8 ms·

Anytime they have a software update for a "recall", I imagine what the headlines would look like if Apple had to "recall 2 billions iPhones for a security fix"

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
phdp 2y ago
My iphone can't kill someone else moving 70 mph down the highway during the normal course of its operation.
- stavros 2y ago
  Not if the Mossad has anything to say about it.
  - otterley 2y ago
    WTF, dude. The iPhone wasn’t designed to be an explosive device.
    - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
      Samsung Note 7: hold my battery.
    - ant6n 2y ago
      > The iPhone wasn’t designed to be an explosive device. …just like those pagers.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - Ajedi32 2y ago
        The pagers actually were designed to be explosive devices. I'm guessing you didn't dig into the details of that story and just saw the headlines?
      - wongarsu 2y ago
        The pagers were designed as explosive devices and specifically marketed to Hisbollah leaders, with fake justifications for the added weight from the explosives. In contrast, no iPhone teardown has shown any explosives, and Apple still has a reputation for saving weight wherever possible. If you have an iPhone that mysteriously has only a fraction of the battery capacity of a normal iPhone it might be time to worry if you have the Mossad version with inbuilt explosives. But otherwise I wouldn't worry too much. A battery explosion would be inconvenient but much less effective
        tromp 2y ago
        > with fake justifications for the added weight from the explosives. There was negligible weight increase, as the battery was significantly shrunk to allow hiding the explosive inside [1]. > At some point, Hezbollah noticed the battery was draining faster than expected, the Lebanese source said. However, the issue did not appear to raise major security concerns - the group was still handing its members the pagers hours before the attack. [1] https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/HEZBOLLAH-PAGERS/mopawkkwjpa/ https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/HEZBOLL...
- leesec 2y ago
  This has nothing to do with his point, which is that its a software update, not a typical 'recall'
  - soared 2y ago
    It lends credence to how severe the language needs to be. A car recall is very serious and implies people need to take action. A software update is meh, I’ll look at that later. Seemingly a Tesla software update is more aligned aligned with “recall - update your stuff” rather than “update - do this whenever”
    - reverendsteveii 2y ago
      I've had several cars subject to recall and every one of them was "go ahead and bring it into the dealer whenever, show them this notice and they'll fix it". I imagine there could be some "drop everything and get this fixed right now" issues but I think the idea that every recall is a drop everything issue is more in alignment with your intuition than the reality on the ground.
      - genewitch 2y ago
        It's more if I own the car "pink slip" there is not really a way to compel me to get a recall repair. Obviously this is different, now, because of some cards and models for the car ECU.
        genewitch 2y ago
        s/some/SIM/
      - AlotOfReading 2y ago
        A car with an active recall is in violation of FMVSS and can't legally be sold by dealerships (or the manufacturer) until the recall is fixed. It's very much a "drop everything" issue for regulated parties in the automotive space. It's only as a consumer that you get to take your time and deal with it whenever, which I think is a very reasonable tradeoff.
- adamdecaf 2y ago
  An iPhone hitting someone in the head at 70mph could indeed kill them.
- nkozyra 2y ago
  > My iphone can't kill someone else moving 70 mph down the highway during the normal course of its operation. How do you know if you haven't tried?
  - barbazoo 2y ago
    Maybe they have!?
    - TrainedMonkey 2y ago
      Phones certainly have distracted plenty of people going 70mph... some of those distractions have been fatal. I would imagine scant few of those distractions had been due to security breaches, but probably not zero. We could imagine a following scenario: a clever virus spreads via zero day exploit to every iphone. The virus uses accelerometer to detect velocity over 70mph and initiates a bedlam protocol a minute after that. Your phone starts blaring maximally offensive content at max volume, controls are locked. Particularly effective when connected to car speakers. The scenario is highly improbable, but there is a vector for a phone security flaw to be extremely impactful.
- buttercraft 2y ago
  Welllll it can if you're looking at it instead of the road. But I get your point
- homebrewer 2y ago
  Sure it can, if the overcharge protection built into the battery malfunctions for some reason. There is speculation that a battery overcharge bug was fixed in a recent update issued to old Pixels.
- jillesvangurp 2y ago
