TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Software is eating the car

287 pointsby avonmachalmost 4 years ago

40 comments

SavantIdiotalmost 4 years ago
Short answer to the lede: no, the industry cannot cope. Or rather, it will limp along with bloatware, bugs, and malware exactly the same way we see desktop OSes bloat, or the way we see routers and set-top boxes hacked to become botnets.<p>In my 40+ years in the industry I&#x27;ve yet to see code get SMALLER. With the exception of Linux kernel 1.0 in the 90&#x27;s which was a step backwards into smaller, more compact code, code has always bloated.<p>Damn. I just want a car with as FEW knobs&#x2F;buttons&#x2F;levers as necessary. Literally: make it as simple as possible. Like an golf cart! Is anyone else out there with me? I feel like Walter from The Big Lebowski regarding this: has everyone just gone crazy?
评论 #27462539 未加载
评论 #27463907 未加载
评论 #27463727 未加载
评论 #27463109 未加载
评论 #27462609 未加载
评论 #27469782 未加载
评论 #27467645 未加载
评论 #27463057 未加载
评论 #27462586 未加载
评论 #27462774 未加载
评论 #27467138 未加载
评论 #27462660 未加载
评论 #27468314 未加载
评论 #27462556 未加载
评论 #27463678 未加载
评论 #27463475 未加载
评论 #27462533 未加载
评论 #27465839 未加载
评论 #27478617 未加载
评论 #27462554 未加载
评论 #27468768 未加载
评论 #27464995 未加载
评论 #27463712 未加载
评论 #27464391 未加载
评论 #27474661 未加载
评论 #27465605 未加载
评论 #27464130 未加载
评论 #27462847 未加载
评论 #27466695 未加载
评论 #27468437 未加载
评论 #27465597 未加载
评论 #27464898 未加载
评论 #27464733 未加载
评论 #27463718 未加载
评论 #27463593 未加载
评论 #27470908 未加载
评论 #27463977 未加载
评论 #27464061 未加载
评论 #27466371 未加载
评论 #27468431 未加载
评论 #27466431 未加载
评论 #27468425 未加载
评论 #27465145 未加载
评论 #27463599 未加载
评论 #27467421 未加载
评论 #27465340 未加载
评论 #27466091 未加载
评论 #27468064 未加载
评论 #27465461 未加载
评论 #27464215 未加载
评论 #27468600 未加载
评论 #27464094 未加载
评论 #27466013 未加载
评论 #27464969 未加载
jacquesmalmost 4 years ago
Nothing worse than automotive software. Buggy, slow, terrible user interfaces, outright dangerous and in many ways much worse than the systems they replace or augment.<p>The automotive industry has a long long way to come - assuming it will happen at all - before they can be said to be responsible software vendors.<p>Case in point: my - former - C class Mercedes that made two pretty good attempts to kill me by slamming on the brakes in a situation where that was totally unexpected and caused a perfectly safe situation to turn into a critical one. If not for playing ping pong for many years I highly doubt I would be writing this. After the first instance I had the whole car checked out to see if there was any fault in the system, the answer was that it was all working perfectly (that time the car had braked whilst on a very narrow bridge sending the car into a skid which I managed to correct before going over the side). Three weeks later it did it again, this time apparently because an advertising sign in a turn generated such a strong radar return that the car thought I was about to have a frontal collision. Again, out of nowhere an emergency stop.<p>I sold the car and got one where the most complex piece of software is the aftermarket radio, it has ABS and an ignition control computer but nothing in the way of &#x27;advanced safety features&#x27;.<p>My vehicle actively trying to kill me is something I can do without.<p>So: as far as I&#x27;m concerned <i>much</i> less software on board of cars, open source it all if possible and roll it out much slower so we can get the bugs out.
