Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> It should be a "right to not have product forced on you."

Even better, a "right to modify everything you own, in any way you like". Don't you like the micro-controller installed by the manufacturer? Buy another one, with the correct firmware programmed from scratch, and swap it off.

We are already well into a new era of software, in which software can be programmed by itself, especially Rust. What is missing is money transactions for software companies and their employees located everywhere in the world.

"Devices with no surprises". Retail shops in conjuction with electronics engineers put new controllers in everything and re-sell it. Open source software, auditable by anyone and modified at will.

Programs for every car, every refrigerator etc cannot be programmed by a company located in one place, not even 10 places. It has to be a truly global company.

In other words, I want your device, I don't want your closed source software.



Are you willing to indemnify the manufacturer from any liability for anything that might go wrong on the car from then on? No factory warranty once you make changes. Potentially losing access to recall repairs because of the changes you made. In this age of software the entire car is increasingly designed holistically. The engineer might decide to use a particular grade of aluminum on a control arm knowing that the controller software is designed to never exceed certain limits.


I think we can just lean on the Magnuson–Moss framework for all of those concerns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act


> Are you willing to indemnify the manufacturer from any liability [..] No factory warranty once you make changes.

Car manufacturers have figured out how to make expensive cars with good materials and very safe as well. The problem is cheap cars, which can be much more defective and dangerous to drive.

There is a solution to that though. 10-50 people combining their buying power, getting an expensive car and time sharing their usage of it. A mix between public transportation, robo-taxi and personal ownership.

> The engineer might decide to use a particular grade of aluminum on a control arm [..]

That's a problem indeed, a 3d printer for example might be off by some millimeters in some dimension, the manufacturer accounts for that in software and it prints well afterwards. What kind of materials are used is important for sure, but the properties of metals used in the car can be made public, especially if the manufacturer is paid premium and just sold an expensive car instead of a cheap one.

The thing with software though, is that it can be infinitely extended and modified. I can have ten thousand programs more running in my computer tomorrow, with no change to anything physical. Physical stuff need to be manufactured, transported, warehoused, so there is always a limit.

Consumers want always more stuff, if 10 programs are available they want 10 programs. If 100 programs are available they want 100 programs. It never ends. Proprietary software is not ideal there.


Yes freedom means having to consider tradeoffs and possibly making mistakes. That's not a reason to give up on freedom though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: