[buildbot]

Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.

[diebeforei485]

Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that.

The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.

[thomaskcr]

I like that we're arguing over the word "recall" being an issue when the system it applies to is called "full self driving". I think calling a level 2 driver assistance system "full self driving" is a much bigger inaccuracy.

[abudabi123]

Rebrand the "full self driving" marketing to "driver assist optimist".

[futuroptimist]

To play devil's advocate, it's only a misleading label when the word "Beta" is omitted.

[insanitybit]

Not really. If someone says "Full self driving beta" I'm thinking "The goal is full self driving, the current approach should deliver full self driving, beta means that it requires some tweaks and testing".

[yazzku]

Nobody outside of tech understands it this way. "Full Self-Driving Beta" is a marketing stunt that borders on fraud. These cars can't drive themselves for shit, they're not even in beta.

[jim0266]

You own/owned a Tesla with FSD Beta, right? You have driven it extensively to see and understand its capabilities and how it's improved, right? I've driven FSD Beta now for more than a year. Based on my experience you have no clue about which are speaking.

[insanitybit]

You've misunderstood me. I agree with you.

[Natsu]

> I'm thinking "The goal is full self driving, the current approach should deliver full self driving, beta means that it requires some tweaks and testing".

And that "bugs" involve accidents.

[KMnO4]

Reminds me of an old joke about Ford vs Microsoft. We seem to have come full circle. Abridged version:

> At a computer expo, Bill Gates compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, 'If Ford had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.'

> In response to Bill's comments, Ford issued a press release stating:

> “Sure, but would you want to drive a car that for no reason whatsoever would crash twice a day?”

https://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/lounge-10/microsoft-vs-ford-...

[kelnos]

"Beta" just means there are likely to be bugs, not that the intention isn't (level 4/5) "full self-driving".

[clnq]

It seems to me that calling it a "recall" emphasises the severity of the problem, which might make it easier to argue that a lot is being done for customer safety to the interested authorities. But I don't think Tesla wants this to be seen more than an OTA update from the perspective of their customers (at least those who ignore Tesla news).

I had a VW car that was "recalled" shortly following the emissions scandal. The dealership asked me to come in for a free software update related to emissions. So you can say it's a "recall" to the lawmakers but call it a "free software update" to the user.

[dmix]

The industry needs to come up with a new related term like "Software Recall"

Recalling the hardware is a drastically more difficult request to impose on customers and financially/logistically for the car maker.

That's a disporportate response just to highlight importance of an OTA update.

[outworlder]

> Recalling the hardware is a drastically more difficult request to impose on customers and financially/logistically for the car maker.

And the distinction matters to consumers because...?

A component is faulty. It needs to be fixed. Whether or not you have to drive to a dealership, if it's OTA, if someone at a dealership needs to plug a specialized device to your car's OBD port, or the car is unfixable and needs to be melted to slag and you get a new one doesn't really matter. There's an issue, it is a safety issue, and it needs to be fixed.

How efficient the process can be it's another matter entirely. That's up to the manufacturers.

[chc]

> Whether or not you have to drive to a dealership, if it's OTA, if someone at a dealership needs to plug a specialized device to your car's OBD port, or the car is unfixable and needs to be melted to slag and you get a new one doesn't really matter.

As a car owner, those scenarios are drastically different to me. I have a hard time imagining anyone saying "It doesn't really matter to me if my car receives an OTA update or if I need to drive 2 hours to a dealership or if my car is melted to slag."

[hex4def6]

If you had to send in your cellphone each time there was an android update vs all IOS updates being OTA, I think you would see the distinction as a consumer.

[kalleboo]

> And the distinction matters to consumers because...?

Because in one I have to book a time with a dealer and take half a day off of work and in the other I have to do... nothing and it will just fix itself.

[shkkmo]

I would say that whether a "recall" requires some action on the part of the owner is a very important distinguishing factor.

A recall should unambiguously mean that some action from the owner is required to resolve the issue (e.g. taking it to a dealer to get a software update installed.)

If no action is required (other than caution / not using the product feature), we should use some other term such as "safety advisory" to avoid ambiguity around critical safety information.

[jjav]

> A recall should unambiguously mean that some action from the owner is required to resolve the issue (e.g. taking it to a dealer to get a software update installed.)