  You'd be surprised how many phones are involved with car accidents though. The issue here is with the word recall, which is slightly alarmist This is a bit of a non-event for owners and they'll get a completely routine over the air firmware upgrade soonish with some mandated changes. No dealers are involved. Just a simple update. Somehow a lot of these recalls are limited to the US only. Which raises a few questions of course about the rest of the world and what Tesla is doing there. I think it's just the language and the processes of the NHTSA that result in this clickbaity reporting. Also a lot of cars ship without over the air update capabilities. What happens with recalls for those? For example, when the wheels may come off in a Toyota (NHTSA 23V432000), it's somehow less news worthy than when it is about a Tesla. That one got a "do not drive" advice along with the recall BTW, as you'd hope. It only affected a few hundred cars fortunately. But I bet more care owners and mechanics did work to double check they weren't affected. That happened 2 years ago. Not all recalls are similarly scary, of course. Most are quite boring actually. Especially Tesla ones. There's a helpful tool (https://datahub.transportation.gov/stories/s/NHTSA-Recalls-by-Manufacturer/38mw-dp8u/ https://datahub.transportation.gov/stories/s/NHTSA-Recalls-b...) that allows you to slice and dice recall data by manufacturer. There are a lot of recalls. The vast majority are real recalls involving component replacements from car manufacturers that are mostly not Tesla. Tesla seems to be able to address their issues via software mostly. By the numbers, maybe be careful with Ford, GM, or Toyota. Lots of recalls for those. Parts falling of causing crashes. Electrical failures resulting in drive train failure mid drive. You know, minor issues like that. Totally not worth reporting on hacker news because it doesn't involve Tesla or Elon Musk. This also raises a few interesting questions about the software quality of other manufacturers. Apparently they ship bug free software (try explaining that to VW owners) or their software is just not getting a lot of scrutiny. Is Ford really that good at software or updating it? Or maybe the NHTSA is a bit selective with their scrutiny here? On a positive note, really nice of them to do free QA for Tesla.
  - AlotOfReading 2y ago
    Recall is a specific legal notification that's required for non-compliance with US laws. Other countries have different processes, different terms, and different laws. Even when they are issued with the same terms for the same problem, they're generally less covered by news media. NHTSA doesn't require that manufacturers issue recall notices for other countries for obvious reasons. Some countries pay attention to US recalls and issue their own, like this recall issued by Germany [0] following the publication of a US recall [1]. There's no NHTSA conspiracy against Tesla. If anything, they're overly lenient on Tesla compared to other manufacturers. [0] https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/alertDetail/10011042?lang=en https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/ale... [1] https://www.tesla.com/support/recall-brake-fluid-level-sensor https://www.tesla.com/support/recall-brake-fluid-level-senso...
hooverd 2y ago
Fortunately, iPhones don't weigh 2 tons or run the disk of hitting other drivers and pedestrians.
alain94040 2y ago
Yes, I find the language misleading. Recall to me is synonymous with call-back. Which means I have to bring back, return it. On your PC, when you do a software update, you are not returning your operating system, you are rebooting your PC. Return vs. reboot. Quite a difference.
- RandallBrown 2y ago
  With many (most?) car companies, a software update is a call-back. My Ford, with a cell connection, receives OTA updates for stuff like the entertainment system, but I've had to bring it in a couple of times for updates to safety systems.
  - SteveNuts 2y ago
    >but I've had to bring it in a couple of times for updates to safety systems. Personally I'm completely fine with that, anything with the ECU/lower level safety control-by-wire systems should not be accessible to the OTA system. It's only a matter of time until hackers remotely shut down cars and cause chaos though.
    - reverendsteveii 2y ago
      https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/ https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig... It is, in fact, a matter of ten years ago that hackers were able to remotely shut down a moving vehicle
- atkailash 2y ago
  [dead]
- Veserv 2y ago
  “Recall” is and has always meant that a version of the product has a public critical safety defect, not the remedy. “Initiated safety recalls require a manufacturer's action to announce and remedy the defects. A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA.”[1] Note how it only talks about the presence of a critical problem, not how it is solved. A “recall” is stating that the defective version of the product in the field must be “removed” and replaced/updated with a non-defective version at the manufacturer’s expense. The only reason this is confusing is because Tesla has been actively and intentionally misusing the term and sowing confusion to downplay the number of critical safety defects in their cars. But I agree, at this point Tesla has sufficiently poisoned the term that they and everybody else can convince customers that they do not have critical safety defects because they can fix them remotely. As such, the term should be replaced with “public critical safety defect notice” which is clear, precise, accurate, and can not be misused. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls
llm_nerd 2y ago
A part was failing due to overvoltage/overwork, leading to 3000 or so related warranty events being triggered in the field, so they have to do a fix to affected vehicles. Because it's a regulated field, though I'm sure soon enough they'll be able to just sweep it under the rug. Every Tesla story on here sees the same "just a software update" thing, but this is a software update to fix a serious issue that hit thousands of vehicles.
techorange 2y ago
What are you getting at? Didn’t you answer your own question? “Apple recalls 2 billion iPhones for security fix!”
- ralusek 2y ago
  Point is that phones and computers are constantly getting software updates, in which many bugs are patched. We don't get headlines announcing that the phones are being recalled.
  - ChromaticPanic 2y ago
    Phones do not have passengers travelling on them at 80mph. Car software is on a different league of risk.
  - nkozyra 2y ago
    Important distinction here is that not every software update for a vehicle is intended to fix bugs, much less those than contribute to driving error. Not every Tesla update is a recall, for example. It's a good separation when an update addresses a bug - which can lead to drivability/safety issues - is classified differently than one that doesn't. And a recall makes sense, though the issue seems to be that some people associate that with deadly mechanical issues alone. Of course, mechanical recalls happen all of the time, too, but are very often minor and/or ignorable.
  - simion314 2y ago
    What if we use Google and we can see that we get media reporting on security issue updates (and maybe if is Apple the fanboys will also start defending similar as Tesla/Elon fanboys here) https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/02/12/ios-1831-update-now-warning-issued-to-all-iphone-users/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/02/12/ios-... - But mom, it is not a recall, it is not fair others explain that recall has a meaning and if you read the article you will understand it is an software update for a significant issue
adrianN 2y ago
It would be nice if we started treating security defects like hardware defects
- bluGill 2y ago
  Note in particular there is no statue of limitations on some issues. All that protects Ford from having to recall (as in government forced recall) every model T to install seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, TPMS, backup cameras and the like is the courts generally will agree that those things were now known back then and so we shouldn't hold old systems to new standards. Note that buffer overflow attacks have been known since the 1980s. If there is a problem with internet connected windows 3.1 courts should ignore it since microsoft didn't intend for that to be connected to the internet. But windows 95 was intended to connect to the internet and Microsoft probably should recall and patch all buffer overflow vulnerabilities in it. (but they can continue to not support modern AES encryption because that was not know in 1995)
- cameronh90 2y ago
  In my experience, hardware defects are usually ignored. If you're lucky, an "errata" will be published somewhere and you won't get a fix unless you buy a new one.
cyanydeez 2y ago
Ok,whem do iphones kill their users or others. Do you live in. Cartoon world?
ajross 2y ago
The use of regulatory jargon isn't that bad. I mean, the word "recall" has a specific meaning to the DOT and a specific set of requirements and this action is being taken under that regime. It's a "recall". That the etymology is confusing is unfortunate, but language just does that sometimes. So it's nice that we have these people called "journalists" who help us navigate this kind of jargon maze by explaining for the lay reader what the actual meaning of the complicated regulatory communication is. Except that this particular journalist decided to bury that fact ("The company has released an over-the-air software update to fix the issue, it said.") in the seventh paragraph, just a dozen words from the end of the article. That's just straight up malpractice. Reuters is actively trying to harm their readers understanding of the issue.
- reverendsteveii 2y ago
  It's becoming increasingly important to abandon the idea that a journalist's job is to sell you an accurate picture of what's happening in the world. A journalist's job is to farm attention and customer data and then sell it to advertisers.
  - porridgeraisin 2y ago
