Tesla LOCKS customer's battery to 66% capacity after unrelated service.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- / 1551713025815707648
🔵 We fix Macbooks & offer free estimates. rossmanngroup.com
🔵 Send us your Macbook for repair! bit.ly/sendmacbook
🔵 We'll send you a box with a pre-paid shipping label for your repair! bit.ly/sendyour...
🔵 We offer iPhone data recovery: bit.ly/2BDBX4G
🔵 We offer lab hard drive data recovery: bit.ly/labdatar...
👉 LEARN HOW TO DO THIS:
› In-person classes: bit.ly/classrg
› Beginner's guide: bit.ly/2k6uz84
› Support forum: $29/mo bit.ly/boardrep...
👉 CHIPS & COMPONENTS:
› bit.ly/2jaAOXM
👉 TOOLS USED:
✓ Soldering Irons:
› Louis' Hakko station(no tweezers): amzn.to/2cKkMyO
› Paul's Hakko station(works with tweezers): amzn.to/2yMvWNy
› Micro Soldering Pencil: amzn.to/2d5MWUP
› Hot tweezers: amzn.to/2yMvZsZ
› Atten ST-862D hot air station with bent nozzles: bit.ly/atten862
✓ CHEAP HAKKO ALTERNATIVES:
› TS100 soldering iron: amzn.to/2Gy1Fqz
› Recommended tips: TS-C4: amzn.to/33s3jpW TS-KU amzn.to/2QsKT36
✓ Preferred Soldering Tips
› Fine: amzn.to/2d5MgPn
› Flat: amzn.to/2JnsDBT
› GPU wicking: amzn.to/2w8chtB
› Micro soldering tip: amzn.to/2qUSFDh
✓ Microscopes:
› Microscope: amzn.to/2iLrE16
› Barlow lens: amzn.to/2yMKdKf
› LED light: amzn.to/2nzfPT2
› CHEAP alternative microscope: amzn.to/2rTlHbj
✓ Soldering/Repair Supplies:
› Solder: amzn.to/2cKkxUp
› Desoldering braid: bit.ly/2otflOX
› Flux: bit.ly/amtechflux
› Solder paste: bit.ly/amtechso...
› THICK insulated jumper wire: amzn.to/2rvtD0A
› THIN insulated jumper wire: amzn.to/2I47DQY
› Kapton tape: amzn.to/2yN0xuq
› Tweezers: amzn.to/2d5NBpi
› Blades: amzn.to/2ByWnvF
› Freeze Spray: amzn.to/2BySozw
› Conformal coating: bit.ly/greencoate
› Conformal coating curing pen: bit.ly/uvpen
✓ Diagnostic tools:
› USB amp meter: bit.ly/2B2Lu5W
› USB-C amp meter: bit.ly/usbcamp
› On-Screen multimeter: amzn.to/2jtgY9K
› Multimeter Probes: bit.ly/fineprobes
› CHEAP multimeter: amzn.to/2zjkg8U
› Bench PSU: CSI3005P bit.ly/benchsupply
› Phoneboard: phoneboard.co
› Boardview software: pldaniels.com/...
✓ Ultrasonic Cleaning:
› ALL MACBOOKS & CELLPHONES: Crest P1200H-45: amzn.to/2ITSQdw
› PRE-TOUCHBAR MACBOOKS & CELLPHONES: Crest P500H-45: amzn.to/2Qrnhf8
› CELLPHONES ONLY: Crest P230H-45: amzn.to/2QsckKG
› Branson EC cleaning fluid: amzn.to/2cKlBrp
✓ Desk supplies:
› Desk: amzn.to/2yMShdZ
› Chair: amzn.to/2LB8bUB
› Fume Extractor: amzn.to/2d5MGoD
› Work mat: amzn.to/2yMtlTR
› Outlets: amzn.to/2yNsZwo
› Gloves: amzn.to/2iUfumS
› Durable lightning cable: amzn.to/2yNHzUt
› Fine tipped snippers: amzn.to/2HGt4XB
✓ Screwdrivers:
› iPhone bottom screw: amzn.to/2yNwX8p
› Macbook bottom screw: amzn.to/2AKMdVb
› Torx T3: amzn.to/2zjtxxH
› Torx T5 amzn.to/2BLNDn4
› Torx T6 amzn.to/2B0XIfA
› Torx T8 amzn.to/2CpWp68
› Phillips #0: amzn.to/2AJaHhM
› Phillips #000: amzn.to/2yNqsCl
✓ RECORDING EQUIPMENT:
› Work cam: amzn.to/2QjHnt0
› Overhead cam: amzn.to/2eAH0oT
› Work mic: amzn.to/2WGIhzw
› Home mic: amzn.to/2xfampC
› Microscope camera: amzn.to/2icVQoG - mine is DISCONTINUED, closest one I can find.
› HDMI capture: amzn.to/2iyGcle
👉 Discord: matrix.to/#/#rossmannrepair:matrix.org
👉 Affiliate:
› Buying on eBay? Support us while you shop! www.rossmanngr...
› Rossmann Repair Group Inc is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com
👉 Leave a tip for us via cryptocurrency if we've helped you out:
› Credit card: bit.ly/postames...
› Bitcoin: 1EaEv8DBeFfg6fE6BimEmvEFbYLkhpcvhj
› Bitcoin Cash: qzwtptwa8h0wjjawr5fsm0ku8kf40amgqgm6lx4jxh
› Dash: XwQpZuvMvU44JT7C7Uh6xHvkSadzJw9fMN
› Dogecoin: DKetsoCvwa2hF29ssgUA4Wz4hxT4kj3KLU
› Ethereum: 0x6f6870feb48f08388ee345cf0261e2f03d2fa310
› Ethereum classic: 0x671bfd61ba87edf6365c97cea33d66ba73645510
› Litecoin: LWnbTTAjojZQt68ihFJFgQq3cYHUsTcyd7
› Verge: DFumZ5sMhi3JktLQpsTVtV9xUt3zKDrcZV
› Zcash: t1Ko3FkphQYoQroQc8k2DVk4WKMAbmNR8PH
› Zcoin: a8QdvArHmdRYe1MjiqtP6jDNe6Z4JgnRKZ
if they really installed a larger battery on that car, and software locked it to have the same charge of the smaller battery, they gave that guy a heavier car, that will consume more electricity and therefore a shorter range that he would have had with the smaller battery
thats funny, gotta burn battery to haul battery, but will the ware be averaged across the cells thug giving it a longer service life?
Wow, shows they sincerely care about the environment
@@samuelmatheson9655 depends on how the software is made. It could even out wear and shorten cycle amplitude thus increasing service life BUT if you use it a lot, you'll cycle it more... overall... you just get shorter range...
Weight does not affect range all that much at all. Aerodynamic drag is by far the largest enemy of range.
That's a good point!
Their business model is basically: you pay for hardware and materials, and we reserve the right to, at any point, add or subtract range, acceleration, driving performance and characteristics, and features, not just at the whim of a company-wide consensus, but at the whim of any one of our random disgruntled employees... yeah, no thanks - I'll take a hard pass on that one.
Do you remember telephone modems the phone company was fussing about needing all the copper wire for all those phone modems how much of that copper wire for phones and phone modems do they need today they were a pain in the butt at one time and technology replaced it all Tesla automobiles may become a thing of the past over the next few years because somebody will come up and do the job right and take care of customers.
Lease the hardware, AND lease the loicense to drive it. Separately.
It's progress!
@@nobody8717 Exactly! This Corporate America and we really want to alleviate you, the people, the hassles of owning anything in the future. We can assure you that we're doing everything we can so that you will feel good even if everything is for rent 🤑. Of course we already bought your government so they'll do nothing about it, they already forget the warranty law in the first place 😁👍.
This is why I will not buy Tesla or any other "connected" car. DMCA is messed up. Why there is no revolution in US I don't know. Seems land of freedom becoming land of total control.
This is not true.
I was a huge Tesla fan until recently. All of the shit they're trying to pull has taken me from "the next car Im buying is Tesla, hands down" and put me in "I'll never own a Tesla, ever." They went from a game changing company to the same old shit, but possibly slightly worse incredibly quickly. The fact that the software "upgrades" you purchase don't transfer from owner to owner makes it a financially awful choice straight out of the gate. You'd have to stick with the shittiest versions of their cars for it to not affect you.
They were a game changing company... back when the Tesla Roadster was being made. BEFORE Musk showed up. They stopped being game changing since then. And everyone else seems to have better EVs by now.
If your comment is true, you're a rarity. Most Tesla fanboys act like the company can do no wrong. They would wait in line for an opportunity to blow Elon, and hand him wads of cash while their mouth is full.
Too bad, Tesla could be great. Instead I see people driving them and always think something will screw them in the time they own that car.
@@practicalguy973 a ton of them probably just buy a new car when something goes wrong. I know many consumers like that when it comes to other products like phones and Computers so I don't doubt they exist in the car community
@@javianbrown8627 What about all the old used Telsa's. Those are on the road and someone bought the car and will have to deal with unique Tesla issues.