Should, perhaps. But recall has a meaning with legal implications, so it matters. A recall requires the fix status to be tracked and reported for example, whereas a random OTA updated does not.

[dingle_thunk]

Recall is just the wrong word for what this is.

[gxc33]

'full self driving' is an even more incorrect term, then, if you want to be pedantic. if the car mfg takes zero liability/accountability, then it is zero self-driving.

you can, in fact, 'recall' software. this is semantically accurate description of what is happening.

[Sparyjerry]

It's a full self driving 'beta' though, it's literally in the name that it isn't final and doesn't have the bugs worked out. You also have to opt in to it.

[cardiffspaceman]

I don't see how calling it a Software Recall will soften the blow for the car's user when the user has to drive it to a place where a device can be plugged in to do the update.

With a Recall in the normal sense, isn't there a record that the car has been updated? How is this done if the car is kept fully available to the user?

[Sparyjerry]

I had a similar recall with my washing machine. It was literally updated automatically before I even knew a recall existed.

[brokenmachine]

Why the hell does your washing machine need internet access?

[sgent]

But other than Tesla, most carmakers still require a return to the dealer for a software update.

[nerdawson]

Mandatory Software Update?

[dkarl]

If you want owners to understand that it's a serious safety issue, the word "recall" won't help. Most recalls are for minor, non-safety-related issues. My car has had a few recalls, and none were urgent, just things that got replaced for free the next time I brought my car in for service.

"Critical safety defect" would be better.

[nikau]

Then they weren't recalls, they were TSBs

[brandonagr2]

There is a big difference between taking a car to a dealership for them to apply an update, and the car updating itself overnight as it sits in the garage with no action required by the owner.

[QuercusMax]

I work in the medical device space, and we will often have "recalls", which usually result in a software patch. Recall != return.

[diebeforei485]

Are these delivered directly to the device and installed overnight automatically (like an iPhone iOS update) or do they have to be hooked up to a computer to install the software update?

[joshuahaglund]

Recall is the word we use when a defect was found and must be repaired or retrofit. The actual process of repair could involve customer action or not.

Teslas are basically digitally tethered to the dealer, so they can be "recalled" anytime (without your approval, fwiw), but it doesn't make the word not apply.

[buffington]

If Tesla replaced the actual computer that runs the software that they're recalling, would you consider that a recall? What if there was no actual physical fault with the computer, but it just had firmware flashed to a chip that couldn't be reflashed?

I'm looking at a piece of mail right now that's an official recall notice for a different make/model of car I own. The issue? Improperly adjusted steering components. The company is offering to make the correct adjustments for free. Nothing is being replaced.

Whether the recall is to replace a poorly designed physical component, or to make an adjustment, or to apply a software update doesn't make a difference to regulators.

A recall is a legal process that's designed to encourage manufacturers to fix safety issues while also limiting their liability. Companies avoid recalls if they can because it's costly, time consuming, and isn't good PR. But it's worth it if the issue is bad enough that it risks a class action lawsuit, or individual lawsuits, and most desirable when someone like the US government is demanding a recall or risk legal consequences.

When a company issues a recall, they make their best effort to notify consumers of the issue, provide with clear descriptions of how consumers can have the issue fixed, and make it clear that it will be paid for by the manufacturer. In return, the manufacturer is granted legal protections that drop their risk of being sued to nearly zero.

[diebeforei485]

> If Tesla replaced the actual computer that runs the software that they're recalling, would you consider that a recall?

Yeah, it requires physically taking the car to a mechanic or dealer who does this. Very different from using the software update button on the car touchscreen.

> Improperly adjusted steering components. The company is offering to make the correct adjustments for free. Nothing is being replaced.

This is clearly a recall, because it requires taking the vehicle to a mechanic or dealer.

[buffington]

> it requires taking the vehicle to a mechanic or dealer.

Nope.

If you insist on believing this, I'd recommend reading the document found here:

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/14218-...

[vitaflo]

Depends on the device. Some require connection to a host system, some can be done over the air. 100% depends on the security profile of the device in question and what the FDA allows.

[QuercusMax]

I've primarily worked with Software as a Medical Device, so recalls generally involve a config tweak, upgrade, or downgrade.