    Yep. Someone in my family is the type who features quite frequently in the news. I don't mean tabloid-style stuff, or anything related to criminal activity. It was always about fairly serious topics however. As a result, I got to compare first hand information to what ends up in the news. And boy, there are no words. The worst part is that there is no hope. The root cause is that the incentives -- engagement, like you said -- are rotten. Gell-man amnesia etc complicates things further.
    - reverendsteveii 2y ago
      The fix is to start paying for news again. This is capitalism. Everyone serves the one who pays them and sells everyone and everything else. If you want them to serve your interests, pay them. I'm honestly of a mind that while the internet's attitude of making everything available for free was fun and exciting, it's time for us to start paying for things again or not using them. More often the latter than the former. It's baked into our ideological framework that there always has to be an exchange of value. No one will give up something worth something unless they also get something worth something. For a while investors who recognized potential subsidized losses in companies like Facebook and Amazon, but that was with the (evidently correct) expectation that they'd get all of that money back and then some. But that's correcting itself. Everyone either sells you something or sells you to someone, just like it was before the internet. So if someone is letting you use their app for free, they're likely selling you to someone else behind the scenes. If you pay for what you use, you at least have a potential deal that fulfills the rule of exchange without making you the product and you can shop that deal around to see if there are any takers.
dec0dedab0de 2y ago
As others pointed out, it is a legal requirement. I kind of think tech should be regulated the same way. At least if the product has >X amount of users. I know the dangers are not as immediately obvious as the automobile industry, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. We live in a world where consumer technology interacts with medical equipment, heavy machinery, security systems, etc.
switch007 2y ago
Came for the top comment in defence of Tesla, and was not disappointed
lenerdenator 2y ago
That's how that kind of thing is handled in the automotive world shrug
itishappy 2y ago
Tesla release software updates too. This is different. https://www.tesla.com/support/software-updates https://www.tesla.com/support/software-updates
Me001 2y ago
[dead]
NathanKP 2y ago
As a Tesla owner who was the recipient of one of these famous "OTA" updates I can assure you that many of these recalls also involve needing to take your Tesla into the service center because the horrible software managed to actually damage the hardware. For example as this article clearly says: "some 2023 Model 3 sedans and Model Y crossovers running older software could face an overvoltage breakdown, potentially overstressing motor drive components on the printed circuit board." If you look it up there are "many such cases" lol. Personally I'm on the second computer for my Tesla, and I'm sure it won't be the last time some terrible software bug burns out the computer or circuit board.
- curt15 2y ago
  Sounds like their software team applies the "move fast and break things" motto even to cars.
- mullingitover 2y ago
  I often hear Tesla supporters say that Tesla builds a car around a computer while other manufacturers are just stuffing a computer in their car. From experience, to me the problem with Tesla cars is that the computer isn't that great in the first place, and build quality and ergonomics of the actual car are clearly an afterthought. I'd much rather have a mid-tier computer in a Toyota-level car than the most expensive Acer laptop in a Kia.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    > From experience, to me the problem with Tesla cars is that the computer isn't that great in the first place, and build quality and ergonomics of the actual car are clearly an afterthought. Ah, so it's a TV company! (SmartTV software tends to be _terrible_, both from a doing-what-it's-supposed-to point of view, and a security point of view. But the TVs are essentially built around it, nonetheless.)
- foobazgt 2y ago
  While we're swapping anecdotes, I own several Teslas, starting over six years ago, and have never experienced this. I've also never met a person in my life who has experienced this. In contrast, I've had recalls from other manufacturers take so long (several years), that my vehicle died before I was able to get them applied. I've had a recall where the OEM is refusing to make it available to me, because it only occurs in "cold" weather. Tesla's recalls are better than the rest of the entire industry.
FireBeyond 2y ago
And my cars have had "recalls" that consist of "insert this piece of paper between pages 219 and 220 of your owner's manual". Still a recall. Wouldn't be one of these threads without people complaining Tesla should be treated differently.
danans 2y ago
The difference is in the first paragraph of the article: "due to a failure of the power steering assist feature that could make the vehicles harder to steer, particularly at low speeds, raising the risk of a crash."

