5 ms·
Don't worry, I'm just as furious as you are! I want realistic solutions though, and I don't think forcing vendors to open their source will fly. For one, you w
by dsuth 11y ago
Don't worry, I'm just as furious as you are! I want realistic solutions though, and I don't think forcing vendors to open their source will fly.
For one, you will never force all vendors to comply, as some are completely outside of the jurisdiction, like China. Secondly, even if you did force vendors to comply, you've just given any new startup a massive leg-up on R&D, which the existing vendors discounted for them.
I don't think it's realistic, and there are already methods by which the code has to be reviewed externally, at least in principle. I want to improve the existing processes, not move to a new model.
- scrollaway 11y ago> Secondly, even if you did force vendors to comply, you've just given any new startup a massive leg-up on R&D, which the existing vendors discounted for them. Real talk here: Is that such a bad thing? Why should new companies have to deal with problems humanity has already solved?
- dsuth 11y agoBecause this completely dis-incentivises companies to spend money developing features in the first place, and makes it impossible for them to recoup the sunk cost of development over car sales, since they're competing against companies who did not pay those costs. It's completely unsustainable.
- scrollaway 11y agoIt seems to me what's unsustainable is relying on a system built on trade secrets. Something we quickly moved away from in the software world, which has greatly accelerated development, been mutually beneficial to everybody, and certainly hasn't been "unsustainable". I remember someone comparing, on HN, what "closed source" is to science to what ancient guild secrets were to alchemy. Are guild secrets any more sustainable than closed source?
- maffydub 11y agoMaybe I misread the article, but I don't think the EFF are actually calling for car manufacturers to _open_source_ their firmware. Instead, I think they're arguing for a DMCA exemption on reverse-engineering the firmware. At the moment, (allegedly) it's illegal under the DMCA to reverse-engineer car firmware. This obviously stops the research that might have highlighted this. The EFF are suggesting that the DMCA should not apply here, so researchers would be free to work from the compiled firmware (not the source code) to look for issues.