Slashdot Mirror


Open Source Electric Cars — Good Idea Or Not?

thecarchik submits this interesting bit of flame: "Many are keen on the concept of open source electric cars — that is, electric cars where the built-in software can be tweaked, parameters can be changed, and in theory, the cars can be improved. Only it's a really, really bad idea. ... Even carmakers themselves have trouble with software — Fisker has issued a recall and apology recently with its Karma — so allowing average Joe to tweak the car's inner workings seems like a bad idea. Changing the characteristics of an electric car isn't as simple as re-jetting the carbs or swopping out the air filter." Whether software is controlling electric cars or not seems to me beside the point; access to the underlying software doesn't guarantee improvements, but blocking access to it doesn't stop car makers from making software mistakes — it only ensures that those few interested hackers who might be able to work around them have a harder time of it. (Not that tweaking car software is new, or going away.)

25 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. Open Source is good because YOU can fix bugs by ProfessionalTech · · Score: 5, Funny

    But just remember to submit patch or post on bug tracking system from the hospital or grave!

    1. Re:Open Source is good because YOU can fix bugs by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As for private tinkering, It shouldn't be autorised for vehicules on the public roads...

      Why not?

      It is perfectly legal today to 'tinker' with the software running your car today. You can mess with engine management, fuel/air ratios...etc.

      Why would you want it illegal just when changing from internal combustion engine, to battery powered electric engine?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Open Source is good because YOU can fix bugs by Idbar · · Score: 2

      This is great news, so can I submit a patch to make the backseat roomier for my passengers? or making the sedan a coupe?

      Ah... I forgot to ask. What do they want to make open source? The entertainment systems, the engine/injection CPU, the hardware?

    3. Re:Open Source is good because YOU can fix bugs by anyGould · · Score: 2

      Then maybe we should have an interface where you can 'tinker' with voltage curves or PWM tables or something, but you wouldn't need to look at the code that interprets the 'gas' pedal location to do that.

      Maybe I'm hand-rolling my own cruise control. (Or for a less-crazy scenario, maybe I just want to log the position for curiosity's sake).

      I'm with the parent here - no-one blinks if you take your car full of explosive gasoline and tinker with it, so why should an electric car be off-limits?

  2. Some things should probably be left alone by crazyjj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd hate to die in a huge interstate pileup because some dipshit decided to push the overclocking on his car too far and it blue-screened on him at 80 mph.

    Of course, many will point out that people have been tinkering with cars since they were invented, and that's true. But generally in the past, it took at least a modicum of skill to work on a car. Letting any douchebag with a computer plug in and play with any aspect of his car's functions is a little more scaring than a grease monkey putting in new headers on his 66 Mustang.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All the chavs of the world already know a guy who can install an illegal nitrous kit or whatever.

      Hardware upgrades scare me more than software upgrades. You're not going to get a massive increase in power through software alone. If they want to make their suspension more 'sporty' then it's their own spines that will suffer more than anything else.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by virg_mattes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This doesn't make a lot of sense, because most of the things that software could do will only be minor tuning of specific systems, and anything that's likely to cause a catastrophic failure will usually stop the car before it starts. Even a blue screen will usually just cause the car to stall, which is unlikely to cause a pileup.

      Without hardware modifications, changing the performance of the car to any real degree (other than making it unable to run at all) is unlikely.

      Virg

    3. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably haven't heard of these projects/companies have you?

      * The linux kernel
      * RHEL / Red Hat

      Believe it or now, (I know its hard to swallow), but the world runs on open-source/free-software

    4. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by PSargent · · Score: 2

      But generally in the past, it took at least a modicum of skill to work on a car. Letting any douchebag with a computer plug in and play with any aspect of his car's functions is a little more scaring than a grease monkey putting in new headers on his 66 Mustang.

      I don't see a difference. The modicum of skill has just moved disciplines.

      A Chimpanzee with a torque wrench could render a car unsafe to drive, but I'd like to see him upload a new firmware.

      Regardless, I don't see why it's felt that people employed by the car company are infallible. As a freelance engineer I move from company to company. There's a large proportion of engineers out there that have their hands tied because of office politics, are buried under red tape, are brow-beaten because of unrealistic deadlines or just aren't very good. These guys make mistakes, and often have to live with the bugs because the cost to fix them (financial or political, as deemed by their boss) is too great.

      Customers are trusting their lives to this code. They should be allowed to see how good it is. Open it up and let people review and improve the code.

    5. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Usually commercial companies have thoughtful testing and QA process"
      HAHAHAHAHAhahhahaa.. oh man. 'thoughtful testing'. You crack me up sir.

      " They need to because they would be held liable for things like this, "
      It's far cheaper to put a clause in the EULA that says they aren't responsible for damages.

