The electric car manufacturer Tesla had to issue a massive recall this month to fix faulty hood latches that can open while its cars are driving. The problem affects more than 1.8 million cars, which means it’s slightly smaller than the recall in December that applied to more than 2 million Teslas.

The problem, according to the official National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Part 573 safety recall report, affects model year 2021–2024 Model 3s (built between September 21, 2020, and June 2, 2024), model year 2021–2024 Model Ss (built between January 26, 2021, and July 15, 2024), model year 2021–2024 Model Xs (built between August 18, 2021, and July 15, 2024), and model year 2020–2024 Model Ys (built between January 9, 2020, and July 15, 2024).

The problem first became apparent to Tesla in March of this year after complaints about unintended hood opening from Chinese customers. By April, it had identified the problem as deformation of the hood latch switch, “which could prevent the customer from being notified about an open hood state.”

Although the problem is with the hood latch, as with many Tesla safety recalls, the problem can be fixed with an over-the-air software patch. The new software is able to detect if the hood is open and, if so, will display a warning to the driver to alert them to stop their vehicle and secure the hood.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 个月前

      How is that taking it out of context? Software is used to fix hardware defects all the time, everywhere. Just because Boeing did it poorly, doesn’t mean it’s inherently dangerous or a bad idea.

      • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 个月前

        They did not state or imply that Boeing was the only company to fix a hardware issue via a software update, nor did they state or imply that doing so is an inherently dangerous or bad idea.

        The verifiable context was simply that Boeing, a disreputable company, also attempted to correct a hardware issue with a software update. One might infer that the OP could be suggesting this instance may be bad given Boeing’s failure at doing so combined with Tesla’s dubious reputation due to its association Elon Musk, a demonstrably unethical person, and its record of vehicular build quality issues. Claiming the comment suggests ALL efforts to do so are INHERENTLY bad or dangerous cannot be supported without additional information from the OP, though, so criticisms to that effect rely on pure speculation.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 个月前

          How is Boeings failure related to Tesla, a company known for terrible hardware quality control and amazing software?

            • Tja@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 个月前

              And my point is that OP did try to imply that using software for that is a bad idea, I can see no other possible explanation.