[sentientslug]

This is most likely a legislative issue with NHTSA, I don't think they have a mechanism by which they can enforce a software update since the concept didn't exist when recalls were first implemented.

[asdff]

Why not? At the end of the day its a binary check box on the paper that you had the fix. Whether that fix was a software update or a new piece of hardware should be irrelevant.

[sentientslug]

I agree with you, I'm just responding to another commenter who questioned the use of the word "recall" in relation to software updates.

[reilly3000]

This is the correct answer. The question is, how do we get better at regulating reality faster?

[tsgagnon]

This is the correct answer. The question is, how do we get better at regulating reality faster?

I don't think "Use words that put a more positive spin for Tesla PR" is something regulators should be working faster on.

[jjk166]

Inaccuracy is inaccuracy no matter in which direction. If an outdated law made it easier for Tesla PR to spin something in a positive light, would you consider that an issue?

[outworlder]

There's no inaccuracy here. You are arguing about an implementation detail.

[mrguyorama]

Recalls about car software, and about updating car software, have existed since shortly after OBDII was a thing.

[connicpu]

Electing congresspeople who actually stay on top of the expert consensus in various regulated fields is the only way the frameworks themselves can be improved.

[pclmulqdq]

My Honda had 2 recalls on it recently: one was a software update and the other was over the fact that a few of the cables on the audio system were slightly too short. This sounds like the same thing other than the fact that I had to pop over to the dealership to do them. Even with the cable replacement, in and out in an hour with a nice lounge to sit in.

[diebeforei485]

If the software update has to be done physically at a dealer location, that's a recall.

The scenario in this article is an over-the-air update.

[cardiffspaceman]

While we're talking about semantics, the auto industry seems to have a thing called "Technical service bulletin" which is a piece of actionable knowledge. If it applies to you, you act on it. You would probably have to go to the shop to get the TSB considered and applied. I don't think it has any regulatory weight, except as an input to deciding if a recall is a good idea.

[hunter2_]

I just looked it up. The relevant definition of recall is to request returning a product.

If it's possible to buy a software license online and then return it online after deciding you no longer want it (i.e., a non-physical return), then it stands to reason that Tesla can request that you return the defective software OTA and receive replacement software OTA, and that would be a recall. The fact that you are forced into returning the defective software by virtue of not having the opportunity to block the return request is a fairly minor detail.

[pclmulqdq]

I wasn't told about either of these recalls, though. I went in because the audio was clicking, and they told me they had 2 recalls out on my car, including for the audio issue, and that it was a quick fix.

Normally, it happens with an oil change.

[BoorishBears]

It's hilarious watching Tesla owners and Elon complain about the wording when it's Tesla's fault this is a recall.

If Tesla had willingly walked this back, it'd be a software update, or a beta delay, or whatever they wanted to call it.

What laypeople don't realize is that this is being called a recall because the NHTSA pushed them into it: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF

-

FSD has been a cartoonish display for the better part of a year now, it wasn't until last month that the NHTSA actually pushed on them to do a recall, and from there they "disagreed with the NHTSA but submitted a recall"... which is code for "submitted the recall NHTSA forced on them to submit"

Elon knows better, but he knows he can weaponize people's lack of familiarity with this space and inspire outrage at the "big bad overreaching government"

[duncan-donuts]

Surely a hardware recall would specifically tell you to go to a dealer, right? I’m not sure it’s really confusing. The specific thing here is that these are mandatory things that are tracked by vehicle.

[jjav]

> Recall implies something being returned.

That's where the word came from, that's true. But a legal framework has built up around the concept over the decades which isn't dependent on you having to drive the car to the dealer, all of which still applies, so the word is still used.

[diebeforei485]

Over-the-air software updates haven't really been a thing until Tesla (previous cars that required software updates still required visiting a dealer or service center) so what we have here is an outdated legal framework.

[jjav]

It's not outdated. It's simply that the word recall in the context of cars has a specific legal meaning which isn't entirely the same as the conversational english usage of the same word.

A defect that is subject to a recall, for example, is tracked as part of the car history. When considering buying a used car, you can see whether that repair has been made yet or not. The means of how that repair is delivered is inconsequential.