评论 #27465532 未加载
评论 #27465648 未加载
评论 #27465201 未加载
评论 #27465679 未加载
评论 #27465474 未加载
评论 #27466350 未加载
评论 #27465148 未加载
评论 #27469576 未加载
mthomasmwalmost 4 years ago
Serious question - what alternatives are left for those of us who want a dumb car? I&#x27;ve spent the last three months finding out I can&#x27;t get solar panels installed without a high-fidelity power-monitor tap connected to the provider&#x27;s cloud, logging every appliance I use and what it&#x27;s doing. Same deal with cars - they are on the internet and they generate evidence used to convict, and geofencing is coming. Other than stockpiling cars from 2010 - will we have alternatives?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fox13news.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;evidence-showing-drivers-speed-before-bayshore-crash-that-killed-mother-baby-to-be-allowed-in-court" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fox13news.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;evidence-showing-drivers-spee...</a>
评论 #27463749 未加载
评论 #27462618 未加载
评论 #27462739 未加载
评论 #27462685 未加载
评论 #27462950 未加载
评论 #27468818 未加载
评论 #27466099 未加载
评论 #27462650 未加载
评论 #27463953 未加载
评论 #27469617 未加载
评论 #27464319 未加载
评论 #27463987 未加载
评论 #27464486 未加载
waiseristyalmost 4 years ago
I&#x27;m amazed that in this entire article Autosar wasn&#x27;t mentioned once. The giant 2 ton elephant in the room here is automotives reliance on god-awful &quot;kitchen sink&quot; style standards. Try reading through the various Autosar docs and ask yourself if you expect robust bug-free code to be written to comply with it.<p>There needs to be a complete cleaning-of-house in automotive software.<p>I2C, Flexray, Ethernet, CAN&#x2F;CANFD &amp; OBD, LIN, what are we even doing?<p>ARXML, FIBEX, DBC, fuckin kill me.<p>&quot;Unmanaged complexity&quot; a.k.a &quot;we&#x27;ve never thrown away a single technology or standard even once&quot;
评论 #27466239 未加载
jedbergalmost 4 years ago
The problem with this is that auto companies are not software companies. They may have good engineers there, but they are hamstrung with a culture that considers software as an add on cost center at best.<p>Perfect example: I have no way to report software bugs to Honda. I&#x27;ve found a few and collected detailed reproduction data. The best I can do is give it to a sales rep in the service department and hope they send it &quot;up to corporate&quot;.<p>Compare that to Telsa, which has bug reporting built right into the software in the car, as well as bug bounty program.<p>And then there are updates. Honda found a bug where the speedometer would just crash and not show your speed anymore. This is was pretty bad, but I had no idea about it until I went into the dealership. There was apparently a recall but I would have had to find that myself, I didn&#x27;t get a notice. Honda has no built in facility to notify people of software updates and recalls. And then once I found out, the only way to fix it is for a dealership to apply the update. There is no over the air update and no way for me to apply it myself.<p>Car companies need to learn how to be software first, or things will get very dangerous.
评论 #27465396 未加载
评论 #27466723 未加载
评论 #27469583 未加载
iso1210almost 4 years ago
I have to admit I was unnerved the first time I got in a car with an electronic hand brake - certainly something I would not want if I were buying a car. Especially as there was a &quot;Microsoft&quot; logo next to it (presumably for the terrible in car entertainment system which was touch screen only)<p>The encroaching of software into cars does remind me of the old joke though.<p>At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated &quot;if GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.&quot;<p>In response to Bill&#x27;s comments, General Motors issued the following press release -<p>If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics -<p>1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.<p>2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.<p>3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.<p>4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.<p>5. Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought &quot;car NT&quot;, but then you would have to buy more seats.<p>6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would only run on five percent of the roads.<p>7. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single &quot;General Protection Fault&quot; warning light.<p>8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.<p>9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.<p>10. You&#x27;d have to press the &quot;Start&quot; button to turn the engine off.
