[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.

[gxc33]

Wait is your argument adjectives can only be applied to Tesla marketing terms, and not to other English words?

What do you think “FSD recall” or “software recall” means

Tesla released software that can kill people. It must do a FSD recall

This is not the same as Apple doing an OS update, not mandated by a regulatory body because it could kill someone

I was hit by a driver not paying attention. I had to get two surgeries, was not allowed to stand for 9 months, spent another year just rehabbing my nervous system and learning to walk. I still can’t jump or run

Tesla released software it’s marketing as “full self driving” that is not even Level 2 Alpha! Full Self Driving implies a level 5 system.

Tesla’s software has disclaimers like “may not behave as expected in sunlight”. Even its AutoPilot has these disclaimers.

It constantly claims FSD makes drivers safer. Yet it’s non transparent with its data, the data & comparisons it does release is completely misleading to the point of fraud, comparing apples to oranges. The cars it’s released on public roads to untrained drivers runs through intersections (it’s all over YouTube) and fails all kinds of basic driving tests. Tesla accepts ZERO responsibility if someone is killed while FSD is activated… that’s how little confidence it has in its own product

This is a product that can maim and kill humans, ruin people’s entire lives… and your response is incoherent mumbling about adjectives ?

Any person who is majorly confused by what a “software recall” is… or can’t figure out what this FSD recall means for them, shouldn’t be beta testing a 2-ton machine on public roads. They shouldn’t be driving period.

[Sparyjerry]

I disagree, you are making one interpretation of what "Full Self Driving Beta" means to everyone, as if everyone using a beta, they have to opt-in, and purchase, and have a good driving record (indicating they understand the rules of the road), is only looking at it like a headline article they don't read. 'You imagine everyone is dumb and you are the only smart person who looks beyond the name of something. You are the one caught up in the marketing yourself while the people actually making the decisions to spend their money on this and opt in are the ones actually looking into its. You claim that they take no responsibility is incorrect as they offer their own insurance if so chosen. If insurance companies don't want to cover it, they can easily just not cover Teslas but that isn't happening. Insurance companies still cover it because Tesla is safer than other vehicles. "Full Self Driving" doesn't mean perfect driving, it means as good or better than the average human and that bar is not that hard to pass.

[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?

[Sparyjerry]

Don't really need it but it sends notifications when the wash is done, lol.

[brokenmachine]

#internetofshit solving problems you never had, one insecure device at a time.

[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.