[asdff]

Recall should just mean affected vehicles must have the fix. What component of the vehicle is affected or how it is supposed to be fixed should be irrelevant, something is defective and the vehicles should probably not be used until that's sorted.

[cyanydeez]

The software is being returned.

Your argument seems to be about protecting Tesla's reputation

[now__what]

In auto recalls, "recall" more generally implies something being repaired than returned, IME

[buffington]

It implies neither.

A recall is a legal process only. Whether the recall repairs, replaces, adjusts something doesn't matter. Whether a fix is applied as software, or labor, or replacement parts doesn't matter. Whether a customer needs to do something or not doesn't matter.

A recall simply says: as a manufacturer, working with government authorities, while taking specific prescribed steps to communicate and correct an issue at the cost of the manufacturer, the manufacturer is then immune from lawsuits that could arise were they to ignore the issue.

[tshaddox]

Yeah, but the reason why they used the word "recall" is that "recall" was already a word that means to officially demand that something (or someone) be returned to a previous location. Of course, before over the air software updates, essentially anything on an automobile that needed to be replaced/repaired/modified would need to be returned to a dealer/mechanic to do so. So now it sounds a little weird to some people to refer to an over the air software update as a recall.

[nerdix]

Samsung just recently had a recall on some recent model top loading washing machines due to fire hazard. The fix? A software update.

https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2023/Samsung-Recalls-Top-Load-W...

[heavyset_go]

It's seems that it's only not a recall when Tesla does it, because Tesla invented software updates.

[eternityforest]

The software isn't returned but it is destroyed and replaced. In a world where the behavior of the things we own is driven by software, it's pretty much just the same as if you recalled and replaced faulty gas tanks.

[kube-system]

Software recalls are nothing new. This particular use of the word “recall” refers to the legal process used by regulators to mandate a fix to a product.

[eecc]

Well in computing the term “Security Update” is in use, why not call this a “Safety Update”.

[sixQuarks]

I agree. It’s like crying wolf, eventually you start ignoring it

[pengaru]

> It’s like crying wolf, eventually you start ignoring it

The problem here lies in having a manufacturer shipping an unfinished product then relying on an endless stream of recalls to finish developing your vehicle.

These are supposed to be exceptional events. If they've become so frequent you're ignoring them, don't shoot the messenger.

[connicpu]

Laypeople have an incorrect perception of what a recall actually means, especially when it comes to vehicles. The most important effect that comes along with an official vehicle recall is that the manufacturer has to fix the issue for you for free, or otherwise compensate you in some way for reduced functionality you may have paid for.

[mcguire]

Well, that and the manufacturer has to notify owners of the recall, which is (or should be) tracked by the vehicle's VIN.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls

[mrguyorama]

Recalls happen in other product spaces all the time, and they often have "fixes" that say "stop using our product and throw it away". That's still a recall. The word "recall" in relation to this regulation is simply a term for "something is broken in a way that a merchant should not have sold"

[zitterbewegung]

We should probably go beyond the verbiage of recall but right now since it is removing a feature I think that recall is appropriate. A better verbiage might be safety reversion .

[buffington]

The use of the word "recall" isn't because someone just felt like using it. It's an official legal process, followed to limit the manufacturer's liability.

Whether it's a "good" word or "bad" word is irrelevant. It describes a very rigid and official legal process.

[brewdad]

Exactly. I had a "recall" at one point where the manufacturer had a typo on a label in the engine compartment. The fix entailed receiving a new sticker in the mail and applying it over the old one. To this day, I can look up my vehicle on the NTSB site and see that that sticker was delivered to me.

If I had chosen not to actually apply it, the dealer would have been expected to do so the next time my car was in for service.

[caf]

I don't think this is removing a feature, the recall notices says:

The remedy OTA software update will improve how FSD Beta negotiates certain driving maneuvers during the conditions described above, whereas a software release without the remedy does not contain the improvements.

[mrguyorama]

"Recalls" almost never involve being returned. There's a recall out on my car's water pump (Thanks a lot VW) and no part of it involves sending my car back, or even interacting with VW or a dealer. It's just something I'm supposed to keep in mind over its life and various maintenance in the shop.

Other cars get "recalls" all the time that amount to updating the software in the ECU or TCU. Tesla is simply being treated like everyone else.