评论 #27467029 未加载
评论 #27465968 未加载
评论 #27466001 未加载
andrewmcwattersalmost 4 years ago
Maybe not a &quot;dumb&quot; car, but yes, I would like to see more good analog options if the digital alternative is getting screens in cars that look utterly <i>embarrassing</i> compared to yesteryear&#x27;s netbook-sized screen fad.<p>If you&#x27;re going to put tech in my car, you better go all the way. I&#x27;m talking a huge screen, fast multicore processor or redundant systems, touchscreen to UI update response times under 5ms.<p>None of this nonsense where you&#x27;re getting some baby embedded system and the screen updates over 30-50! ms. Shame on these manufacturers. In 50 milliseconds at 65 miles per hour, I think you&#x27;ve moved like over 4 feet. That&#x27;s ridiculous.<p>Say you&#x27;ve got an interaction that takes 150ms. At highway speeds you&#x27;ve moved the entire length of a car.<p>This stuff is simply unacceptable. I mean to the point where I want regulations on how slow your crap software can be. If I&#x27;m moving 4,000 lbs down the road, I don&#x27;t want to be distracted. I want the exact same responsiveness as an analog physical switch or knob.
评论 #27462861 未加载
评论 #27469851 未加载
jonshariatalmost 4 years ago
Link isn&#x27;t working but Selzered&#x27;s link does.<p>What is interesting is that graph half way down: in 2010 the software cost of the car was 35% and they project by 2030 it will make up 50% the cost of the car.<p>As a consumer, I don&#x27;t want anything but Apply Play or Android Auto in my car with a display. Why not cut costs and go a different direction? Am I really in the minority of consumers?
评论 #27463020 未加载
评论 #27464090 未加载
seltzered_almost 4 years ago
bad link, should be: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;spectrum.ieee.org&#x2F;cars-that-think&#x2F;transportation&#x2F;advanced-cars&#x2F;software-eating-car" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;spectrum.ieee.org&#x2F;cars-that-think&#x2F;transportation&#x2F;adv...</a>
geonicalmost 4 years ago
150 million lines of code in a Ford F-150? How is that even possible? A Volvo with 100 million lines including 3 million functions. This sounds like generated code to me. I can’t believe this is handwritten or even necessary.
评论 #27466788 未加载
评论 #27469596 未加载
kmote00almost 4 years ago
Someday in your future, you will jump in your car for an emergency drive, and the screen will say, &quot;Updating. Please wait...&quot;
评论 #27466902 未加载
havocsupremealmost 4 years ago
A bit of a naive question I admit, but how do you even test hundreds millions of lines of code to ensure they all fit perfectly when different ECUs have different suppliers, and by customizing the car you can have different types of chips? Just curious how integration of all the components is done.<p>Also, there seem to be a lot of recalls due to software issues, so I wonder if there&#x27;s any open source or anything close to it that has tools such as CI or VCS for newer electric car companies that use ECUs from different OEMs?
pjmlpalmost 4 years ago
Best of all, it is all written in C and C++, with all the security it entails.
评论 #27464262 未加载
评论 #27464259 未加载
johntfellaalmost 4 years ago
I&#x27;ve been exploring building my own car from scrap. This wsj sort of motivated me (1). The ideal would be no electronics at all. An issue I have with new cars are monitors, I hate them they are distracting. My eyes are pretty sensitive to computer screens etc. Maybe, I&#x27;d settle for just a radio. &quot;Maybe&quot; because you then get looking at a cd player then all the sudden you want the further desire to control what you listen to and before you know it you are talking about mp3&#x2F;digital and more computerization&#x2F;softwaring of the car.<p>The first question is... what do I want? The second is the more complicated issue of getting it done. However it has always been a dream of mine since being a kid and watching the Home Improvement sitcom in the 90s.<p>(1) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;an-odyssey-to-recreate-a-rare-jaguar-e-type-from-scratch-11577110319" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;an-odyssey-to-recreate-a-rare-j...</a>
评论 #27485201 未加载
kumarswalmost 4 years ago
Once again, a plea for moderation from those calling for a return to analog gauges. Remember that outside of Tesla, automakers are generally pretty conservative and most computing in cars outside the head unit is decentralized MCUs that don&#x27;t connect to the internet. And within the head unit, CarPlay&#x2F;Android Auto has moved most of the work to phones.