      ". That's a huge difference to some open source project which is coded by some guy in his parents basement who probably doesn't even have a car but tests it in a simulator."
      Strawman AND an Ad Hom attack.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Some things should probably be left alone by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      I'd hate to die in a huge interstate pileup because some dipshit decided to push the overclocking on his car too far and it blue-screened on him at 80 mph.

      That would happen with closed source as well, only instead of fixing the problem with transparency, you'd be fighting with lawyers!

      Your insurance company will find the guy running the "open source" car, and decide to go after everyone who made the software, ESPECIALLY if they have money. It's why lawsuits go after more than the person responsible - suing some poor sap who just happened to cause it won't make money, but suing everyone related can.

      And if someoen checks in a fix afterwards, they can go after "hiding known issues" offense as well (negligence)

      The open source car will be a field day for the lawyers.

      This doesn't make a lot of sense, because most of the things that software could do will only be minor tuning of specific systems, and anything that's likely to cause a catastrophic failure will usually stop the car before it starts. Even a blue screen will usually just cause the car to stall, which is unlikely to cause a pileup.
       

      Unless the transmission locks in gear and the throttle gets stuck. And the cheapass mechanic using it skimped on brakes (possible - they wanted sportiness and handling, who cares about stopping? The brakes are to get into donuts and spinouts).

      A modern car is basically entirely software controlled except for two safety-critical systems - steering and brakes (the software can modulate power going to the brakes (traction control, ABS) and steering, but if it fails, it still works

  3. Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have it open source, but the car only accept signed code from the manufacturer. People can find bug and patch them, submit back to central place to commit approved changes.

  4. Already exists. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People have been building electric cars for decades. The internet is FULL of open source electric car projects.

    Did anyone even try google before asking?

    https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=build+an+electric+car&oq=build+an+electric+car&aq=f&aqi=g4g-v6&aql=&gs_nf=1&gs_l=igoogle.3..0l4j0i15l6.66739.69666.0.69806.21.21.0.3.3.0.188.1920.5j13.18.0.

    It's the best idea to have open source everything. Building your own car, electric or gas is a wonderful thing and where real innovation comes from.

    Someones back yard shed or garage is the best place to come up with better ideas.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Already exists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All of them. Maybe if you took a look you would have saw that.

  5. Arent mechanical cars already open source? by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 2

    So, why shouldnt the same extend to electronic cars (including safeties to ensure only modifications that the owner approves are allowed)

  6. wrong by miknix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Many are keen on the concept of open source electric cars — that is, electric cars where the built-in software can be tweaked, parameters can be changed, and in theory, the cars can be improved.

    Operating systems can also be tweaked, parameters can be changed, and they have indeed been improved. Do you see average Joe tweaking the swappiness of his kernel? Also, opensource isn't just about tweaking but also contributing back to the community the improvements found.

    so allowing average Joe to tweak the car's inner workings seems like a bad idea.

    So what? Average Joe can also play with the inner workings of his phone, router, TV, etc.. does he do that? No, if he wants to mess with his router he asks to the geek living next door.

    lame

  7. Author has no idea of the open source model by davydagger · · Score: 2
    I am supprised this article made it on slashdot, it is almost downright slander against open source. It takes a single case, and uses it against all open source code. This is classic FUD. this is a SINGLE bug in a SINGLE product. How many recalls, errors, and bugs do more mainstream and closed source car companies have. Many are FATAL. Toyota runaway acceleration bug of two years ago anyone?

    After all the shit Big Auto has done over the years, and suddenly the open source model is under attack because of merely two recalls of a new type of product thats never really been done on a mass scale before?

    Anyone has actually used software knows there are FAR less bugs in open source software than closed. Think about it or a second. You have more people looking over the code in error checking, far more man/hours going into the project than would be feasible for a for-profit closed source project, where you'd have to pay everyone who even came close to the code.(not cheap either).

    Then we have quality of individual. People who program closed source don't give a shit so long as their job doesn't go away. Open Source Programmers CARE. Next your going to tell me some guy in a cubicle with a bachleors, or even associates in computer science is going to match

    Back to the topic, Open Source cars are STILL a great idea. We just need some people who are better at it.

  8. WHO TAGGED THIS HARDHACK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously? User-end software development now counts as hardware hacking? SERIOUSLY?
     
    Let me spell it out. Hardhacks are hacks which require changes in HARDWARE. Like adding a pull-down resistor to a flash ROM to keep your expired satellite service from deleting its own keys.
     

    Even carmakers themselves have trouble with software--Fisker has issued a recall and apology recently with its Karma — so allowing average Joe to tweak the car's inner workings seems like a bad idea

    I don't know any average Joe who can write enough software to make a light off an MCU blink. And who said that Fisker ever hired competent or experienced programmers?
     
    What has this world come to.

    1. Re:WHO TAGGED THIS HARDHACK? by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      I don't know any average Joe who can write enough software to make a light off an MCU blink.