Touching on the RAM point, I sold someone a HDMI IC a few weeks ago and accidently sent a pack of 5 (I also sell them in packs of 5). Rather than take them back, I told him to keep the extras because it's MY SCREWUP. As a business owner it's our duty to do right by our customer, and one of the right things to do is to make sure they're not screwed over even if it means the customer gets a freebie
That's just part of the cost of doing business. The worst part is that in the case of this Tesla, they likely didn't *accidentally* give someone too big of a battery. The fact that they have a *software* "solution" to gimp these batteries means that this is probably something that has happened before to other people.
if you know what your doing you can write that off as a loss. Itemize and deduct your losses over a year. A good business owner never loses money even if its on tools.
I had a situation where my guy sent two of the item instead of one. I ended up answering when they called and, likewise, said "my bad, keep it" but waddaya know, they shipped it back anyway. Now their orders include the "friends and family discount" as a line item.
Got a nice Christmas card from their family too.
Reminds me of the time I bought tire warranty/replacement/insurance. Aka essentially bought 5 tires. Well I damaged a tire and went to get it repaired. Found out it was too damaged. Long story short tire I needed wasn't in-stock and would take a few days to get in. They gave me a new tire next tier up. They didn't have to do that and I would have been more than ok waiting e because I had another car but this tire company/garage essentially got a costumer for life because they went out of their way to make me whole.
Now you've gained his trust just continually overcharge him for the next 30 years to recuperate your costs.
Software locks should be forbidden. You paid for the hardware, you own it, and you have full power of the said hardware. No gaming around it.
No reason to forbid software locks. The seller must *always* be allowed to decide what they are selling. In many situations, hardware is sold subsidised and part of the income is for license fees for use of features.
But a software lock shouldn't be allowed to later remove a function a company has sold or by mistake given.
Especially when the owner is LEGALLY LIABLE for anything that happens regarding the vehicle.
sure you can say software locks should be forbidden but if that was the case tesla would be forced to sell the car for a higher price to recoup the cost. personally if I can save 4 or 5k on a car with less range with the option of buying that upgrade later id rather do that and have the car instead of being forced to pay that extra 4-5k.
I really wouldn't be surprised if the purchase of the car is for a license to use the vehicle instead of owning the vehicle to get around it.
@@matches7116 I'd rather just bypass all that shit and just use the hardware I paid for instead of playing fuck boy games.
Their future is, "You will own nothing, and you will be happy." Nice to watch you again, Louis. Thanks for sharing! Stay healthy!
Neocapitalism are destroying itself... We need a change back to old liberalism...
Yup. For everyone's good of course.
Stay healthy, but get angry! Grrrr!! The world needs you!
Well, they're half right.
Let's hope it's the right half, but that int their intent.
The irony is that the right love claiming that the left is heading to that future... some sort of weird socialism/communism scare. Yet this is the future (or even present) that capitalism is bringing us to.
The problem for me isn't that they "fixed" the mistake years later, it's that they have the ability to reach out and nerf your car whenever they feel like it, turning off features that you paid for. In this case we're talking about the third owner of the car, he didn't even own it when the "mistake" happened.
This was literally an attempt at highway robbery. They cut 80 miles of range, and then offer to restore it for $4500. That's a ransom-ware scam. In any other context it would be illegal.
I've driven a Tesla, I think they're pretty cool, but because of shenanigans like this I would NEVER own one. The newest car I currently own is a 2008, and when I see the stuff happening in the industry now, and this microtransaction trend, I doubt I'll ever own anything newer than that. I'd rather buy a classic car where the only electronic component is the radio then deal with all this nonsense.
But they didnt shut down a feature he had payed for. Thats the thing - They have the right to shut it down exactly coz he didnt pay for it. There is no breach of contract here.
Easy fix: disconnect the wireless antenna
@@alexforce9 They should have notified him before making a change. If you take your car to a mechanic (in the US) for an oil change, they legally cannot perform any other repairs until you approve it.
Tesla could have told the customer you won't be eligible for software updates until this issue is resolved. At least it would be the customer's choice at that point.
@@erikw792 Fair point. A decent custom service is never a bad thing. They are in their right, but there are nice and not so nice ways of in forcing your rights.
@@alexforce9 Sure they did. He bought the car on the used market, AS IS. Regardless of how that battery got in there he purchased it. What Tesla did, IMO, was theft. They have no right to remove features from his car without his consent.
The line is a bit more blurry if we were talking about the original owner who purchased the car from Tesla, they at least signed a sales agreement with Tesla. This guy never had any agreement with Tesla.
With Tesla, it’s NEVER your car. It’s like a new kind of lease. Imagine speed restrictions because of missed maintenance. Getting locked out of the car entirely because of a missed payment. Yup. That’s our future.
Before they would repo a car. Now if their system messes up they have the authority to brick your car until they think you're square with them... I wonder if they need court approval to do this like a repo? Modern cars that connect to servers should have mandatory failsafe offline functions
Wait until the government implements laws that allows them to say you've used too much electricity at your house or ate too much beef for the month and makes tesla shut off your car for the next 7 days or whatever they decide to "lower your carbon footprint". This is where this is going.
"You will own nothing and be happy"
@@cyberninjazero5659 Yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
@@ryans.8814 I suppose the future of repo is your car suddenly just driving off on its own.
We need to enforce military-style contracts that prohibit alterations after the sale of the product. No over-the-air updates that get installed arbitrarily, no annual payment requirements for Software As A Service, and any method of disabling the product remotely must be stripped prior to installation.
That and the ability to decide when updating what will be installed or removed like the old days
I agree with you both here. Especially now that Tesla has decreased range for model y long range after owners complained that the vehicle did not travel the distance range. We really need to have always where ev buyers actually own their car and get to keep the best software features that comes with it.
Lol good luck with that
If this frustrates you, look at what zero motorcycles is doing with brand new bikes. In this Tesla case, the car originally came with a 60 battery and got a 90 replacement. Maybe the original owner should have been limited to 60 at service. Who knows. Who cares. Zero, on the other hand, sells a bike with a software limited battery where you pay something like $2500 to unlock additional capacity, and there’s other fees associated with bike performance and charge speed. All the hardware is there. Gotta pay a software license on an already expensive bike to unlock everything.
I’ve been looking forward to going electric. But as more and more manufacturers do this shit, I’m shying away from it. I’d rather spew toxic fumes than have software locks for hardware that has already been manufactured and installed that require more fees or subscriptions to access.
I own my polluter car and my polluter bike. Im not going to trade that for electrification. I used to want a zero motorcycle. I don’t anymore. Fuck them.
Electric motorcycles are a sin, no shifting, no vibration, no noise. What’s the point?
Completely agree, I like the idea of a silent, smooth, powerful allegedly low maint vehicle, but as the car i drive right now is 16 years old and has happily allowed me to carry out all maintenance in my backyard, its going to be ICE vehicles for me for the foreseeable future.
Just wait until Russians get their hands on it - Eastern Europeans wholly reject service and subscription models. Where do you think all the hacks for John Deere come from 😂
@@watsisbuttndo829 I mean there was one EV that is maintenance free, it's called the Baker Electric, built before and after WW1...
@@thomas735 Some people just enjoy the ride. The feeling of flying while still tethered to the ground. The rest is just dressing.
We need laws against software lockouts and forced updates. I’d never want to buy an EV knowing that some entity has full control over my vehicle years after purchase. It’s scary enough that your car could be shut off at anytime, assuming you were in trouble w/ the law
That will make cars more expensive. We need laws to regulate how it is made and ensure there is always a reasonable purchase option
@@Cuban-J exactly lmao. i really dont get why is some people`s head only EVs associated with anticonsumer practices. like it never happens with ICE cars lol. And also just get a dumbed down EV and you fine. No corporation will be able to wirelessly hack into your electric golf cart and seize battery usage or whatever.
@@Cuban-J I feel you but at that point I’m just not gonna buy a newer ICE car.
Anything with the electrical technical capability to be shut off or fucked over by someone external is a no go from me. I’ll take a ‘98 blazer over a new Tesla.
They can legally do it due to EULAs, and they should be able to update their software and so on, because imagine if you bought a laptop with windows 10 on it, and you could disregard the user agreement that says that you cannot distribute it? In this case the EULA says that you can't use the heated seats until you pay extra, and you agreed. It should be legal, but people use it poorly. It's not a matter of law, but a matter of corruption and principle.
@@Pawer8 The cost of putting in the battery remains the same whether they active the full capacity of it or not.
It's the opposite way around, by disabling range via software It enables the company to artificially create new pricing points for the vehicle without spending money on physical upgrades.
This is no different then cutting off the fuel pump if the fuel tank drops below 40% and then demanding you pay them more money to "unlock" your tanks full capacity.
These lockouts do not save money for customers. They create new revenue streams for the company. If you support this modelling as a consumer your insane.
I like to think of this more from a repair situation. If you buy a laptop, then pay to get the screen fixed, and the shop decides to put a password on a third of the SSD. We have a word for that it's ransomware. This man should sue.
