Why Is Tesla Forcing Software Updates If No Safety Issue Is Involved?

[TMC Staff]

There was a theory that it was required by some countries, but that is not the case. Part of the fascination most people have with Tesla vehicles is the fact that they behave like computers on wheels. All it requires for some improvements is an over-the-air update. There are famous cases of that, but there...
[WPURI="https://teslamotorsclub.com/blog/2020/02/26/why-tesla-forcing-updates-safety-issue/"]READ FULL ARTICLE[/WPURI]

 

[M3BlueGeorgia]

Having worked with OTA software updates on (unrelated) consumer products, I'd say it makes sense to restrict the universe of versions getting updates, because you have to QA every future update against every deployed version which can be updated, which means maintaining those versions and testing them. It can get crazy when you have lots of versions deployed on different hardware configurations.

Consequently it makes great sense to apply some limits as to how many older software versions can get OTA updates. If people keep rejecting the latest update, why should the company (whether Tesla or some other company) go through the QA hell to verify each and every old version can be successfully OTA'ed to the latest version?

 

[Brando]

IF people don't like Tesla OTA updates, for god's sake, sell that Tesla and go buy what you want. IF Tesla software updates are NOT what you want - sell it. Go buy what you do want. Just stop winning.

You have dozens of other cars to choose from.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

I have a computer science background and a 25 year IT career that I have retired from. I understand all of the points of view with regard to this topic. However, the thing that is different between a Tesla and an ordinary computer (desktop, laptop, tablet, smart phone) is that the vehicle Tesla sells to somebody needs to keep them safe at speeds and situations that can kill.

I will just come right out and state my retired professional opinion. I think any Tesla owner that chooses to defy Tesla's integrated computing transportation judgement in matters of software updates is not thinking about the matter correctly. I really have trouble imagining someone who actively chooses to disregard Tesla updates (for whatever reason) during an unfolding accident crisis thinking to themself that they probably should have not disregarded the skipped Tesla software updates. And after managing to live through an accident, imagining what civil or criminal consequences they potentially share with regard to personal responsibility. I shudder at the ramifications in the event of a life ending accident for these Tesla owners who choose not to update their software. I fervently hope I have expressed my position well enough that all eyes reading this opinion can manage to change their choice about updating Tesla software if necessary.

 

[clydeiii]

Define "safety." Any update could theoretically be about safety, so it's a meaningless metric. Any update that strengthens the security between the car and Tesla's servers is one that is directly related to safety, in theory, because if you stay with the only mechanism, it's possible a hacker could take over your car and run you into a wall.

 

[3mp_kwh]

Tesla has no right to make its cars worse, nerf batteries, or otherwise make its interface less, and less, ergonomic.

I don't appreciate the software angle, because all it suggests is Tesla can't get the car right the first time. Yes, a car, not software. The unsupported features, if you don't accept a downgrade, make plain an end game for the owner who dared be in it, for the long haul.

There is no "Keep you car as is, and lose all VPN" feature offered. They shouldn't even stoop that low, but they go lower. These cars don't need a real-time link to Tesla, and the company knows it. Pathetic, that "gotta get root" could be on so many owners minds.

Preserving its own flexibility to take other people's property for ransom is an ethic many software people on TMC seem to support. This isn't about VPN, or we would just shut up and let things be fixed on the back end. They're being broken.

 

[clydeiii]

Define "worse." What is "worse" to some is "more safe" to others.

 

[SpaceCash]

Much ado about nothing.

 

[M3BlueGeorgia]

Tesla has no right to make its cars worse, nerf batteries, or otherwise make its interface less, and less, ergonomic.

I don't appreciate the software angle, because all it suggests is Tesla can't get the car right the first time. Yes, a car, not software.

Preserving its own flexibility to take other people's property for ransom is an ethic many software people on TMC seem to support. This isn't about VPN, or we would just shut up and let things be fixed on the back end. They're being broken.

The discussion here is whether Tesla should allow old versions to be OTA'ed. Not at all the strange point you are trying to make.

For example, if you've decided to avoid the last two years of OTA updates, and now change your mind, its not reasonable to expect Tesla to have continued to verify the OTA process against your two year-old build.

 

[3mp_kwh]

The discussion here is whether Tesla should allow old versions to be OTA'ed. Not at all the strange point you are trying to make.

For example, if you've decided to avoid the last two years of OTA updates, and now change your mind, its not reasonable to expect Tesla to have continued to verify the OTA process against your two year-old build.

Nothing strange about keeping a car, as delivered. Owners aren't being given the option of maintaining a "two year-old build". They are being told they will lose voice, remote app control, etc., if they don't submit to the possibility their BMS may be manipulated.

 

[I'm_Jp]

It may have to do with security.
Security protocols evolve for a reason, and sometime old protocols must be abandoned.
To leave the old protocols in place, opens the servers to attack.
Leaving a vehicle in old protocol, may mean that it will loose it's connectivity in the future, when the servers have moved on.

just my guess

 

[clydeiii]

Nothing strange about keeping a car, as delivered. Owners aren't being given the option of maintaining a "two year-old build". They are being told they will lose voice, remote app control, etc., if they don't submit to the possibility their BMS may be manipulated.