      The problem isn't the average Joe writing software. The problem, as it always is, is the average Joe downloading and installing a patch from www.trustmeimnotmalware.reallyimnot.com. Worms and trojans and botnets on the 'net are bad enough - but on the highways? Thank you, no. I don't have any desire to potentially place my life and limb at the disposal of some black hat in Siberia.
       
      The commenters above talking about how you "can't significantly alter the performance" are either missing the point or not being imaginative enough... Just off the top of my head, I can think of several ways to seriously mess with both the performance and the internal workings of the car. Imagine a malware patch that introduced a random delay between pressing the accelerator and actually applying the acceleration? (Or doing the same to the brakes.) Or messing with the battery capacity display. (Or the speedometer.) Or adds a positive or negative delta to the accelerometer or the brakes? Or disables regenerative braking while displaying it as taking place. Etc... etc... That's just the results of stream-of-conciousness thinking on half a cup of coffee, actual black hats can probably come up with even more clever and destructive hacks.
       
      And that doesn't even address the issue of the well meaning white hat that diddles with code he doesn't fully understand. Yeah, Bobbyelectrics.com's patch may make 'x' seem to work better - but what's the effect 10 or 20k miles down the road? You can't (generally) break a computer's physical hardware with software, but that's not necessarily also true of a car.

  9. Proprietary Electric Cars - Good Idea Or Not? by gQuigs · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Carmakers themselves have trouble with software--Fisker has issued a recall and apology recently with its Karma". Perhaps they should not be allowed to use proprietary software code. Opening up the code allows for more control by the people who actually own the cars.

    Furthermore, in many incidents like the Toyota acceleration issue, having open code/data is essential for proper investigations and accident reconstruction.

    I for one, really do want to buy a car running on a RMS style of software freedom. I'm trusting my life to this car, I want to increase the chances a bug will be caught. I don't even necessarily want to make any modifications without the car companies blessing. At the end of the day, I'm spending >$20,000 on this thing, I want and should have control of it.

    So.. which car companies/cars are the most easy to modify by the owners? Have any car companies embraced this? If not for underlying systems, how about at least for the GPS/Infotainment systems?

    1. Re:Proprietary Electric Cars - Good Idea Or Not? by Whorhay · · Score: 2

      I have a friend that wrote his own software to allow him to flash his Subaru Imprezza WRX's ECU. The software is now called RomRaider, available at www.romraider.com. Originally he called it Enginuity but apparently somebody owned rights to that already. Anways he could monitor the performance of his car in real time using a laptop, and he could make tweaks and modifications to change the performance.

      It was all open source and only possible because Subaru had made the code availabe. I don't know if it was or is a standing policy of Subaru's but I've viewed them in a much more positive light since then.

      Comically enough he had threats of lawsuits from at least one company that produced commercial software for doing the same things. They were licensing the software and essentially got a couple hundred bucks anytime a shop used the software to performance tune a clients ECU.

  10. Review Board by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 2

    I would like to see it take an open-source model with a review board to make sure the changes are safe. I propose the review board is half computer engineers and half automobile engineers, and they will judge and pass/fail the additions with sufficient documentation on their decision so the proposer/person adding the code or feature can modify it to suit their approval.

    --
    If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
  11. WikiSpeed by ka9dgx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The WikiSpeed project is aimed at producing street legal cars that get 100 MPG, have 5 Star crash ratings and would be priced at $25,000. They've won an X prize already.

    They are applying the principles of agile development to every aspect of the process possible. Everything is modular so that you can work on an engine system separately from other parts of the machine. You could do a hybrid, or straight electric system if you wanted to.

  12. People often project their inadequacies on others. by Medievalist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Many people want to make the things they aren't competent to do, or don't trust themselves to do, illegal for YOU to do - unless you hold special license. These people may well believe that they are inherently better than you, but they also have an instinctive willingness to obey authority figures such as Milgram's white-coated doctors and government-sponsored certification authorities.

    In reality, you should be able to tinker however you will with anything you own, and simply held responsible for any harm that you do in the process. Full stop.

  13. Re:nonsense by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 2

    and by the way, if you can't steer your car without power steering assist you're a pussy who should stay in the basement. parallel parking with a broken power steering belt is merely annoying

    ...saith the guy who obviously doesn't drive a diesel pickup.

    Seriously though, dead power steering is worse than no power steering...but with a heavier vehicle, it become exceedingly difficult. It takes all 180 pounds of me to turn the wheel of a HMMWV with dead power steering, and that can only be done when it's moving, and I'm far from a pussy, though some days it would be nice to stay in a basement. My Dodge Ram, on the other hand...well, I'm sure that's just as difficult, but I haven't had my power steering pump die. But in a simple passenger car, yes, you are entirely correct.