Some guy being deadmau5?
1 Like
But thatâs my point, is there a requirement for certification of the software version you are running?
Not that Iâm aware of.
The only thought given to this is, the manufacturer doesnât let you do it because reasons, so lets assume everythingâs fine.
I canât speak for Ontario but car owners are allowed to do changes within certain thresholds.
They are also allowed to modify their car beyond those thresholds but the car wonât be street legal anymore.
Is that the case here? Doesnât seem like it.
Think about what you are saying! How does what you or I accept change according to the whims of such people? It only works if you internalize this stuff, which one might suppose would be action against your (and the majoritys) best interests. It doesnât surprise me that some people strive to exploit the masses - what worries me is that people go along with it.
I am aware of why the stuff is posted. But my criticism is that is playing along with such things is exactly what gives others power over you, when this would not naturally be the case. If you put people in charge of you, then hoping they will be fair is all you can hope for.
2 Likes
If I donât own it - donât they get the parking tickets?
1 Like
Iâll accept my vehicle is only licensed to me when GM assumes the liability of ownership.
2 Likes
Yes! Thatâs it!
This sounds like those stickers plastered over hard drives, etc. âIf this sticker is destroyed or opened, you have voided your warranty.â Except that GM wants to make it illegal to tamper with the tamperproof sticker.
This further sounds like the Windows 98 argument by Microsoft, that IE was an integral part of the operating system. Until it wasnât, because some kid cleverly figured out a way to disassociate it without killing Win98.
2 Likes
If this sticker is destroyed or opened, the processorâs private keys will be erased, and your car will no longer authenticate with its engine.
1 Like
Maybe someone can help me understand.
ODBII is mandated in all new cars in the US, so that non-dealers can troubleshoot and repair cars without the help of a dealer.
It sounds to me like they want to basically add encryption to that interface, or get rid of the standard.
Either way, today, if anyone here doesnât have one yet, find out if your car is new enough for an ODBII adapter, and go buy one for $25 that will pair with your smartphone.
1 Like
Well if I donât own a car that I pay for maybe people wonât buy GM cars anymore? Letâs see how that rolls. Bring it on GM!
Jeez, and they say the communists would take away your personal property. Looks like when the rich capitalist jerks do it, itâs for freedom and the economy. Instead of taking away your property, make it so that you never own any, so that youâre beholden to them to sell you everything for their profit. How can people still support this system?
7 Likes
Itâs a big company, the thing that always confused me was the number of models that are just straight rehashed (sometimes even under the same model name) released in the same markets. Theyâre competing with themselves by selling the same damn cars. Less of that now but it never made sense to me.
1 Like
Time for some open source car software! It couldnât be worse the the insecure mess that is on cars now.
1 Like
Well GM has to do something to make money. Due to union contract GM was loosing money on every car that they sold. Its the worst business model ever. So now they will try to recoup the losses with service and repair. That makes sense. Also they should keep ownership. They will have to maintain and repair there cars. If they want you to pay on your loaner car they will have to keep it running. Therefore them owning it is a good thing. Free maintenance for the life of the car. How can you beat it. Does anyone really own anything anyway? You are all that you posses. Ideas are not even your own. They can try to make them tangible but once thought they are property of society as a whole. Oh wait that is communism right? I digress. What ever you do donât buy a FORD.
Corey - I saw you talk about this when you keynoted at the Institute for the Future a few years ago! I guess I donât own my refrigerator and coffee maker either.
This is the main reason Iâve gone off self-driving cars. I have no doubt that someone - Tesla, or Google, or MIT, whatever - will be able to figure out the technical issues involved sufficiently well to make self-driving cars at least as safe as human-driven cars. And probably a lot safer. And Iâd love to own a self-driving car. My time would be far better spent chillinâ and napping, or chatting, or playing cards, or reading than intently watching the car in front of me stressing about when that moron is going to make his next idiotic move.
What I have no confidence in, though, is that âweâ will be able to figure out the looming DRM and ownership boondoggle. I have zero interest in the GM or John-Deere approach to âownershipâ, and based on the way this has played out in other arenas I believe itâs going to get a lot worse before it gets any better. So in the meantime car manufacturers can go jam their self-driving cars. At least until they buy enough politicians to get a law passed mandating self-drive 
Public transport, on the other hand, I view completely differently. Self driving busses and trains and trams and big-rigs hauling freight across the country? Yeah, bring it on.^
^ except ⌠that just leads to a further erosion of blue-collar jobs 
Which is why I never use the self-checkouts at supermarkets. My kids are going to be looking for after-school jobs soon, and their first full time jobs not too long after that. At this rate thereâs not going to be many entry-level jobs left by then
2 Likes
lol. Nice one. Just keep on repeating the lie.
Edit: also, welcome to BoingBoing! Hang around for a while! Join some other conversations!
2 Likes
Wow, BoingBoing went full-metal-retard on this article. Iâve been writing software for over 35 years and have had to deal with copyright issues. Letâs get down to brass tacks:
YOU OWN YOUR CAR. PERIOD.
Nothing about a copyright supersedes your ownership. My computers? I own them. My TVâs? I own them. My car? I own it.
What John Deere and GM are doing is arguing that their rights are being violated by people hacking (yes and no⌠mostly no). There was an anti-hacking language stuffed in one of the copyright laws that was aimed at people trying to steal movies, decode cable, etc. JD and GM are attempting to argue that this is the same thing (it isnât).
GM does have a valid point about the software needing to comply to Federal laws. True. But the rest of it is about making sure that no one else creates test equipment that undermines their monopoly.
And it isnât just GM and JD - all auto companies are this way.
But you own your car. Any other argument is just pure bullshit.
GM,like Keurig with their DRM Coffee pods,will wind up losing their rear end.Copyright? BS!.Autos can easily run without a computer.With a lot of people rebuilding older autos instead of buying a new one,due to the extremely high cost of new cars,My Aerostar van had its computer replaced with one I built,running Linux.I got much better mileage since I did that.Copyright has been increased to absurd levels.
So,we just license your brand of vehicles,GM? OK,that means I wonât be buying from you! I can go elsewhere.
I did the same thing to a 1995 Blazer and freaked out the dealer when my computer and code refused to let him have any readings unless I recieved payment then and there (There was no need to since I was there for a recall )Since the hand built computer was running MY code I rammed the DMCA right down their throats.Needless to say,they refused to honor the recall,I sued them and put the bastards out of business after winning every dime they had.So if GM wants to play that game,OK accept the consequences because I will bust their ass one way or another.I know copyright law much better than the average Joe does and I know how to use the Copyright law to defeat Copyright law.
Donât F**K with a hacker -YOU WILL LOSE!
1 Like
This is not about repairing your car. I donât think GM cares where your car is repaired. This is about other manufacturers (mostly in China) stealing the code that GM paid billions to develop. GM does not want the Chinese âknock offâ specialists to begin producing unlicensed GM cars with a Chinese nameplate on them. I donât blame them. And there will be other manufacturers doing the same thing soon.
