a mistake.
Yup, definitely should have salted it. Didn't think about it at 3AM. Probably should have used one of Tesla's salts so that they could try and crack it. Maybe next time.
- - - Updated - - -
It's a full list of changes I noticed 2.12.126 -> 2.13.77. Includes the P100D.
Yup, definitely should have salted it. Didn't think about it at 3AM. Probably should have used one of Tesla's salts so that they could try and crack it. Maybe next time.
- - - Updated - - -
It's a full list of changes I noticed 2.12.126 -> 2.13.77. Includes the P100D.
well that will never be brute forced then. Ha. Oh well
Drumheller
Active Member
Yup, definitely should have salted it. Didn't think about it at 3AM. Probably should have used one of Tesla's salts so that they could try and crack it. Maybe next time.
- - - Updated - - -
It's a full list of changes I noticed 2.12.126 -> 2.13.77. Includes the P100D.
or just not posted someone else's secrets on the internet. you'd totally be cool with someone compromising your identity and posting sensitive information online so long as it is hashed, right?
Not really. It implies that people in the company have some authority to make decisions (even dumb ones) without invoking a huge bureaucratic approval process. That's vital at a a fast reacting and innovative firm.
I suppose that there's a possibility that this decision was made higher up and then it was reconsidered after a bit of sober thought. But in any event it doesn't matter. EM has tossed out an olive branch. And, really, if Tesla was hanging stuff like this out there, it was only a matter of time before this happened.
And what do you suggest they do to make it impossible for this to happen? Companies have to trust their employees to some extent, like it or not.
I'd guess that some first or second line manager made a bad call and had someone initiate the downgrade. He/she is probably at very great risk of losing their job right now, if they haven't already. If more than one person was involved maybe several heads are on the chopping block.
The real telling part is Musk's response to this. If wk gives it a day or two, I expect he'll find all the updates are available again, and he may even get some sort of apology from Tesla (though Musk's tweet certainly qualifies as that, IMHO).
Drumheller
Active Member
Lesson learned for Tesla: don't include information you aren't ready for release in the firmware. You could have politely pointed that out to them instead of releasing it publicly.
It looks as if Tesla may have attempted to delete that version of firmware from your car as a way of protecting other information from being released as they no longer trust you with that information. However, you're painting it on the internet as a punitive action against you.
Every human being can relate to the feeling of having information before other people and being tempted to announce it early for the satisfaction. However, refusing to own up to your mistake is why some people are getting negative viewpoints in this thread.
Last edited:
Well, once Tesla decided to distribute their secrets to buyers of their products it really stopped being their secrets.
A positive outcome is likely that Tesla will review their procedures regarding firmware versioning and distribution - and hopefully also what kind of staff is allowed to directly interfere with products already sold.
That is not my point.
It is either that a low level person had the ability to screw with a customer or it was approved by someone high up who has the authority to screw with a customer.
It is nothing about bureaucratic process, since it could have been that there is no process, or it was a single executive approving it with a one step process.
Erring on the side of screwing a customer, or making it it easy to screw a customer, is a strange decision.
- - - Updated - - -
I would start with having a senior exec sign off on a decision to screw a specific customer. I would err on the side of customer satisfaction.
A day or two? How long does it actually take?
No, the tweet is neither an apology to the user or a statement that Tesla did anything wrong. He only personally separated himself from what happened and said hacking is cool, or whatever.
Usually an apology from a professional is "we are sorry that we did ..., we apologize for any inconvenience"
I am sure that when they get his contact info, they will do that.
Similar threads