My biggest issue with this is, that the 2nd or 3rd owner probably bought it as a 90 and paid for a 90 only for Tesla later reducing it.
To put it into computer perspectives, as most people here would be more accustomed with that:
Imagine someone buys a laptop with a 2TB SSD, has it in for repair and the manufacturer gives them a 3TB SSD instead. They sell the laptop later on, then you buy that laptop from that 2nd owner. You buy a laptop with a 3TB drive. You pay for it as a 3 TB machine. Then you have some different issue with it, bring it in for repair and the manufacturer locks it in software back to 2 TB and want's to sell you the extra TB despite the 3TB drive still being in the machine.
Exactly what I thought. If there was anyway the second buyer could read or believe it was a 90 battery then it is criminal to lock it now
That’s what I was thinking as well. I was like, well shit, that sounds like something I’d do (3rd owner) get the whammy!
I’ve avoided this problem by deciding never to buy a Tesla. Please keep on informing us as to which companies don’t deserve our business.
Please deposit 5 dollars for the next 3 minutes of headlights.
Don't joke about that
Just wait till you crash and the airbag asks for your credit card
@@jeice13 DON'T JOKE ABOUT THAT!
@@jeice13 and the crash was caused by not being able to steer because you didn't pay for steering
@@jeice13
lets try not to give them any ideas.
This whole 'as a service' concept is basically just a form of eternal way of eternal indenture: As long as you keep being productive, you can make use of goods and services.
It's only a matter of time before additional requirements or demands are made...
I was heavily leaning toward a Tesla for my local commuter car. After hearing this story, not a chance in hell. Several times I’ve accidentally gave a customer more than what they’ve paid for and never once have I held anything hostage. Which was basically what they were doing.
There is a story like this every day from new cars and phones and shit. Just buy an old piece of shit car with decent gas mileage. Worst case scenario you sell it for scrap and get another. Its what I do.
Wow 1 anecdote changed your mind? Not very strong minded
@@ogzombieblunt4626 which isn't a bad thing. The ability to change one's own mind after learning new facts is a great property, not a weakness. Only the foolish stay "committed", no matter what.
@@kain0m
An anecdote is not a logitudinal study my dude
@@ogzombieblunt4626 Tesla has about 10,000 negative anecdotes like this. At some point, it stops becoming an anecdote and starts becoming part of a trend.
Make no mistake. The end goal is "cars as service" It's no longer if. It's when.
This is so true.
Luckily there will always be some alternative EV company which will offer internet free cars, where you don't have to worry about OTA's and software locks. Apple does the same sh*t, luckily there are plenty of Android brands which have no such lock-downs. Vote with your wallets folks!
@@BillAnt Internet-free cars? I haven't seen a car in the last 15 years that didn't come with satellite radio, which is just another network connection. The only way you're going to get an "internet-free" vehicle is to buy something that was built before 2000...
@@wun1gee - Satellite radio only communicates one way, it receives a signal but doesn't transmit. My 2021 Hyundai Elantra has no internet connection. There will always be cars which don't have it or it's not activated.
@@BillAnt Considering the vast majority of stellite radio systems will let you sign up for the service from the radio unit itself, they a absolutely do transmit. When I installed the UConnect out of a Town & Country in my Wrangler SiriusXM was able to tell it wasn't in a T&C anymore but was in a Wrangler because it was sending data.
Louis, welcome to Texas! It’s great to have you here!
Agreed, it’s petty and wasteful that Tesla had a policy to software lock a larger battery years after that they had mistakenly installed it. They did not take into account the negative social media impact and wasted customer service hours. As a business owner, to me, it makes much more sense to leave it alone, chalk it up as an “oopsie,” keep the customer happy and move on - especially because they are a paying customer! The cost of the “oopsie” happened two years ago, the cost was already incurred two fiscal years ago, and Tesla gained nothing today by software locking the battery. Tesla arguably incurred more costs today by reopening a can of worms and virtuously “fixing” their mistake.
From a business perspective, I’m trying to understand why Tesla would fight a customer over this issue. I’ve always been a fan of their cars, especially the Model S, but it’s incidents like these that have pushed me away from purchasing a Tesla.
Imagine this from an ICE standpoint. I buy an LS-swapped car. And when I take it in for an oil change, the tech comes up to me and goes: 'so we swapped your car back to a 4 cylinder. It'll be $4,500 if you want us to put your LS back in, and we modified your engine bay so you can't swap it back yourself"
That is theft and extortion, plain and simple.
😂
This is like a guy buys a 1976 Camaro. He sells it to someone else. The someone else installs dual exhausts, and sells it to someone else. The next guy brings it to the dealer, and they decide to remove the dual exhausts and puts in a single pipe and claim "you shouldn't have that, so we 'fixed' it."
Im from Germany. The thing you describe wont happen. Only way that would happen is when the exhaust is not TÜV certified, then they could they when you have the car check up that you A: Remove it or B: register it, other thing would be if it is least or financed
@@cyberman2294 Germany isn't an applicable example to basically any other nation.
EDIT: Or really, Germany is the EXTREME example, and you say even then what OP said wont happen. Reread the comment.
This is more like a guy buys a base model Dodge Charger and sells it to a third party. Said third party now Rebadges car to a "hellcat" spec and sells it to another third party. Dodge would not be at fault.
@@The3nd187 Nah, it's more like: a guy buys a base model Dodge Charger SE with a V6 and sells it to a third party. This third party swaps the engine with a V8 and rebadges the Charger to say Hellcat and sells it to another third party. The second third party takes it to a Dodge dealership/service center for maintenance and the technicians discover that it's supposed to be a base model SE, so they tune the ECU to make less horsepower, equivalent to the base model V6. The current owner now has a big V8 engine that makes as much horsepower as a smaller V6 engine. Dodge would be 100% at fault.
@@AnAnonymousAuditor You have a point, but looking at my example now it would be Dodge putting in the stock base model 10 gallon gas tank vs the 15 gallon Hellcat gas tank.
Good points. It's getting harder to just purchase something and own it and have control over it. We need a clear delineation between buying and leasing.
Someone needs to develop a 3rd-party control computer to completely seize control of all functionality. That or just start putting them through their walls.
Same with Apple or literally any other company who uses software locks to stop a user from doing what they want to with paid hardware.
Wk057 (the author) can do it all for pre ap3.0 cars.
Tesla needs to quickly learn that the aftermarket is almost everything in the automotive world or just give it up already. Once the big players start cutting into market share, Tesla will simply become another badge. People are not going to tolerate unavailable parts and services. Used cars are almost more important to dealerships than new cars, and they are not going to want to buy, trade for or sell a vehicle that their parts department cannot fully service or get parts for. There is no; oh, the seat warmer doesn't function, the battery is only 64% at best or Tesla won't do this, that and the other on the car, when a sales rep takes a client on their test drive.
actually, engine control is not so difficult.
basicly, it is rc car with media center.
but... do theese a-holes already use anti-repair chips on motors?
if not, they will(
There are people that jailbreak teslas and do everything you want.
I think the messed up part is they did this after it was resold already. So technically the new owner thought they were paying for certain thing and then had it stolen from them.
Bingo
This is one of reasons I opt for 70s/low80s rides - almost entirely mechanical and easy to fix/repair and look far nicer than modern vehicles.
This is really a scary situation. Pretty soon consumers will own nothing aside from the rights to use the product.
Personally. I stay away from devices like this just for this reason. I drive a 50+ year old vehicle for the sole reason that I can fix it no matter what’s wrong with it and I’m completely free to use it how I want to with no manufacture intervention or repercussions.
not pretty soon, it's common already, read eula's you'll see it.
@@emrwtf For some instances you are correct, but it’s not common as you make it appear to be. Consider Tesla, you can buy a tesla, you still own it, but your flexibility is severely limited due to the dense integration of software. We’re not quite there yet, but everyday we get closer.
@@mrblond750 You still own it, but if Tesla remotely removes the ability of your vehicle to charge, good luck using it.
@@Shotblur Now that is common right now.
@@mrblond750 I'm just speaking from my world, and what i've seen. It's much more common than uncommon from my point of view. And to agree with your point, getting worse.
Tesla: 'Hey customer, we did a software-/driver update.'
Also Tesla: 'You are not the driver anymore, pay us X amount of ransom. Have a nice day!'
I thought I'd share a story from the early '80s. I had just graduated high school and was working as a TV/stereo repairman to pay my college tuition. Most consumer electronics were just switching from tubes to solid state which meant there was a lot more things that could be repaired more cheaply than replaced. Like you mentioned, we often repaired the problem as a way of making the estimate. A new guy bought into the shop and started changing our repair prices by charging more for identical work on more expensive models. For example, we charged $30 in labor and $5 in parts for replacing the bypass diode that blew during the surge from a lightning strike. On a larger, more expensive model he claim the same repair now took an hour (increasing the labor charge to $75) and charge $15 for the same diode that we paid $1 for. Occasionally a person would say, no I'm not paying that much, I'll just come by and pick it back up. For some reason this pissed him off, and he would go back in and do several hundred dollars worth of damage to the set before they could pick it up. This seems to be the f'd up attitude that drives decisions behind those like this Tesla tech made.