评论 #27466869 未加载
评论 #27469630 未加载
peter303almost 4 years ago
Peter Hubers tome The Bottomless Well considers software as the apex of the energy pyramid. Each level of the pyramid- animal, wood, coal, gas, electricity, nuclear, software- (I may have recollected the order not entirely correct) is more usable and powerful than the one below it.<p>You can see this pyramid in the evolution of the automobile: mostly petro-mechanical, then a growing fraction electrical, then an increasing fraction software.<p>I was not fully convinced by the book is that computing is a type of refined energy, but can agree with some of arguments for it. Other computer utilization like mass data centers and crypto currency support computing as the new wave of industrialization.<p>As an aside: Hubers thesis is the world will never run out of energy because we are constantly improving it, for example with or as software. Furthermore the amount of work per capita has grown with the quality of energy, and shall continue to increase in future.
phkahleralmost 4 years ago
In an electric car the motor control software can be quite tiny compared to traditional engine control. A lot of them are also direct drive, so no transmission controller.<p>Now battery charging is a bitch. The standard communication between a Level 2 charger and a vehicle is IMHO designed by committee. It uses power-line communication even though it&#x27;s not over the high voltage&#x2F;current wires in the cable. That means special chips, firmware, and TCP&#x2F;IP. Sounds like a startup solution rather than just plain automotive CAN connection.<p>Anyway, most of the software isn&#x27;t worse than an ICE car. Also, most of it will still be running on micro controllers, not fancy Linux systems. Detroit still knows how to do embedded but they&#x27;re starting to get corrupted with ideas from all this autonomous stuff.
josefrescoalmost 4 years ago
What if cars were like TVs? Some would be smart with integrated software, and some would be dumb and require a &quot;stick&quot; to make it smart. I&#x27;d certainly be tempted to buy the dumb version and have the flexibility to try different software experiences.
评论 #27464170 未加载
elihualmost 4 years ago
I remember back in the early days of Linux how we&#x27;d say that using a proprietary OS is like owning a car with the hood welded shut. It seemed so obviously ridiculous. Yet, that&#x27;s basically where we&#x27;re headed now.<p>In some ways that&#x27;s a good thing: EVs require much less physical maintenance. (At least, their drivetrains need less maintenance. Whether the rest of the car does depends on the manufacturer.) But on the other hand, depending on how heavily locked-down the car is, it&#x27;ll be hard to do third-party modifications and older vehicles are going to be at high risk of having security vulnerabilities as soon as software maintenance for old vehicles stops being a priority for the manufacturer.
aidenn0almost 4 years ago
What worries me the most is the usage of flash storage backing huge swaths of the functionality in the car. I suspect 10 years from now we will have cars where everything between the dashboard and glove-box does not work because the flash has worn out.
评论 #27465830 未加载
评论 #27465663 未加载
kwdcalmost 4 years ago
What&#x27;s the effective lifespan of a new car now? Software will likely shorten it in many ways. Especially with subscription models being so tempting for manufacturers. As the decades progress, will we care? But the street will find uses for these future old cars. Those powerpacks will be reused. Parts will be swapped.<p>Limiting factor: will manufacturers lock down components so they have a shorter and finite lifespan and&#x2F;or compatibility? Very likely. The Right to Repair movement is still gaining traction. How this plays out will be quite a story.<p>I hope its not a repeat of most IoT where stuff frequently turns into junk within five years and usually heads off to some sad landfill.
Areading314almost 4 years ago
With WFH one could expect the total miles driven per year to decrease drastically due to less commuting. This would make the lifetimes of cars longer and lead to lower demand -- a second way in which software is &quot;eating&quot; the car.
throw111444almost 4 years ago
I own Mitsubisi Pajero (Montero in the US) that is basically designed in the 80s-90s. I installed a dumb car radio with monochrome display, which plays sound via USB and BT. I want a car that is controlled by me directly: electrically, hydraulically and pneumatically rather than algorithmically. With only the exception for ABS and ignition control which are the only valid uses for the software in the car.
incanus77almost 4 years ago
I drive a 1985 VW Vanagon. While there have been many, many times that I have wished for some comprehensive diagnostics, and am considering an engine swap at some point, when I drive and there is literally zero distraction from electronics or touch screens, it’s wonderful. I did add a CarPlay-enabled deck for directions and road trip music, but otherwise everything is manual.