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

phdp 2y ago

My iphone can't kill someone else moving 70 mph down the highway during the normal course of its operation.

stavros 2y ago
Not if the Mossad has anything to say about it.
- otterley 2y ago
  WTF, dude. The iPhone wasn’t designed to be an explosive device.
  - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
    Samsung Note 7: hold my battery.
  - ant6n 2y ago
    > The iPhone wasn’t designed to be an explosive device. …just like those pagers.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - Ajedi32 2y ago
      The pagers actually were designed to be explosive devices. I'm guessing you didn't dig into the details of that story and just saw the headlines?
    - wongarsu 2y ago
      The pagers were designed as explosive devices and specifically marketed to Hisbollah leaders, with fake justifications for the added weight from the explosives. In contrast, no iPhone teardown has shown any explosives, and Apple still has a reputation for saving weight wherever possible. If you have an iPhone that mysteriously has only a fraction of the battery capacity of a normal iPhone it might be time to worry if you have the Mossad version with inbuilt explosives. But otherwise I wouldn't worry too much. A battery explosion would be inconvenient but much less effective
      - tromp 2y ago
        > with fake justifications for the added weight from the explosives. There was negligible weight increase, as the battery was significantly shrunk to allow hiding the explosive inside [1]. > At some point, Hezbollah noticed the battery was draining faster than expected, the Lebanese source said. However, the issue did not appear to raise major security concerns - the group was still handing its members the pagers hours before the attack. [1] https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/HEZBOLLAH-PAGERS/mopawkkwjpa/ https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/HEZBOLL...
leesec 2y ago
This has nothing to do with his point, which is that its a software update, not a typical 'recall'
- soared 2y ago
  It lends credence to how severe the language needs to be. A car recall is very serious and implies people need to take action. A software update is meh, I’ll look at that later. Seemingly a Tesla software update is more aligned aligned with “recall - update your stuff” rather than “update - do this whenever”
  - reverendsteveii 2y ago
    I've had several cars subject to recall and every one of them was "go ahead and bring it into the dealer whenever, show them this notice and they'll fix it". I imagine there could be some "drop everything and get this fixed right now" issues but I think the idea that every recall is a drop everything issue is more in alignment with your intuition than the reality on the ground.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      It's more if I own the car "pink slip" there is not really a way to compel me to get a recall repair. Obviously this is different, now, because of some cards and models for the car ECU.
      - genewitch 2y ago
        s/some/SIM/
    - AlotOfReading 2y ago
      A car with an active recall is in violation of FMVSS and can't legally be sold by dealerships (or the manufacturer) until the recall is fixed. It's very much a "drop everything" issue for regulated parties in the automotive space. It's only as a consumer that you get to take your time and deal with it whenever, which I think is a very reasonable tradeoff.
adamdecaf 2y ago
An iPhone hitting someone in the head at 70mph could indeed kill them.
nkozyra 2y ago
> My iphone can't kill someone else moving 70 mph down the highway during the normal course of its operation. How do you know if you haven't tried?
- barbazoo 2y ago
  Maybe they have!?
  - TrainedMonkey 2y ago
    Phones certainly have distracted plenty of people going 70mph... some of those distractions have been fatal. I would imagine scant few of those distractions had been due to security breaches, but probably not zero. We could imagine a following scenario: a clever virus spreads via zero day exploit to every iphone. The virus uses accelerometer to detect velocity over 70mph and initiates a bedlam protocol a minute after that. Your phone starts blaring maximally offensive content at max volume, controls are locked. Particularly effective when connected to car speakers. The scenario is highly improbable, but there is a vector for a phone security flaw to be extremely impactful.
buttercraft 2y ago
Welllll it can if you're looking at it instead of the road. But I get your point
homebrewer 2y ago
Sure it can, if the overcharge protection built into the battery malfunctions for some reason. There is speculation that a battery overcharge bug was fixed in a recent update issued to old Pixels.
jillesvangurp 2y ago
You'd be surprised how many phones are involved with car accidents though. The issue here is with the word recall, which is slightly alarmist This is a bit of a non-event for owners and they'll get a completely routine over the air firmware upgrade soonish with some mandated changes. No dealers are involved. Just a simple update. Somehow a lot of these recalls are limited to the US only. Which raises a few questions of course about the rest of the world and what Tesla is doing there. I think it's just the language and the processes of the NHTSA that result in this clickbaity reporting. Also a lot of cars ship without over the air update capabilities. What happens with recalls for those? For example, when the wheels may come off in a Toyota (NHTSA 23V432000), it's somehow less news worthy than when it is about a Tesla. That one got a "do not drive" advice along with the recall BTW, as you'd hope. It only affected a few hundred cars fortunately. But I bet more care owners and mechanics did work to double check they weren't affected. That happened 2 years ago. Not all recalls are similarly scary, of course. Most are quite boring actually. Especially Tesla ones. There's a helpful tool (https://datahub.transportation.gov/stories/s/NHTSA-Recalls-by-Manufacturer/38mw-dp8u/ https://datahub.transportation.gov/stories/s/NHTSA-Recalls-b...) that allows you to slice and dice recall data by manufacturer. There are a lot of recalls. The vast majority are real recalls involving component replacements from car manufacturers that are mostly not Tesla. Tesla seems to be able to address their issues via software mostly. By the numbers, maybe be careful with Ford, GM, or Toyota. Lots of recalls for those. Parts falling of causing crashes. Electrical failures resulting in drive train failure mid drive. You know, minor issues like that. Totally not worth reporting on hacker news because it doesn't involve Tesla or Elon Musk. This also raises a few interesting questions about the software quality of other manufacturers. Apparently they ship bug free software (try explaining that to VW owners) or their software is just not getting a lot of scrutiny. Is Ford really that good at software or updating it? Or maybe the NHTSA is a bit selective with their scrutiny here? On a positive note, really nice of them to do free QA for Tesla.
- AlotOfReading 2y ago
  Recall is a specific legal notification that's required for non-compliance with US laws. Other countries have different processes, different terms, and different laws. Even when they are issued with the same terms for the same problem, they're generally less covered by news media. NHTSA doesn't require that manufacturers issue recall notices for other countries for obvious reasons. Some countries pay attention to US recalls and issue their own, like this recall issued by Germany [0] following the publication of a US recall [1]. There's no NHTSA conspiracy against Tesla. If anything, they're overly lenient on Tesla compared to other manufacturers. [0] https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/alertDetail/10011042?lang=en https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/ale... [1] https://www.tesla.com/support/recall-brake-fluid-level-sensor https://www.tesla.com/support/recall-brake-fluid-level-senso...