And he was within his rights to do that?
@@bensoncheung2801 I'm not sure if it is legal, but it surely isn't ethical. After the little shitgoblin started rewriting the paperwork on my repairs and forging my name on them, I quit. The shop closed within 6 months. I assume people got wind of what he was doing. And there were other shops close enough to soak up all our business.
@@jimhunt1592 Nobody was ever able to confront the guy?
imagine how much damage a disgruntled employee can do with remote control like this
This will happen one day and it'll seriously damage the company
I don’t know why so many people are thinking of this. Such an action would be EASILY traceable. And disgruntled people in all walks of life do crappy things. This isn’t so exclusive.
@@daakrolb I think the point is bad employees shouldn't even be able to do it, regardless of being caught doing it.
@@daakrolb irrational people don't care if they get caught, they do shitty things anyway
I'm just waiting for Russian hackers to hack 10,000+ Teslas to drive into a wall all at once.
Putting aside the customer relations issues with what Tesla did, maybe this is actually worse than you say. It was badged a 90, so not like badged a 60, but capacity of a 90. Guy bought a 90. Raises even more legal question since the car was bought used. If Tesla didn’t do anything wrong, does the buyer seek rebate from whoever sold it to him? And what if the buyer NEEDS a 90 range, and therefore a 60 is of no use to him? And did the buyer have to sign an agreement with Tesla that they could make these changes? Fascinating legal questions! Maybe have a show with a guest lawyer with a specialty with these issues.
Lastly, let me point out that not only does the guy have a 60 and Tesla is unnecessarily needing to mine those additional costly metals that weigh a lot, the buyer is now paying a fuel economy tax equal to the reduced mileage they will get, and increased energy to operate.
On the plus side, the battery may last longer…
Combustion engine and carburetor will fix that problem. No remote access.
Guy who sold it likely just put a 90D badge on it akin to all 328 owners putting an M3 badge on their BMW's. Tesla could have notified this customer and pulled out the 90D batter and put an old refurbished 60D battery in it, of course we would still get a Louis Rossman video out of that scenario as well.
@@dakoderii4221 These days, not really.
Similar things have come up when people sold Teslas with full self driving which Tesla turned off - based on an interpretation that the feature is a license to the driver and not a purchase that stays with the car.
@@dakoderii4221 OnStar
I knew this would happen if you moved out of New York City. You're just not angry enough anymore. Your genuine umbrage was your superpower. This video is great, very informative, I'm better off for having watched it. But I would prefer if it made me slam my Budweiser down on the table and say, "hell yeah, screw their software locks!"
... You used to have a vibe something between an activist and a pro wrestler, and now you have the vibe of an NPR newscaster. Get angry Bruce Banner! We need the green guy!!
Maybe what you need is a nemesis. You did your best work when Cuomo was at large. We need another one if those.
The fact that a software lock like this exists shows you the mindset of the company. It's one thing to include heating coils in a seat but disallow their function with software because the feature wasn't paid for. Disabling part of a battery is insane. What if this person bout a "90" battery from a junker because his "60" battery was spent?
ALL CAR COMPANIES SUCK. Just accept that fact & you’ll stop being surprised when they screw customers by denying warranty protection, taking-away purchased features, etc
.
Well thats it , and who is to say that when the original battery failed ..... it was possibly way earlier than it should have and the tesla dealer may have given the original owner the bigger battery upgrade as gesture of goodwill , and here we are with tesla screwing with the current owners car.
People should really think very very carefully about what they are putting a lot of hard earned cash into when they are buying something like this that they may be stuck with for years .
I like the versatility of a conventional car , i can service it anywhere , in 8 or 10 years time im not going to be pissed off because it has bugger all range or will have to pay 10000 to 20000 bucks for a new battery to be fitted , and god knows what other electronic features they will find to gimp along the way in an EV .
They may decide that 50 mph or 80 kph is fast enough for safety reasons , and gimp your accelerator pedal , this shit is real .
No, it doesn’t make sense, even for heating coils. The company literally had to pay for that part to put it in there, and you had to pay for it because you own the car. The only thing they’re doing is locking it behind an artificial pay wall. You already paid for it, they just want you to pay for it twice
If they want to include the heater in every car because they think its cheaper, thats fine. Don't have a problem with that. The problem is they dont charge you a single time to unlock the feature, they want a monthly subscription to keep it enabled. Thats the insane part...
@@mikldude9376 Lithium-ion batteries last fat longer if you don't discharge them fully and if you don't charge them fully. Considering the software lock is most likely a charging limitation will mean that the pack will never be at a full state of charge.
Unless the scumbags can disable individual modules.
Perfect example of the amount of control people can have on a vehicle. Driving too much, remotely shut it down. Driving out of a restricted area, shut you down. Carbon footprints monitoring!
i have a 1980 gmc built thomas mighty mite school bus. its engine is a 350 cu inch small block chevy. it has a 4 barrel edlebrock carb and the only thing in it thats electronic is the tiny ignition module in the distributer. no computer, no obd port, nothing.
@@MrSGL21 you are extremely lucky!
@@rcommando1107 wef ❤ dont you dare say one negative word about my boy Klaus.
@@UnKnownv5 he'll get there.
@@UnKnownv5 IIRC China during the Olympics did this the physical analogue way. Car has an odd number in the numberplate? No driving today. Even number? No driving tomorrow. Soon to be remotely operated. While in theory this has no problem... we are not in a perfect world and it sadly will be more control to those who don't deserve to have it.
I'm retired but when I was doing repairs I took great delight in giving customers a free upgrade wherever practical.
If you drag a 100+kg heavier battery around just because Tesla didn't have the correct battery in stock at the time, you should get some compensation for the increased motor, battery and tire loads. For what it is worth, you do get ~50% extra reserve capacity for wear and improved all-weather performance.
The original owner was compensated for the larger battery with increased range for free he then sold the car as a 90 when it was only supposed to be a 60 maybe it's a misrepresentation on the part of the first owner to the 2nd one
@@johncherish7610 it has a 90 battery, so no, it was not a 60 but a 90
@@johncherish7610 well it's not really a misrepresentation. It had battery of a 90 and could go the same distance as one at the time.
As a gearhead that does my own repairs it's disconcerting how these companies lock you out with software. Buy, throw away, buy again yet blame consumers for the pollution? Worse yet lots of these companies are using Chinese built electronic components of dubious quality.
It's the same exact story as single-use plastic. Buy, throw away, buy again. Spread propaganda about how it's unsafe to reuse (or repair). Blame the general public for all the excess waste that you're selling. Repeat until an entire generation believes that "ownership" is a privilege and not a right. The Lord in the manor doesn't want you to drive, so he accesses "your" car remotely and neuters it. Whose car is it really, if you can't even be sure of your right of _usus, fructus_ and _abusus?_
Hah, my old Razor electric scooter's control module fried. So I replaced it with two relays (one for acceleration, one to cut that one when I press the brake) and I happened to have a 24v charger for a mobility scooter so I used that. Now it's all analog, baby, EMP proof at that :P
@@the_kombinator Awesome! You don't know how many times I've repaired a computer, flat screen, electronics in general that's usually very easy to troubleshoot. In every instance it was a swelled capacitor that cost 10 cents (or free from another circuit board I saved just for capacitors) to replace yet most people will just toss it and buy new.
I took my Dad's electric fencer to the manufacturer that does walk in repairs. Less than a year later the transformer they replaced quit again-it's not them it's the Chinese built transformer. There's no reason we can't build our own stuff but corporations want the cheap labor at the cost of quality.
@@tomservo5347 I repair retro computers, so I'm decent at component level repair (not an expert though!) I repaired a free 52 inch TV because a single LED was causing the series connected strip to stop working. I of course bought ALL the LED strips ($120 shipped) but years later I still have the TV, and 11 out of 12 LED strips in case it fries again. ;)
On top of that, I have four carburetted cars. I suspect it will be harder and harder to run those in the coming decades though...
@@the_kombinator Gearheads specifically build cars with carburetors to avoid the computer telling an engine that wants to run to not run. I'm not onboard with the 'global warming' thing (or climate change or whatever convenient moniker they come up with) and it's incredible that no one realizes no matter how much the West cuts it's own throat with green laws China and India will outproduce emissions anyway. I thought trees and green things ate up those emissions and produced oxygen via photosynthesis we all learned about in grade school.
I recently bought a 2nd gen KLR650 specifically for the fact it's carbureted and I can modify it a million ways without any computer going apeshit over it.
The idea of having to pay extra to unlock an upgrade that is already there has been going on forever. 15A & 20A outlets internally are identical in some brands with the only difference being the slots in the outer plastic, yet the 20A costs almost double what the 15A costs. 50 years ago B&L StereoZoom microscopes came in 2X, 2.5X, & 4X with the internal mechanisms identical, and limited in motion by the end-stops in the knob. They later even sabotaged the ability to bypass the knob stops by cutting several teeth off one of the gears to prevent the zoom mechanism from traveling past the lowered zoom factor.