rektidealmost 4 years ago
I have this weird feeling that we ought to displace the problem somewhat. I feel like the ubiquotous &amp; pervasive computing people were onto something. And in some ways, we&#x27;re already seeing a very narrow brand of this future arrive: Apple and Google both have systems to allow the phone to control &amp; manipulate some of the car&#x27;s infotainment systems.<p>Extending that idea further, &amp; removing most of the native infotainment from the car, turning it into a bunch of dumb, wirelessly controlled displays &amp; buttons, that an external system can use, would be interesting. Certainly there&#x27;s still a large maintenance burden. And now we&#x27;re talking about allowing external consumers of the car&#x27;s services.<p>There is some precedent for this. Webinos was a very intersting ubiquotous computing platform, and one that BMW&#x2F;Jaguar&#x2F;Land Rover did a bunch of work on[1]. It definitely still kept the car&#x27;s infotainment system, but it also exposed many of the car&#x27;s systems &amp; services externally, over a normalized, secure, webinos control system, such that you could manipulate the car&#x27;s systems, or in one demo, look at the radar system, from remote devices. I kind of picture the radicalized form of this as, your car has some hdmi ports in it, and you plug in a Roku or Chromecast or whatever to power the screens, or have your phone wirelessly send a video stream. The manufacturer would still need to have an out-of-box experience, but in 10 years or whatever, the manufacturer might not have to still support it like they do a built in one: they still have to maintain some API surface, but that, hopefully, can be a simpler, more controlled, known interface, with less maintanence burden, &amp; less fancy application processors.<p>I don&#x27;t really think what I suggest saves all that much trouble. It introduces more trouble too. But starting to decouple computers, starting to untangle the weave, but it does seem like a long term more sustainable course of action. Whatever modern computer we carry with us is what we trust, and leaving it to provide an up to date experience across all varieties of screens, inputs, peripherals we encounter has always been, to me, what the ubicomp revolution was about.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.autoconception.com&#x2F;bmw-group-research-and-technology-developing-open-source-platform-for-using-mobile-web-applications-across-multiple-devices&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.autoconception.com&#x2F;bmw-group-research-and-technol...</a>
tima101almost 4 years ago
I&#x27;ve been shopping for new tractor and found out that some newer tractors have software-controlled regeneration process. Then I watched on Youtube how buggy software in those tractors randomly kicks in regen process and does not allow owner to use tractor. I ended up buying lower HP tractor that has no chip and no regen process.
jrsjalmost 4 years ago
This is the opposite of what I want, guess I should buy a low mileage used Tacoma and hope it lasts for the rest of my life
reader_modealmost 4 years ago
I got the feeling that car companies treat SW like a cost center, asses in seats kind of mentality. They don&#x27;t pay well, you work on uninteresting stuff and corporate ladder is likely a dead end.<p>So I doubt they (traditional car companies) are going to get better at software any time soon.
评论 #27469826 未加载
mauvehausalmost 4 years ago
Future headline: &quot;Cars now as reliable as computers. Bicycle sales boom&quot;
glitchdoutalmost 4 years ago
&gt; Stout’s data shows that occurrences of software being used to fix vehicle hardware problems has steadily increased in the past five years.<p>Reminds me of the Boeing 737 Max and MCAS
TeeMassivealmost 4 years ago
I don&#x27;t mind having gadgets on my car, but please just allow me to have a &quot;bare metal&quot; mode when things will inevitably go wrong.