Which points exactly to what you say it isn't: a security-related update, likely moving from a VPN to TLS.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

Nothing strange about keeping a car, as delivered.

As a car guy I would agree with your POV.

As an active member of our technologically connected society with a good grounding in the issues and challenges presented by computers, software, AI, networking, internet, etc. I would disagree.

It is eminently reasonable for Tesla to conduct their business as they see fit even if it does not match your expectations. In order to get closure rather than just complain, go ahead and bring a lawsuit against Tesla for whatever you think they have done to damage your choice to purchase their product.

I would also note that complaining in this forum is potentially dangerous if you manage to convince someone who doesn't understand the danger behind not updating their software but rather confuses the issues due to lack of technological literacy and competence.

 

[3mp_kwh]

Define "worse." What is "worse" to some is "more safe" to others.

I have two MS, one V8, one V9, and this has been covered here. I'd suggest searching and reading threads with "Version" in the title.

Curious. Just from your reply, how is it "more safe" to drive a car where one has to control a media toolbar from the bottom (Version 9), rather than fixed up top (V7)? Your eyes go further from the road? Are added sub-menu commands "more safe"? Animated controls?

We don't have to re-litigate everything people didn't like about updates. Do we?

 

[clydeiii]

I have two MS, one V8, one V9, and this has been covered here. I'd suggest searching and reading threads with "Version" in the title.

Curious. Just from your reply, how is it "more safe" to drive a car where one has to control a media toolbar from the bottom (Version 9), rather than fixed up top (V7)? Your eyes go further from the road? Are added sub-menu commands "more safe"? Animated controls?

We don't have to re-litigate everything people didn't like about updates. Do we?

I have no doubt that you think v7 is more safe than v9. I'm sure others would think that v9 is more safe. "Safety" is difficult to measure and often quite objective.

 

[3mp_kwh]

As a car guy I would agree with your POV.

As an active member of our technologically connected society with a good grounding in the issues and challenges presented by computers, software, AI, networking, internet, etc. I would disagree.

It is eminently reasonable for Tesla to conduct their business as they see fit even if it does not match your expectations. In order to get closure rather than just complain, go ahead and bring a lawsuit against Tesla for whatever you think they have done to damage your choice to purchase their product.

I would also note that complaining in this forum is potentially dangerous if you manage to convince someone who doesn't understand the danger behind not updating their software but rather confuses the issues due to lack of technological literacy and competence.

Your prose can be isolated down to Tesla's intent to stay connected to its cars. Its cars, however, are people's property. That's not a "car guy" thing.

I really don't think I'm complaining. After all, you're right. These are just cars. They shouldn't ignite a bunch of expert software pro's, like a SWAT team covering the Inside EVs article, followed by TMC. I'm aware Electrek closed its comments, after covering the same topic days ago.

I have a day job, and happened to see this 3 hour old article, on IEV. It's the bend of the responses, that seem to "complain" about common customer decency, to me.

 

[clydeiii]

Your prose can be isolated down to Tesla's intent to stay connected to its cars. Its cars, however, are people's property. That's not a "car guy" thing.

I really don't think I'm complaining. After all, you're right. These are just cars. They shouldn't ignite a bunch of expert software pro's, like a SWAT team covering the Inside EVs article, followed by TMC. I'm aware Electrek closed its comments when it covered the same topic, days ago.

I have a day job, and happened to see this 3 hour old article, on IEV. It's the bend of the responses, that seem to "complain" about common customer decency, to me.

You mentioned voice controls. I don't know about how Tesla works its magic, but I know for Apple's Siri, it doesn't work unless you can connect back to the Apple mothership. They do all of the translation of your voice into text server-side. I would assume Tesla could be doing something similar. It would need to talk to the server. If the "old" way of doing so is insecure and they need to upgrade that method, then it's entirely reasonable for them to ask you to upgrade to the latest build in order to keep such functionality working.

Your car is a car, but it's also a computer. You're thinking about it as a car, while we're thinking about it as a computer.

 

[irelandm]

For the love of God, is there any way to filter out all "articles" written by this hack? Just complete garbage. Not just the content, but the writing style. It's just bad, more like a blog than an article.

 

[Brando]

I have no doubt that you think v7 is more safe than v9. ... "Safety" is difficult to measure and often quite objective.

The only way to actually "measure safety" is with historical data.

Is Tesla the only company that can actually offer actual data on their vehicles?
question: IF Waymo shows stats as good as or better than Tesla, would anyone sell their car and only use Waymo?
Of course not. I doubt any buyers are that binary in their actions.

side note: NHTSA tests show 3 Tesla vehicles the safest. (2019) Model 3, Model X and Model S - and no other car maker has done better.
Can legacy auto match/beat Tesla on ANY front?? safety, acceleration, operating cost, retained value ??

 

[Ande]

The most likely reason to require update is that they will remove old VPN certificate, or it expires.