In my truck, i put in gas to a certain amount and they can’t software limit it. Also, it can tow things long distances without severely limiting range. BTW, this is really concerning, in a world increasing in being controlled techwise, the ability to just “limit” people becomes a huge way to control.
This kind of thing has pissed me off since the early 2000's when I realized that the Cable Box that I bought had not only software but also hardware locked out. They had actually disabled ports via software so you could not use them. The ports are there, they work (technically), but you can't use them. And sadly the trend continues with all sorts of tech, like Phones and Consoles and even Smart Home Devices. The powers that be, reach in and remove/block features that you PAID FOR. Personally I think it should be illegal to remove features at the least. If it was there when you bought it, they should not be able to remove it via a patch etc. later. PS3(?) comes to mind especially.
Yup, especially since in this case the owner bought it as a 90 model, not as a 60
Yeah the original model PS3s csn run Linux but only on an early software version. They patched it out and on later consoles made it impossible via hardware.
LG TVs are a huge belligerent on that front
IMO the source code of the software used and the datasheet of the hardware used, including hardware architecture and hardware command system should be sold as manual WITH any goods that contain any kind of electronics and software with it.
It should be illegal to sell any kind of device that doesnt follow that rules.
@@BananaMana69 To be fair, the PS3s were not sold as Linux workstations. And they weren't stellar performers in that role.,
It's going to be great when these things require a login and then send a safety rating score for your driving to your insurance company automatically
I believe there was a story a while back that when you opt to use Tesla's insurance they monitor your driving and give it a score
To proceed to hospital please drink verification can
Stuff like this is what is putting me off ever buying a brand new car going forward, just the fact that ultimately I'm not the person in control of it and a malicious actor can at any time, regardless of what the law states, reach in a *boop* mess with my car without me even knowing. Now I'm a person of mechanical inclination who has the knowledge and ability to just work on my own cars and keep them, hence why I've stripped down and am in the process of doing a full mechanical rebuild on a 2000 Subaru, to where mechanically it will be a brand new, 23-year old car, that I plan to use as my daily car for the next 10 years or so until I strip it down and rebuild it again, but other people do not have the same inclination and patience that I do and are forced to keep themselves in a never ending buy/lease a new/CPO car every 2-3 years and will inevitably come to face the always-connected, on-the-fly "update" whether you want it or not automotive dystopia going forwards.
I am definitely not mechanically inclined at all, but I have enough common sense to know that anything that is 100 percent circuit board / Internet dependent going down these bumpy roads in most major cities that haven't been paved since I was in diapers is going to have a problem. No thanks. They will have to sweep my 2008 Chevy Equinox off the pavement with a broom before I get rid of it.
@@sandral.f.h.4041 Funny, my common sense says that using thousands of small controlled explosions per second to transport myself is going to cause problems. But that's why we don't rely entirely on common sense for decision making. Note that circuit boards have been in cars for decades.
Circuit boards and internet are separate things. You can have EVs without an internet connection. Heck, you can have an EV with an internet connection, but where the motors and anything drive critical is air-gapped to the internet connection. But of course, consumers don't care. Or in your case, don't know. Oh well.
Same here. I deliberately bought a 20 year-old car instead of a brand new vehicle and it was the best move. Not only was it cheaper, but I wasn't in a rush, so I got a top deal with a one-owner and low mileage vehicle. I get an enthusiast mechanic to service it, and I can fix it, too. No one can screw with it and take anything away from me. No more new cars for me.
@@chaklee435 who’s selling them like this though.
Right on. Newest thing I have is a 2006 with no on-star. That and new cars costing 10x what a used one goes for. No brainer.
Stuff like this is why property is going a bad way. Digital and electronic based stuff is literally, "You will own nothing"
yup...why im also pissed with Microsoft and doing this crap with all their programs, you can't even own a copy of Microsoft office...your only option is a monthly or a yearly subscription
which is absolutely ridiculous especially if you got kids and you want to prepare them for middle school...but Microsoft shot themselves in the foot because now you can basically do everything on Google
google doc - Microsoft word
Google spreadsheets- Micro Excel
Google Slide - PowerPoint
etc etc
yup.. the trick is making you think its yours when you buy it
But you can own "land" in the metaverse. You can't pay with meta-money though. Only real money is accepted by our owners.
This is why I crack software 🏴☠️
I think stuff like this is what is gonna lead people to be tech averse. I've already changed my mind on wanting a Tesla model 3.
Software locks need to be made flat-out illegal across the board. Super-illegal. As in "mandatory ten years in prison for all management at the company" illegal.
Oh, and while we're at it, let's also ban the use of encrypted firmware and signed code. Both of those serve only the purpose of controlling the product after it leaves the factory.
Damn man. This is such a big lesson. This makes me stay the hell away from Tesla. I have a rich friend that won't buy a tesla because he feels it would be like driving an iPad. He has a point, but it is also pretty damn funny.
Well, he's kind-of right, just probably not for the reasons he thinks. He's probably thinking "touchscreen UI", while the real reason is "manufacturer screwing you over".
ALL CAR COMPANIES SUCK. Just accept that fact & you’ll stop being surprised when they screw customers by denying warranty protection, taking-away purchased features, etc
.
@@Roxor128 Exactly, when a company can remotely modify a physical object you bought, and even paid for. Then yea it's a problem and we as consumers need to vote with our dollar.
@@upsidedownpeon9984 And vote on the ballot paper for candidates who aren't afraid to regulate these scumbag companies.
@@Roxor128 Unfortunately that's rare. Most of the candidates are firmly in their pocket.
One step closer to: "I'm sorry I can't do that Dave."
Dave: "Let me into the car, I need to go to work!"
Tesla: "I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that, Dave!"
Dave Starts taking a screwdriver to the door lock.
"What are you doing, Dave?"
Oh my goodness, that is so kind of you. You're offering your employees to stay at your place temporarily until they find something because they're moving too. You seem like such an awesome kind of boss. I hope you find a good realtor. Moving house is a while ordeal (been there, done that). It's always better with a good realtor. We had an excellent one.
This was a total smooth brain move on Tesla's part.
I do need to add that the likely reason they stuck the bigger pack in was because that was all that was available at the time.
...You literally have an "I stand with Ukraine" avatar. You're no less moronic.
Extending this situation into the future, it sounds like these vehicles will always be at risk of becoming bricked at any time the company pleases, or through any mistake they happen to make. How can they have much resale value when they can be bricked at any point in time? We bought a toy robot that has voice recognition a few years ago. In LESS than a year the company that made it was bought out by another company and the only thing the robot would do after that was tell us to go to a certain web site to sign up for a $60 subscription with the new company to unlock it and be able to use it again.
that was the vector or whatever right?
@@bhume7535 Yeah, poor little Vector. (I think there was also a kid's version called Cosmo?) RIP Vector was voice-activated (and face recognition) so that was all handled by the company's servers which shut down when the company was sold.
They were demanding Elon brick all citizens Teslas in Russia to help with the war effort. He didn't do it, but the fact crazy people in the news were even calling for it blows me away.
The REALLY bad part is that if Tesla can hack your car and reduce the capabilities, or even shut it down, so can a bad actor. As time goes on, this will become a significant issue with IoT devices.
@@brooksrownd2275 I wanted a vector so bad. Sad to hear.
Very similar thing happened to me with my aftermarket Kenwood head unit for my car. Spent $1,200 on this HU which has integrated Spotify connection to my phone app. Spotify cut off this connectivity to now sell their "car thing" instead. My phone still connects to the HU using the standard Bluetooth app, but Spotify will not communicate. It was a feature I purchased with the hardware, and the company (Spotify) took it back a couple years after the fact. Total shady practice IMO.
We live in a world where our tech overlords are dictating what we can do
With our own property. If I buy a car the manufacturer shouldn’t be able to sabotage it and/or hold me hostage. Interestingly enough I don’t see this in other countries, just here in the USA.
GM wants to deny people warranties now if they decide to resell their cars to
Someone else. Insane.
Imagine taking your car or truck in for a leaking water pump or bad oil pump, and 3 years later they say silently put the bad pump back in. Absolutely insane. But so easy with electronics and software.
@@volvo09 I know, and unless the customer votes with their wallet things won’t change!
@Vercusgames yeah smart on you, it’s my opinion that Tesla will be the biggest bubble stock in history!
@Vercusgames Some of the best stocks are for companies that take advantage of their customers!
That's capitalism baby
It's insanely sketchy how modern cars, not just Teslas, can have so much remotely controlled. If you have a GPS connection, odds are you have a network connection. You can read some scary conspiracy theories out there that when you research the vehicles, may hold a lot more water than they should. As an IT guy with decades of experience across multiple fields and tiers, let me tell you, I buy older cars for a reason.