Hell, even in food, a "recall" usually means "throw it away" not return it.

[tsgagnon]

Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.

True, but by announcing things in this fashion it is making Tesla look bad. Regulations really need to be updated so that car makers can hide this type of problem from customers as easily as possible. Especially when it comes to Tesla, regulators really need to bend over backwards to prevent articles from being written that could be interpreted in a negative way.

Or are people concerned about the word "recall" for a different reason?

[buffington]

> announcing things in this fashion it is making Tesla look bad.

I almost didn't catch the sarcasm of this comment, but there are other comments in this thread that are saying basically the same thing, but actually meaning it. It defies logic.

People seem to think that the government is being mean, and singling out Tesla, and being nasty using the word "recall." A recall is a legal process. The word means something very specific, and when a company issues a recall, they do so because they don't want to be sued.

It's almost like complaining about the word "divorce" or "audit" or "deposition" or other similar words that describe a legal process. The words used mean something specific. Tesla is conducting a legal process, and there's a very specific word for that process, and it means something. It's a recall.

[johannes1234321]

> True, but by announcing things in this fashion it is making Tesla look bad.

They rolled out software with critical safety issues. They have to be called out.

[brandonagr2]

There is no critical safety issue, the driver is always in control of the vehicle.

Are you saying it's a critical safety issue to depend on a human driver? The same as in every vehicle on the road?

[bischofs]

Regulators dont care about the perception of a recall, they care about the safety of the consumers and more importantly the general public who have not signed up for Teslas beta program.

[redundantly]

I don't think the other people that replied picked up on your sarcasm.

[rodgerd]

Musk stans poison discussion so thoroughly that it becomes impossible for people do differentiate between Paul Verhoeven levels of sarcasm, and the ernestly held opinions of his fan club.

[heavyset_go]

It's a great example of Poe's law at work. Tesla apologists are just that absurd when it comes to holding the company to a double standard about anything that could make them look bad.

[ddulaney]

> so that car makers can hide this type of problem from customers as easily as possible

What. No! At an absolute minimum, I want to be aware of any changes to the thing in my life most likely to kill me. Maybe we could use a better term like "Software Fuckup Remediation" or "Holy Shit How Did We Not Get The Brakes Right".

[buffington]

If there were a word for "we would do anything we could possibly do, legally or otherwise, and more if we knew how, to avoid having to spend a second or a penny trying to fix the thing we knew was broken when we sold it to you, but the government is looking at us funny and we might get sued if we don't, so we'll grudgingly do it,", it'd probably be "recall."

[freejazz]

> it is making Tesla look bad

Maybe Tesla should stop doing things that result in it receiving poor publicity? just a thought

[brandonagr2]

Tesla should continue doing what's best to accomplish the company mission and making vehicles safer by improving automation.

Why should a companies actions be dictated by PR and media news cycles?

[freejazz]

Musk was complaining, not me!

[rco8786]

Because nothing is being "recalled".

It should absolutely be tracked and publicized. But it's fundamentally different than "this car is fundamentally broken and you have to take it back to the manufacturer"

[jjav]

> Because nothing is being "recalled".

"Recall" with cars is a legal term that means something specific.

> But it's fundamentally different than "this car is fundamentally broken and you have to take it back to the manufacturer"

That's not a criteria for a recall. A recall can be for a small thing completely unrelated to driving safety. Someone else mentioned having a recall to replace a sticker. My most recent recall was to replace the trunk lifts.

"Recall" for a car just means a specific procedure now has to be followed, tracked and reported. It says nothing about the safety criticality of the fix.

[albertop]

You do not call security updates that you get to your computer a recall of your computer, do you?

[nerdix]

If I don't apply the update, would my computer potentially kill me or cause me great bodily harm? If yes then I think it should be called a recall.

[Analemma_]

To me "recall" clearly implies that I have to drive it to the dealership and let them fix or install something. "Mandatory software update" might be a better term.

[idopmstuff]

The suggestion wasn't that it should not be tracked, just that it shouldn't be called a recall, since they're not actually recalling your car to have something fixed.

[JaggerJo]

I’m leasing a Honda E and software wise literally nothing except apple car play works/ is usable.

Some things are absolutely safety relevant. But no one cares.

[foobarbecue]

Should be a CVE.