Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts "Right To Repair" Initiative On Ballot, May Override Compromise
skids writes "MA voters face a complex technical and economic question Tuesday about just how open automobile makers should be with their repair and diagnostic interfaces. A legislative compromise struck in July may not be strong enough for consumer's tastes. Proponents of the measure had joined opponents in asking voters to skip the question once the legislature, seeking to avoid legislation by ballot, struck the deal. Weeks before the election they have reversed course and are again urging voters to pass the measure. Now voters have to decide whether the differences between the ballot language and the new law are too hard on manufacturers, or essential consumer protections. At stake is a mandated standard for diagnostic channels in a significant market."
Specialized tools are necessary for service work
This does not count as a "necessary" specialization of a tool:
If manufacturers must limit themselves to open, standardized interfaces they will be slower in achieving greater emissions and fuel efficiency.
[Citation needed]
It's time to accept the fact that the priority must be emissions and efficiency and not owner's liberty
Therefore, we should ensure that only mechanics who pay the maker of the car a monthly fee can perform repairs!
There is a logical step missing from your argument...
Palm trees and 8
But as time goes on, those purely mechanical vehicles will get rarer and rarer, to the point where not everyone is going to be able to afford one.
Evenutally you are going to get to the point where enthusiasts will need to decode the diagnostics codes to work on their own cars, maybe by then the codes will be well known, maybe they wont.
There is something else to consider here. At the moment the manufacturers are using security though obscurity, the codes may become well known especially 25 years after manufacture but if there is no law which says consumers have to be able to decode the diagnostics themselves. Whats to stop the manufacurers encrypting the codes, possibly on an ECU by ECU basis? The reader has to be networked to head office and request the decryption code for each customer vehicle at least one in order to work out whats wrong?
These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
Both. I have a degree that allows me to understand wiring diagrams and repair electronics. I still would rather do frame restorations.
Why? Because when you are dealing with old electronics you frequently have to deal with difficult to diagnose intermittent problems. You are dealing with aging sensors, degraded wiring, lose connections, out-of-spec electronics and there isn't memory dump or line-by-line debug to help you figure out what went wrong. With some of the harder problems you have to manufacture tools or methods to simulate test conditions.
Even 2013-model brand spanking-new car, using dealer's bells-and-whistles diagnostic system will not tell you faults outside of individual modules or sensors. Why? Because standard is remove and replace. Plus it won't tell you why this or that module or sensor is failing. Did wiring harness rot? Do you have lose connector somewhere? Is diagnostic system itself is failing? If problem doesn't happen that often during warranty period, then solving/detecting this problem isn't part of design.
A wrench should be good enough. After all, he's got the element of surprise.