Hacker News Reader

Comment by erichocean | Hacker News Reader

They need a better word than "recall" when it's an over-the-air software update that addresses the issue.

When I hear "recall", I think "I need to take this to the dealer."

Totally agree. I've seen people argue before that "recall" means something very specific as defined by the NHTSA, and that may be all well and good, but that language came into existence before OTA updates existed. The very word "recall" implies taking something back, and the consequences of needing an OTA update vs. physically taking it in are so vastly different that I don't think it makes sense to conflate the two.

If it was just an OTA you probably wouldn’t hear about it, missing the fact that the hood might unlatch with Tesla just showing an error

This is why I think it makes sense to have explicit, defined categories for "physical recalls" compared to "OTA recalls", e.g. if something is defined as an OTA recall then you would get a specific kind of alert in the dash that says that an update contains a recall fix, along with detailed info. Most drivers would be more likely to see a warning if it came directly in the car's dash compared to a piece of physical mail that looks kinda like junk mail.

I think an additional Recall message in the dash would be a good idea. I wouldn't change the name, it's an established name and everybody knows its significance. Wether the car needs to be returned physically is up to the car manufacturer. I think most of the people complaining about the semantics are shareholders, they are just fine with "hanging up" their phone etc.

This is a particularly weird case, because it's a software update which _does not_ address the issue.

It’s not a fix, it’s a workaround.

a lot of fixes are kind of workarounds

"I don't understand what this word means, so people need to stop using it."

I'm sorry but the fix that they did over the air is bullshit.

From the article: "The problem first became apparent to Tesla in March of this year after complaints about unintended hood opening from Chinese customers. By April, it had identified the problem as deformation of the hood latch switch, "which could prevent the customer from being notified about an open hood state." [...] Although the problem is with the hood latch, as with many Tesla safety recalls, the problem can be fixed with an over-the-air software patch. The new software is able to detect if the hood is open and, if so, will display a warning to the driver to alert them to stop their vehicle and secure the hood."

All they did was add a pop up to tell you to stop once the hood has flipped up, the underlying issue with the hood latch is mechanical and unfixed. By all rights this should be a full physical recall.

The problem is that when the customer doesn't close the lid properly, the car didn't display the warning that the lid wasn't closed properly.

Now it does. Seems like a fix to me?

The hood could come unlatched while driving and having your hood flip up (or the driver stopping quickly if they notice it starting to) at 70 mph can cause an accident.

How is this any different from any other car? If you only partially close your hood the most you get is an alarm inside the car telling you should really close your hood completely.

Other car companies don't get away without fixing the broken latches

It's not the latch that's broken, it's the latch sensor. A lot of cars don't even have latch sensors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com