I also won't be buying a new car... probably ever. The government-mandated systems list is going up and will include breathalyzer ignition locks soon in the USA and Canada.
@@rockspoon6528 I saw that, so freaking dumb. What if you're the DD or, like so many other tech related things, it just malfunctions for no reason?
@@DeadBaron For DD's they just blow into it, but if it malfunctions there goes your damn car until the cops show up and unlock it, probably. If they don't arrest you first because "the machine doesn't lie".
I like to make two points. When I did TV repair in the late 90s and 2000s there were some televisions that had features in them that were not accessible without the proper remote. The very expensive remote control allowed for features to be accessed. Now regarding that extra 300 lb lithium, it's still there so the longevity of that pack would be greater since you're not pulling from it in the maximum way. Glad they corrected it given that it was their error, and making one pack is ultimately more efficient than making multiple packs.
Imagine being cancelled for having incorrect opinions and then having your car soft locked because of it
Welcome to our Cyberpunk Dystopia, minus the Lazer guns, cybernetics, and robot prostitutes.
You just described the Oculus Quest VR headset before Meta un-linked the account with Facebook.
Welcome to China hacking John Deeres and shutting down our farming equipment when angry like the John Deere company did to the equipment in Ukraine...
that's the plan
That's what WEF wants
Third owner bought it "AS IS", so Tesla robbed THIRD customer.
Tesla could've take the battery cap from FIRST, not after two transactions.
Even if it was a mistake, the fact they can do this in the first place is pretty damning and this sort of stuff is why if I had the money and despite the desire to have a nice Tesla car, I'd be afraid to buy one, because they have too much software control over the vehicle.
Imagine Dell connecting to your PC via teamviewer during the night and reformatting your hard drive from 900 to 600GB, because that's how the computer was originally sold. Make no mistake that is what Tesla has done here.
Best comparison, i was trying to think of that kind of situation.
The RAM analogy is being too generous to Tesla. The scenario would be Tesla didn't physically remove the RAM module, but rather they forced an over the air firmware update that cripples the RAM functionality and locked it to 8 GB, then asks for a ransom to get it back.
That’s pretty much what he said though, that it’s not like he is taking that ram back, rather it’s Tesla being greedy at blocking the feature just because they want to make sure the customer doesn’t get anything he didn’t pay for.
@@da4127 So to get payed fully for your product is being greedy now? phahahaha
@@alexforce9 No, to lock an already working product to not work properly out of spite is greedy
@@circuit10 The product is working properly. Its not greedy to in force the actual letter of the contract. In the contract it says how big the battery is. If his signature is under that contract - it means that is what he AGREED UPON!
@@alexforce9 there is a difference of capacity vs size/weight. They made his car carry more weight and lose charge faster
The problem is not paying extra to unlock the heated seats, it's that they are removed when the car transfers ownership. Extra features as a more expensive package have been included in the car buying process for years, but imagine if you bought a more traditional car, and, when you sold it, the manufacturer came up behind you, beat you to the ground, and ripped the heating element out of the seats.
If you are going to make me pay for heated seats when buying a second-hand car, then come drive to my house and replace the heating element. Because if I am paying for new heated seats, i want to make sure the heating element is brand new and functions perfectly.
It seems to me that if the car was bought secondhand, then "first sale" doctrine should apply. This is "theft of services" on the part of Tesla, plain and simple. Given that the value is more than $500 it's a felony...
A purchase contract that says Used P90 but is actually software-limited to P60 by Tesla is automatically breached. The buyer can sue the seller in civil court & recover his money.
Especially since the seller KNEW he had purchased a P60 directly from tesla. By telling the buyer “it’s P90” the seller committed fraud
@@electrictroy2010 at the time of sale it was functioning as P90 therefore not willful fraud.
Strange how that one guy has taken all of the blame away from Tesla and put it all on the previous owner.
This should be easily disputed. And if the judge is too old and out of touch, just explain its like a gas station cutting your tank off at 60%
Yeah well here's the point of the legal assumption. The operation of the vehicle was as purchased from dealership. And the fact that it still operates as intended for the record.
Its pretty obvious you are not a lawyer.
@@ultrastoat3298 no I just play one on TV.
Yeah if you purchased a product that modified the way the machine operates then yes you'd have an actual claim.
But since ""the battery was replaced by a warranty claim , tesla is under no obligation to embetter you.
The car was a x class . The battery as stated in a post :
At some point years ago the battery pack was swapped under warranty with a 90 pack. It wasn't software limited. It was effectively made into a 90 by Tesla.
So what tesla liability is that the car has to function as oem intended.
Yeah so tesla isn't legally liable to give the guy an upgrade.
What happened was mechanic was cool as F ,and hooked the guy up.
So yeah given the fact that warranty claim was done satisfactory to the original owner.
The fact also remains that did any warranty transfer to the guy who owns it now?
So there's that.
It's like a guy who did a chip tune on his z28 warranty on the brain box went bad gm didn't have to retune the car, that's how things work under the law .
Lol yeah you remind me of those fair use is a law crowd
@\f_a/ You bring your gasoline car to your dealer and they fill 1/3 of your tank with cement, because you were getting too good of gas mileage...
It is on the 3rd party who sold the car imo.
This was a real eye openner. When it comes to car seat warmers it makes sense for the company to install them but not charge the customer for it because the supply chain and construction of the vehicle stays consistent. That's where the company saves money and the customer saves in upfront purchase. For the the customer to have it turned on later should only be charged the cost difference that would have been charged if were an item anyone else would have paid for up front when buying the car. BUT!! When it comes to the most important aspect of an electric vehicle "THE BATTERY''. It should be designed to operate at no lower than 90% capacity. A 90% cap helps the battery to last longer. The most complete use of the battery should always be made available. It's cost to the customer and the cost to the inviorment to make it, is high. So it's fullest use should be made available upfront at purchase.
To clarify that last sentence. The batteries power should ALWAYS be sold to the customer with 90% of its use available. Never lower to be made as an "Up Grade" having to be purchased later.
Locking hardware to sell a cheaper version makes the whole company sound scummy to me. If the cheaper version of a product has the same hardware as the more expensive product, but it's locked behind software then the more expensive product should be priced at what the cheaper version of the product is.
But it is, it's an additional, optional fee when purchasing the "cheaper" model.
@@Vampr1c If they are making a profit while selling the cheaper model with the extra features, then they can afford to sell the more expensive version for the cheaper price, but they're just pocketing that extra money for extra profit while being wasteful. I get that businesses are trying to make as much money as possible, but when you're doing that as a business you shouldn't rub it in your customers faces by locking products like this.
@@ryuranzou I agree with your statement, I was merely pointing out how you were differentiating them as completely separate models. I should have started with that, my apologies.
I don't know, but maybe this 60 kw pack is constructed of grade b cells..
Better to use them to something than just scrap them, could be poor cell manufacturing way back in the early days when the manufacturing process/quality was not so good.
@@jada1173 The 60 kw pack was originally actually 60. But so few people bought the 60 that they just stopped making those packs, and software-locked the 75s. And everyone understood that. Nobody was upset, because they weren't paying for the batteries.
Sounds like I changed my mind about wanting a tesla ever.
Same
I wanted a Tesla back when they were the new shiny thing. Now, after a couple of years, I noticed how scummy the company actually is.
Stay away from tesla, get a VW, AUDI or something offline
@@gandalfwiz20007 really? You think VAG is the solution!? Go from one scumbag company to another?
@@kwl189 it's not the solution, but it's the lesser evil...sad
a larger battery pack also means it will not degrade. So it depends on how the previous owners service was written up 'complementary upgrade' or not. They would put a large pak in to be able to offer an upgrade later, but also since there was an issue it gives them more flexibility - maybe its normal now to allow 'unlocking' more power. if not a larger pak will compensate for their driving habits.
You can be a tesla fan AND think this kind of policy is really petty. If Tesla doesn't change course, yes this can tarnish the polish.
Yea I have been looking fwd to the cyber truck things like this have completely turned me off from getting one.
ALL CAR COMPANIES SUCK. Just accept that fact & you’ll stop being surprised when they screw customers by denying warranty protection, taking-away purchased features, etc
.
And I don't need a tesla to complain about there crappy business practice.
@@emailsuxor "Yea I have been looking fwd to the cyber truck"
Which one was that? The crappy truck with the not-so-unbreakable glass that's coming never?
I see many Tesla fans who after seeing/hearing about some of the stories start to hate the company but I see many more who double down and defend the company no matter what. And those people usually don't have counter arguments too (there was one is this very comment section saying Tesla paid back their loans unlike some other car companies and trying to berate a person who changed their mind about buying a Tesla after hearing this story)
This HAS to be illegal.
The problem as I see it is though, it would be an EASY argument to make to someone like a judge who has absolutely no practical knowledge of anything at all, that because the car was only "optioned" with xxx amount of power, it's "unsafe" for it to have access to xxx amount of power, even though xxx amount of power is installed.
The real problem with the world is the level of ineptitude and lack of common sense possessed by those entrusted with making the decisions.