hooverd 2y ago

Fortunately, iPhones don't weigh 2 tons or run the disk of hitting other drivers and pedestrians.

alain94040 2y ago

Yes, I find the language misleading. Recall to me is synonymous with call-back. Which means I have to bring back, return it. On your PC, when you do a software update, you are not returning your operating system, you are rebooting your PC. Return vs. reboot. Quite a difference.

RandallBrown 2y ago
With many (most?) car companies, a software update is a call-back. My Ford, with a cell connection, receives OTA updates for stuff like the entertainment system, but I've had to bring it in a couple of times for updates to safety systems.
- SteveNuts 2y ago
  >but I've had to bring it in a couple of times for updates to safety systems. Personally I'm completely fine with that, anything with the ECU/lower level safety control-by-wire systems should not be accessible to the OTA system. It's only a matter of time until hackers remotely shut down cars and cause chaos though.
  - reverendsteveii 2y ago
    https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/ https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig... It is, in fact, a matter of ten years ago that hackers were able to remotely shut down a moving vehicle
atkailash 2y ago
[dead]
Veserv 2y ago
“Recall” is and has always meant that a version of the product has a public critical safety defect, not the remedy. “Initiated safety recalls require a manufacturer's action to announce and remedy the defects. A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA.”[1] Note how it only talks about the presence of a critical problem, not how it is solved. A “recall” is stating that the defective version of the product in the field must be “removed” and replaced/updated with a non-defective version at the manufacturer’s expense. The only reason this is confusing is because Tesla has been actively and intentionally misusing the term and sowing confusion to downplay the number of critical safety defects in their cars. But I agree, at this point Tesla has sufficiently poisoned the term that they and everybody else can convince customers that they do not have critical safety defects because they can fix them remotely. As such, the term should be replaced with “public critical safety defect notice” which is clear, precise, accurate, and can not be misused. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls

llm_nerd 2y ago

A part was failing due to overvoltage/overwork, leading to 3000 or so related warranty events being triggered in the field, so they have to do a fix to affected vehicles. Because it's a regulated field, though I'm sure soon enough they'll be able to just sweep it under the rug. Every Tesla story on here sees the same "just a software update" thing, but this is a software update to fix a serious issue that hit thousands of vehicles.

techorange 2y ago

What are you getting at? Didn’t you answer your own question? “Apple recalls 2 billion iPhones for security fix!”

ralusek 2y ago
Point is that phones and computers are constantly getting software updates, in which many bugs are patched. We don't get headlines announcing that the phones are being recalled.
- ChromaticPanic 2y ago
  Phones do not have passengers travelling on them at 80mph. Car software is on a different league of risk.
- nkozyra 2y ago
  Important distinction here is that not every software update for a vehicle is intended to fix bugs, much less those than contribute to driving error. Not every Tesla update is a recall, for example. It's a good separation when an update addresses a bug - which can lead to drivability/safety issues - is classified differently than one that doesn't. And a recall makes sense, though the issue seems to be that some people associate that with deadly mechanical issues alone. Of course, mechanical recalls happen all of the time, too, but are very often minor and/or ignorable.
- simion314 2y ago
  What if we use Google and we can see that we get media reporting on security issue updates (and maybe if is Apple the fanboys will also start defending similar as Tesla/Elon fanboys here) https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/02/12/ios-1831-update-now-warning-issued-to-all-iphone-users/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/02/12/ios-... - But mom, it is not a recall, it is not fair others explain that recall has a meaning and if you read the article you will understand it is an software update for a significant issue

adrianN 2y ago

It would be nice if we started treating security defects like hardware defects

bluGill 2y ago
Note in particular there is no statue of limitations on some issues. All that protects Ford from having to recall (as in government forced recall) every model T to install seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, TPMS, backup cameras and the like is the courts generally will agree that those things were now known back then and so we shouldn't hold old systems to new standards. Note that buffer overflow attacks have been known since the 1980s. If there is a problem with internet connected windows 3.1 courts should ignore it since microsoft didn't intend for that to be connected to the internet. But windows 95 was intended to connect to the internet and Microsoft probably should recall and patch all buffer overflow vulnerabilities in it. (but they can continue to not support modern AES encryption because that was not know in 1995)
cameronh90 2y ago
In my experience, hardware defects are usually ignored. If you're lucky, an "errata" will be published somewhere and you won't get a fix unless you buy a new one.

cyanydeez 2y ago

Ok,whem do iphones kill their users or others. Do you live in. Cartoon world?

ajross 2y ago

The use of regulatory jargon isn't that bad. I mean, the word "recall" has a specific meaning to the DOT and a specific set of requirements and this action is being taken under that regime. It's a "recall". That the etymology is confusing is unfortunate, but language just does that sometimes. So it's nice that we have these people called "journalists" who help us navigate this kind of jargon maze by explaining for the lay reader what the actual meaning of the complicated regulatory communication is. Except that this particular journalist decided to bury that fact ("The company has released an over-the-air software update to fix the issue, it said.") in the seventh paragraph, just a dozen words from the end of the article. That's just straight up malpractice. Reuters is actively trying to harm their readers understanding of the issue.

