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