prova_modenaalmost 4 years ago
As someone in the industry of supplying parts to keep older cars running, I view the increase of automotive software and electronic complexity as ensuring a future crisis of maintainability.<p>Availability of parts and service information has always been an issue for aftermarket repair&#x2F;modification of vehicles. However, as long as there are enough vehicles and committed owners around to create a small market for repair parts and services, independent companies have grown to provide what the original manufacturer will not. This even applies for very niche vehicles where some devoted old fellow runs essentially a hobby business keeps the flame alive.<p>Even relatively recent vehicles with considerable electronic sophistication can be supported this way. I have worked with specialist companies that will modify, repair and re-engineer some of the more complex control units and electronic subsystems used on 2000s and 2010s vehicles (i.e. suspension control ECUs, digital dashboards etc).<p>However, the trend described in this article has the potential to upend the status quo described above, simply due to the escalating complexity involved. It&#x27;s sort of a tradition that auto enthusiasts and aftermarket industry initially distrust new tech in automobiles- fuel injection, ABS, traction control systems, emissions controls such as EGR etc all got that reception initially. Expertise with all those systems was eventually absorbed throughout the industry and resistance decreased as the benefits were better understood. However, as complexity increases there is a gradual increase in costs (engineering, training, manufacturing, install&#x2F;service labor) to deal with all these sophisticated systems. Without other unforeseeable changes, there are almost certainly various inflection points where increases in complexity will result aftermarket support collapsing for particular models (or specific subsystems). This is something that already happens, but mostly for relatively rare models as until recently automotive complexity increases were constrained by the slower pace of ICE and chassis development.<p>As these costs rise, fewer and fewer models of cars will have a healthy enough aftermarket to support investment by independent companies to analyze, repair and replace these complex systems. For sure, it will result in more models of cars becoming unmaintainable and fewer cars staying in operation beyond their warranty expiration dates. However, also I think this will result in a market space opening up not for repairs and replacements, but for various kinds of bypasses and defeat devices (&quot;deletes&quot; in industry terms) that will either remove complex subsystems entirely or allow replacement with more generic components. This is already occurring in some sectors of the automotive industry, particularly around diesel truck emissions control systems, where EPA has pursued aggressive enforcement actions against companies selling delete kits[1]. However I think where it will get really interesting is when we start getting widespread delete kits that aren&#x27;t primarily mechanical in nature, but attempt to lock out or spoof entire software&#x2F;electronic subsystems.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.epa.gov&#x2F;enforcement&#x2F;performance-diesel-inc-clean-air-act-settlement-information-sheet" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.epa.gov&#x2F;enforcement&#x2F;performance-diesel-inc-clean...</a>
评论 #27469847 未加载
_benjalmost 4 years ago
This makes me think of aeronautical industry. It is possible to get a J-3 Cub with just a stick that pulls on the control surfaces or it is possible to get a Cessna private jet with thousands (if not millions) of lines of code in it. They are just different.<p>My fear is that we&#x27;d get to a point in which dumb cars will be something that is no longer a mainstream option. Maybe then we&#x27;ll need to have our own EAA but with cars.
cblconfederatealmost 4 years ago
&gt; will add hundreds of millions of lines of code to cars.<p>Er, no, it will add wheels to tablets.
ivan1783almost 4 years ago
Does anyone want to team up and build the &quot;dumb&quot; electric car company?
tibbydudezaalmost 4 years ago
CAAS - Car As A Service.
评论 #27466948 未加载
adamcalmost 4 years ago
This terrifies me.
fridifalmost 4 years ago
Time to buy up all the engines that dont need ECUs
评论 #27464028 未加载
评论 #27463781 未加载
评论 #27464062 未加载
评论 #27464223 未加载
ArkanExploreralmost 4 years ago
It seems that &#x27;hardware&#x27; is eating the car, too. I want to just buy a small, slow, simple EV for picking up groceries and other city errands, for $5k-$10k.<p>It seems like the only companies making that are the Chinese, and usually only selling them in China.<p>Heck, it doesn&#x27;t even need an Infotainment system - just bluetooth for audio and calls, USB-A charger port and phone cradle.
评论 #27462730 未加载
评论 #27462839 未加载
评论 #27462726 未加载
评论 #27464816 未加载
评论 #27462742 未加载
评论 #27462825 未加载
Shadonototroalmost 4 years ago
the problem will be bad developers who write bad code that results in need of more powerful and powerhungry chips wich results in chip shortage<p>the curse of the tech-age is capitalism needing cheap labor, wich results in stupid choices being made<p>we seen this during the Web 2.0 era, bad&#x2F;cheap programmers made everything slow, sluggish and resource hungry, bad code, always bad code<p>it still continues today
评论 #27464573 未加载