reverendsteveii 2y ago
It's becoming increasingly important to abandon the idea that a journalist's job is to sell you an accurate picture of what's happening in the world. A journalist's job is to farm attention and customer data and then sell it to advertisers.
- porridgeraisin 2y ago
  Yep. Someone in my family is the type who features quite frequently in the news. I don't mean tabloid-style stuff, or anything related to criminal activity. It was always about fairly serious topics however. As a result, I got to compare first hand information to what ends up in the news. And boy, there are no words. The worst part is that there is no hope. The root cause is that the incentives -- engagement, like you said -- are rotten. Gell-man amnesia etc complicates things further.
  - reverendsteveii 2y ago
    The fix is to start paying for news again. This is capitalism. Everyone serves the one who pays them and sells everyone and everything else. If you want them to serve your interests, pay them. I'm honestly of a mind that while the internet's attitude of making everything available for free was fun and exciting, it's time for us to start paying for things again or not using them. More often the latter than the former. It's baked into our ideological framework that there always has to be an exchange of value. No one will give up something worth something unless they also get something worth something. For a while investors who recognized potential subsidized losses in companies like Facebook and Amazon, but that was with the (evidently correct) expectation that they'd get all of that money back and then some. But that's correcting itself. Everyone either sells you something or sells you to someone, just like it was before the internet. So if someone is letting you use their app for free, they're likely selling you to someone else behind the scenes. If you pay for what you use, you at least have a potential deal that fulfills the rule of exchange without making you the product and you can shop that deal around to see if there are any takers.

dec0dedab0de 2y ago

As others pointed out, it is a legal requirement. I kind of think tech should be regulated the same way. At least if the product has >X amount of users. I know the dangers are not as immediately obvious as the automobile industry, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. We live in a world where consumer technology interacts with medical equipment, heavy machinery, security systems, etc.

switch007 2y ago

Came for the top comment in defence of Tesla, and was not disappointed

lenerdenator 2y ago

That's how that kind of thing is handled in the automotive world shrug

itishappy 2y ago

Tesla release software updates too. This is different. https://www.tesla.com/support/software-updates https://www.tesla.com/support/software-updates

Me001 2y ago

[dead]

NathanKP 2y ago

As a Tesla owner who was the recipient of one of these famous "OTA" updates I can assure you that many of these recalls also involve needing to take your Tesla into the service center because the horrible software managed to actually damage the hardware. For example as this article clearly says: "some 2023 Model 3 sedans and Model Y crossovers running older software could face an overvoltage breakdown, potentially overstressing motor drive components on the printed circuit board." If you look it up there are "many such cases" lol. Personally I'm on the second computer for my Tesla, and I'm sure it won't be the last time some terrible software bug burns out the computer or circuit board.

curt15 2y ago
Sounds like their software team applies the "move fast and break things" motto even to cars.
mullingitover 2y ago
I often hear Tesla supporters say that Tesla builds a car around a computer while other manufacturers are just stuffing a computer in their car. From experience, to me the problem with Tesla cars is that the computer isn't that great in the first place, and build quality and ergonomics of the actual car are clearly an afterthought. I'd much rather have a mid-tier computer in a Toyota-level car than the most expensive Acer laptop in a Kia.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  > From experience, to me the problem with Tesla cars is that the computer isn't that great in the first place, and build quality and ergonomics of the actual car are clearly an afterthought. Ah, so it's a TV company! (SmartTV software tends to be _terrible_, both from a doing-what-it's-supposed-to point of view, and a security point of view. But the TVs are essentially built around it, nonetheless.)
foobazgt 2y ago
While we're swapping anecdotes, I own several Teslas, starting over six years ago, and have never experienced this. I've also never met a person in my life who has experienced this. In contrast, I've had recalls from other manufacturers take so long (several years), that my vehicle died before I was able to get them applied. I've had a recall where the OEM is refusing to make it available to me, because it only occurs in "cold" weather. Tesla's recalls are better than the rest of the entire industry.

FireBeyond 2y ago

And my cars have had "recalls" that consist of "insert this piece of paper between pages 219 and 220 of your owner's manual". Still a recall. Wouldn't be one of these threads without people complaining Tesla should be treated differently.

danans 2y ago

The difference is in the first paragraph of the article: "due to a failure of the power steering assist feature that could make the vehicles harder to steer, particularly at low speeds, raising the risk of a crash."