The modern automobile is safer, cleaner, more efficient, and more technologically advanced than anything that came before it. Yet those improvements have come at a cost. For many owners, mechanics, and independent repair shops, that cost is repairability.
If we’re ever going to have cars that run user-repairable software, we’re going to need mechanics (or at least independent mechanic shops) that know enough about software to get around. I’m not saying it’s the only thing or even that it’s the top priority right now, but it’s gonna take a while to get there from where we are, and I think the sooner we start thinking about it the better off we’ll be.
I’m honestly surprised at how far some tech-illiterate people get in office jobs.
If my clients who rely on computer use to obtain money are reluctant to learn even the basics, if I can get away with it, I will say “imagine your home builders didn’t know the difference between a nail or screw? Learn file types, it’s your screws and nails. Now imagine your bus driver doesn’t understand road markings?”
It surprises me too, but I actually think that’s fine. Lots of people have different skills and not everyone has to be the tech expert, as long as everyone acknowledges that it is an expertise and that that expertise deserves weight. But, most technical mistakes in an office setting don’t result in serious injury or death, and that happens a lot in mechanics shops. People who decide whether dangerous machines are safe enough would need to have a higher level of technical professionalism than your average desk jockey.
I think that attitude is pretty common among people who make software that can get people killed (e.g. medical) but my experience is limited to a few secondhand conversations so I don’t know how well-established that culture is. I’ve only ever worked on software that, if it failed, meant that a few people would get very upset and a bunch of people would get mildly upset, then we’d fix it and everyone would move on pretty quickly.
I mean you are mostly right and I was joking and exaggerating. I mean someone who can tear apart a transmission and put it back together and have it work better is obviously smart and intelligent.
Honestly I hate the direction cars are going. For example twenty years ago I could buy a new stereo at Walmart and have it installed in an hour. Now do that in a tesla. Yes some cars had different physical mounts and some had the door chimes built in such a way they would not work with aftermarket stereos but generally worked.
That was a solved problem. There was no reason to make this difficult.
I do too, I think general-purpose compute has become a too-cheap way to solve problems that have more durable (and repairable) mechanical solutions. It makes the sticker price lower even if the total cost over the lifetime of the vehicle (or laptop, or washing machine, etc.).
I think it would be nice to have a law that certain hardware needs to have user-autitable and user-replaceable control software. If you want to ship your hardware product with some preinstalled software, the source code must be publicly available. I don’t know how it would get passed in America because it would make consumer electronics more expensive to manufacture, but I think it would be helpful in the long term to legally decouple hardware from closed-source software.
I would go further than software. I think too much stuff is cheap. I’m not rich, I’m barely surviving. That said if things were more expensive but better I think that’s a net positive. Like you can buy a 50 vacuum, won’t do a good job won’t last long no hope to fix anything. If minimum was a 300 vacuum but it had a 15 year warrenty, mandatory suction and cleaning ability and user fixable wouldn’t that be better?
It’s similar to the old boot thing. A poor man buys a pair of boots for 10 dollars and lasts 2 months. A rich man buys a pair of boots for 200 and they last 4 years.
Being poor is very expensive!