Are these "recalls" just simple over the air software updates? Just because car people are not used to this doesn't make it necessarily bad. Obviously no bugs are better than some bugs. But people here tend to know how software development works.
A recall is a public dangerous defect notice. The dangerous product version can no longer be deployed, existing systems suffering from the dangerous defect are identified, and then the version with those dangerous defects is removed from the market with all due speed by either refunding, replacing, or remediating at the manufacturer’s expense. The defective version is thus no longer present, i.e “recalled”.
The term has a precise meaning as I laid out. Unfortunately, it has been so thoroughly intentionally poisoned by bad actors in recent years that the term should be retired. We should use the descriptive term: “Public Dangerous Defect Notice” to avoid such bad faith misrepresentation going forward.
I think that is where the two clusters of people that I see commenting here are converging / possibly arguing past each other.
One popular form of headline that comes to my mind from business new channels of which I remember no specific instance basically goes like this: “Car manufacturer recalls X many cars costing over them Y dollars because of some fault”. X is usually in the tens of thousands or more and Y is usually in the millions of dollars (now maybe tens of millions of dollars).
Yes that's a much better term. In peoples minds "recall" means MY vehicle has to be transported somewhere to be fixed.
For the individual customer, a recall can be a massive frustrating hassle, which an OTA isn't. That doesn't change the severity of the issue, but a model that has 9 physical recalls to fix some brake issue, and 1 OTA update is going to be seen as a disaster, while a model that has 0 physical recalls and 10 OTA updates will be seen as a pleasure to own.
Recalls in consumers' minds are a frustration measurement more than a safety record. Most recalls are about very small/hypothetical risks, so the risk I want to avoid when I look at manufacturers recall history is the risk of having to fix my vehicle physically. Because that's a real/large risk, while the risk of it catching fire spontaneously could be catastrophic but is usually tiny.
Recalls are frustrating precisely because they're safety issues. Otherwise, customers could safely ignore recall notices and experience no frustration.
There's no law that says a customer has to respond to a recall. That's entirely voluntary.
In this respect, there's no difference between OTA updates and dealership repairs.
Think about non-vehicle software bugs, like in your computer operating system. Those are frustrating, even though they can be fixed OTA.
There's been been a number of physical recalls for the Cybertruck, including:
- Accelerator pedal sticking[1]
- Trunk bed trim detaching[2]
- Front windshield wiper failures[3]
- This latest drive problem[4]
From what I could find via the NHTSA there's only been six this year for Cybertrucks, so it seems like the majority are physical problems.
Edit: Forgot HN's formatting for lists.
[1]: https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=24V276000
[2]: https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=24V457000
Legacy industries view software projects as a 1-and-done deal. The "we'll fix it live" approach in tech is a short-coming of our discipline. We can ignore it when failure means a mild inconvenience. But, hard engineering isn't as forgiving.
Even if the fix is 'just' a software update, the bug can put lives at risk. [1]
Each industry and its regulators come with certain norms. Cars are expected to be delivered as 'complete' products. If Tesla can't abide by that expectation, then that's their problem. Don't drag the entire software industry into this.
Yes and the way software development tends to work is absolutely unacceptable in safety-critical systems in a 7000 lb vehicle.
Of course it's bad. If this were a purely software discussion, would anybody be saying "It's OK they have a bazillion zero-days every year because they're quick to fix them when they learn about them"?
Also, remember that the flipside is also true: with aggressive OTA updates, they have the ability to create new issues that weren't there to begin with. I wouldn't trust somebody with that bad a QA track record to not introduce new issues.
> The latest recall—the wedge wagon’s sixth this year—requires shop time, not an over-the-air (OTA) update.
For most automakers, a recall involves hundreds of thousands to millions and is almost never an OTA software update.
I cannot find any evidence that previous physical recalls this year only affected a few hundred units. Two are 2000+ units and the others seem to be however many had sold by the date of the recall (10k+ in both instances).
This article is a hack job. I didn't see any positive commentary. Wired is cooked.
Despite this, seems like at least the regular Teslas are among the safest vehicles on the road all things considered.