@@UnKnownv5 NOT when you buy it used from the SECOND OWNER !!!
The software lock just feels gross but my main problem is with the subscription model that always seems to go with it. So not only are features held for ransom but that monthly kick in the teeth can go up at the manufacturer's discretion.
I think if the manufacturer can, at any time, reach over into your device to change something, then they should also take over some of the legal liability if something goes wrong. Eg if the change in software configuration leads to the car behaving in a different way that leads to a crash, then the manufacturer (Tesla) should be at least partly liable for this.
Essentially, companies that force updates on you should not be able to hide behind the idea that they're providing the software/hardware "as is" to you.
Legally this is already true. Good fucking luck ever getting them to actually take the blame for it. Remember when Toyotas were yeeting themselves into things and how long it took for them to take any resposibility? Remember how little Toyota had to pay out to those who were injured and fucking died because of it?
I'd say this needs to be challenged in court.
Question is who owns the Tesla?
Customer or Tesla?
If Tesla can automatically communicate and change features on your car they should ask permission first.
Like a dialogue box pops up.
_Software upgrade required_ _proceed_ ?
...
It's most likely in the terms and conditions of buying a Tesla that they have access to it.
...
It's this access that should be challenged and ownership established.
I will never own a car that is sold with software lockouts or allows over-the-air control. I was horrified all the way back when I first saw cars with GM's OnStar system. I couldn't believe people were giving GM that sort of control over their vehicle, and _paying_ for it to boot.
True. But you can have a third party rip out onstar. Tesla is a little too knew for 3rd party mechanics to know how to properly remove teslas control and keep all the features functioning
@@GreyBlackWolf - It's just a matter of time till 3-rd party controllers become available, or at least hacks to disable internet connection completely. Personally I would never own a car with any kind of internet connection and OTA's.
@@BillAnt agreed
@Jason Bourne - There'll be new cars especially gas types which won't have all that internet connection/OTA firmware crap.
If you want to push EV's, then first better make sure that the US electric grid can handle it, because currently it cannot without adding nuclear power. Wind and solar are inefficient to produce large amounts of grid energy, they are ok for personal use.
Congratulations on your move to Texas. I hope things work out better for your company in Texas.
There is definitely a case now for customers issuing a term in to a contract of sale.
A customer adds a clause along the lines of "you can't remove any features or performance from my property". Most dealerships would just sign the contract, particularly for high value sales. The manufacturer/dealership model has generally worked with automobiles for over a century. Yes, a manufacturer could rescind a franchise, but it wouldn't take long for the number of pissed-off franchisees to fight back.
Unfortunately this is the future of EV’s, software locked features here and there. Tesla can do it because they build their software to allowed them to block whatever they want. But don’t think the other car manufacturers won’t do the same at some point in the future.
So the customer has to make some noise and vote with their wallet. Do the research and buy the electric vehicle without this type of brand intervention. It is one of the reasons I don't ever want Apple products. I think with your attitude the world only gets worse. I'd say follow Louis spread the word and buy other products.
@@richardbloemenkamp8532 hard to find a car manufacturer that doesn't pull this crap though, you buy a ford, have to take it to ford dealership for any issues or void the warranty, add your own mods void warranty, week late on oil change void warranty, try and hot swap a part thats faled its software locked to prevent identical parts swapping!!!
there is no car company that doesn't pull this crap that ive found.
I really hate this future. Sometimes I wish we could get a car with 2022 safety features but with the engine and driver train freedom of a 2000 car. Just give me a safe car without the stupid software locks and 100 car modules that complain when my sunroof doesn't open
@@robgilmour3147 it used to be Toyota then they started this bullshit too. Any car past 2008 has this bullshit. The more expensive they are the more stupid shit they pull
you can get a jammer to jam certain signals from sources. They are pricy but for 4500$ you can get a really good one. and the jamming is selective.
We need to get the ball rolling today on fighting "as a service" features on products coming into the market before we can't own anything we buy anymore.
now I see the problem with Transportation as a Service
A creepy james bond villan said 'you will own nothing and be happy'.
How do we do this ?
Imagine if you bought a toyota camry that was sold to you at a lower trim than the one you got, and they remove the leather seats, V6, high end radio, etc when you came in for an oil change. I don't know how these "tech" companies get away with so much. It seems like screwing over the customer with takebacks, subscriptions and shady licencing of "services" becomes status quo once you get to a certain threshold of trendy techyness. And the people working there pretending its a good thing that they've gimped this dudes battery. Reminds me of microsoft
Computer manufacturers used to do something like this. DEC was famous for selling you an upgrade then a technician would come out and change the jumpers on a board you already owned and the feature would be enabled. Same with software these days, you pay for the license to get the features that are already there.
The fact only that Tesla has a system that can software lock the capacity of the battery say's a lot to where we are heading.
We assume that other EV makers can't do this, why? If they're not doing it, that's different than they can't do it.
@@daw162 ig the premise is if they could do it, they would do it, cuz profits or smth
@@daw162 Most EVs aren't as technology and software based as tesla. Soon enough it will be the norm as they would have caught up.
This is why the IoT/smart devices future where we are going scares me. I don't know iw why some people are happy to go along with it.
Companies will abuse that power. Force to give you downgrades because of planned obsolescence, spy on you, etc.
Everyone right arm will get very strong
I think Tesla has been doing something like this for a while. My buddy owned a 90. He looked at upgrading to ludicrous mode. They explained that it was essentially a license for him to use it. If he sold the car they took the software upgrade away. I think they had a pay for increase use of battery capacity license that worked the same way. Good for original purchaser but gone when you sell it.
So... if i pay for it and it does not unlock for the Hardware permanently, is the purchase then locked to my account instead?
Or do you have to pay for it AGAIN with your next Tesla?
Sounds silly, but if you know you have an account with all these things unlocked ...of course you are going to buy the same brand again, that could be a way to bind customers to your brand permanently. THAT logic i would understand...
just disabling it AND making you pay for it again... that just removes resale value from your property. That i would call theft.
Then you must buy a Tesla in the name of a company, and when you sell, you sell the company.
@@ZeroB4NG as it was explained to my friend, it was a license for you on that particular car. If you sold or traded you got no credit and you had to pay for it on the new car.
Same price if you had the car and mode for a day or 10 years.
It soured him on the brand.
I wonder if you were in an accident and the car totaled , would be able to get additional value for the license or not. Since it essentially has no additional value at sale or trade would the insurance company give you anything.
I think about it this way. If I buy a home and then discover that there is a second bathroom in my house which I am unable to access without paying the seller another "extra bathroom unlock fee", would you accept that? I think not, but this is clearly the way our society is heading.
Well. That just cements me NEVER getting a Tesla
problem is Tesla is setting this for other car companies to follow, just like how Apple influence other phone manufacturers
The ai already cemented that for me.
No worries other big car companies are going EV with good prices. One of them allows customers to work with local businesses in car service
You see the guy joe rogan had on his show the other day who took the telsa engine out and put a v8 in? Pretty intresting show
Well that just cements me never buying an EV from any vendor
There need to be more consumer groups going against this kind of behavior. My question is where is the line on this? When one company sees another doing this, it starts a toxic ripple down effect...
8:10 The 60kwh pack was discontinued, so they replaced it with the only available option: a larger 90kwh pack. Computer sellers used to downclock CPUs on product that were still selling well, but didn't have the older CPU available anymore so they shipped the computer with a downclocked better CPU. I had such a computer, and when I found out, I "overclocked" it to it's designed speed.
Here, Tesla probably have said to the first owner: "We changed the pack under warranty, and we had to install a larger one. Since we have no other choice, (and maybe their TeslaOS didn't have the feature to downgrade a pack back then) and can't charge you over a warranty issue, we gave you a larger pack. Enjoy!"
TelsaOS evolved, the 70 and later 75kwh pack was released (sold as an unlockable 70kwh pack), and they added the pack unlock feature to the OS.
But the downgrade shouldn't have happened.
TESLA HAS RIGHTS TO THE SOFTWARE, BUT NOT THE RIGHT TO BREAK INTO OTHERS PROPERTY. This is absolutly sad.
@\f_a/ this guy knows what's up
@\f_a/ Exactly. Why don't we just have electric cars instead of smart cars? I don't the concept of a smart car.
@\f_a/ ah no the speed controller is really no different than an EMS in fact there is much more complicated electronic in an EV than an ICE car
Look, imagine you make bikes. A costumer come and wants a bike. You tell them - 500 for the whole bike, but I can sell it for you for 400 if you dont wanna the tires. The costumer says - Sounds good. Then some of your workers forgets to remove the tires and delivers the bike as it is. Then you find out and want the additional 100 for the tires. But the costumer says " I payed for the bike, its mine now". Do you think its fair?
@@alexforce9 yes an error is always in the customers favour it's the same here for miss labelling the price if it labelled high they need to fix it if it's labelled low they need to honor it, same goes for your example you don't get to tell the customer i want more money now you suck up your loses on that one and tell your employees they need double check their work before releasing the item
Reminds me of when I was a kid one day in the school cafeteria. So we usually had multiple options for lunch, even for those of us on free lunch. Two options were pasta with a salad and chicken nuggets with fries. They had the pasta and chicken meals on the same line one day, when usually they were separate. So I grabbed the pasta, fries, an orange, and a milk and when the cashier rung me up, she told me I can't get fries with the pasta and it'd be a dollar extra for what would otherwise have been a 40 cent lunch. So I told her I only had the 40 cents because that's all I expected I'd need and she grabbed the fries off my tray with her bare, cash-handling (and hairy, I might add) hands and threw the fries in the garbage. So what did she accomplish that day? Nothing. Not a damn thing, other than assert herself over a poor child and waste food in the process. Still disgusts me to this day.
Kids can be stupid, due to lack of experience, but adults can be vindictive azzholes who live to ruin things. I've seen so many adults act a certain way, and just shake my head. They have no excuse.
Wow. What a pathetic woman. Just rest easy knowing her entire life was pathetic & miserable…
Was that a lesson maybe?
You can't get something for free just because you didn't have enough money.
Then everyone can just do the same and get that for free.
Just be glad she didn't put it back at least.
@@jada1173 If that was her intention, then she had no idea what she was doing. First off, if the sides couldn't be swapped, then there should have been a sign stating such. Otherwise, the only takeaway from the lesson is that I need to get better at reading minds. Second, trying to "teach" a kid on a government lunch program that "you can't get something for free" is not only cruel and vindictive, but the privileged preaching to the underprivilaged choir. And third, let's leave the lessons to the underpaid, overeducated classroom teachers and not the cafeteria cashier.
I work for a home builder, and a customer paid for a rough in for AC, but not the full system. They accidentally added the whole system, but now they legally cannot go back without the customer’s permission and remove what they did not pay for. If the owner does not agree to let them on their property, they just got the finished system for free. Why would the car be any different? It is private property and if they did not catch the mistake when working on it, or had to upgrade it for free because they did not have the lower end part, too bad. We have also had to upgrade some appliances for customers because what they ordered was not there on time, and that was a free upgrade too. You are a big company, and this is just a part of doing business.
…exactly why I tell people I won’t be driving cars that communicate. The only communication I want my car to have is ignition switch and key.
My everyday drivers are between 92-08. Max. No cars with antennas that receive bands outside AM/FM.
Communication is fine if it doesn’t allow people other than you to control the car
@@circuit10 so basicly wheels on the bus goes round and round till he tells the passenger to shut up
Reminds me of this with my cable co. Years ago, I installed the free digital mini box at the company's insistence, new Federal law etc. I wasn't near any deadline for upgrading. BAM! As soon I did it, I lost maybe 20 channels, including what I had just been watching! I called them. "Oh, you had that by mistake. You weren't supposed to have those channels. You can pay us more and get the channels back!" Can they now sell those unused channels to another customer?
I will say as a car enthusiast and automotive engineer the one thing about traditional car companies (especially the big 3) is that a LOT of employees there are also car enthusiasts and that DIY culture and openness to modification makes its way to their cars. Go into any GM/Ford/Stellantis parking lot and you'll see modified V8 muscle cars and trucks left and right and even the executives tend to be enthusiasts themselves. And with Ford you see this with the Maverick and Lightning with how accessible electrical outlets are and how F150 Raptors have auxiliary switches from the factory meant for the customer to add additional accessories like lights or horns from the aftermarket. Meanwhile Tesla is all software engineers who are used to censoring their software
They might as well have made it 69%, because it'd be just as big of a joke as this.
I can't help but imagine a world surrounded by the idea of "You will own nothing and you will be happy", and it's things like this that make me question whether we're already there.
You own as much as you pay for. No one is stopping users to pay the full price from the get go and to own their own damn car from the get go.
@@alexforce9 the company has a killswitch tho
@@skullingtonfx4441 That they cant use unless they wanna get into serious law shit. Coz you know - the electricity company have those too. Your water company, phone, gas, hell, even your insurance company cant just cancel stuff.
@@alexforce9 those are services lmao. Unless you are admitting that you don't own the car and are just using it as a service. We really do own nothing but we aren't happy about it
@@skullingtonfx4441 Lmao. Why are you making the leap from - They can do it. to - I dont own that car/bike. ? They cant LEGGALY do it. I can come to your house tonight and steal your dog, does that mean you dont own a dog?
This could come in as unlawful hacking, which can have quite serious penalties for the persons involved. It's a quite daring person at Tesla that asks for money to undo their hacking.
If Tesla made a mistake years ago and the car was sold etc, Tesla just have to live with their original mistake.
It's under the Terms of Service that nobody ever bothers to read
@@ronaldckrausejr7762 Note that not all text in legal documents are actually valid - even if the customer has "accepted".
I would have told them to restore it back or I would call the police for vandalism, if the police and dealership still didn't do anything I would have filed an insurance claim against the tesla dealership for vandalism. No matter what anyone thinks, if you tamper with something that doesn't belong to you then it is the definition of criminal mischief.
WELL SAID! This comment should be pinned to the top.
Also, if the dealership is located in your community, you could post a negative review on the community's Facebook page. explaining exactly what they did to the car.
One step closer to dystopia.
Not being able to use the extra batteries with the software lock is actually wrong. The batteries get wear leveling so while you won't get the range, you will get a proportional increase in charge/discharge cycles.
Assuming they actually don't have messed that up too. Which is a possibility.
The interesting think about that is the fact that battery service life is directly related to depth of discharge, so if you can only drain the battery to 33% you'll get roughly double the service life before the battery needs to be replaced
More and more this is why i love 1985 diesel wagon. Remote start would be nice but not at that cost of the manufacturer being able to to mess with it any time they want.
300TD?
@@bobbbobb4663 - if it is a W123 E Class, he'd better take good care of it.
@@EyePatchGuy88 I'm in the club as I own a 1979 240D (U.S. spec, 4-speed manual, crank windows, MB-Tex) with the rare factory rear seat headrest option. MSRP was $16,000 in 1979 which was the same price as the top of the line Cadillac Seville.
@@bobbbobb4663 yep and it will outlast us all!
@@justinhaller2055 Yes sir. OM617 for the win.
One of the major problems I'm assuming in this situation is also the fact that he's purchased the car from someone else that sold it as a 90 rather than a 60. If it was actually a 60, it likely would've sold for a good amount less. That's one of the bigger problems I'm seeing as well.
This is the bigger problem really. Who's made the wrong thing in this case? The previous owner could have sold a 90 since it's physically is a 90. But he could've also sold "a 60 and I get this many miles from it", so not even falsely selling a 90.
Technically I don't think Tesla made anything wrong, BUT of course the only reasonable thing to do is to let the customer keep the 90 range. If Tesla is really greedy, they could've let him use 90 but if he resells it, it downgrades to a 60.
A purchase contract that says Used P90 but is actually software-limited to P60 by Tesla is automatically breached. The buyer can sue the seller in civil court & recover his money
.
Especially since the seller KNEW he had purchased a P60 directly from tesla. By telling “it’s P90” the seller committed fraud
This was for sure a hacked 60 rebadged as a 90 to sell and tesla fixed the hack i like the part where louis shows the message from the seller i change it back to a 90 for him and tesla changes it back to a 60 in seconds. The seller is admitting he is hacking the tesla software. But sure lets just go with big bad corporations doing evil things just because they can!
The seller is the scammer here he sold a rebadged hacked 60 as a 90 banking on the fact it had a no longer connectable 3g service card in it so as soon as it was connected to a network again the software fixed the hack.
WOW! I never thought you would make the move to Texas. Congrats!
Functionally identical to a company disabling the fuel pump if the fuel gauge dropped below 33% on a normal car.
There's gotta be a way to create and install one's own hardware that unlocks full capability while cutting off communication with that part to the host company so it remains within complete control of the owner.
Do I know what that is off the top of my head? No.
But if you can't ask to have control given back to you, you find ways to take it.
It's gonna be interesting to see the rise of homebrew software for cars if it's not already a thing.
@@UnKnownv5 Yep. That's the next big hurdle. If society figures out workarounds on products from the current companies, best believe they'll sic their legal teams on them. Then they'll pay for legislation to make such workarounds illegal, or anything similar.
People need to realize that now is the time to create products and systems that benefit the consumer while it's still legal to do so.
To take a page from Incubus: I suggest we learn to [protect our independence and well-being] before it's made illegal.
@@r.b.ratieta6111 not to mention the consequences when you have a crash and your insurance inspector finds you messed with the software, or Tesla tells your insurance that your car hasn't logged in for 2 years and doesn't run the latest security updates.
....not to mention german TÜV would rip your head off. (ask any car tuner from germany, every single one has horror stories to tell).
Reading into cases with companies like apple, having a fully online, digital machine, each part will have a digital code or whatnot, and replacing or tampering will set off an alarm and they could just shut off the car entirely, or just get it to drive to the closest dealership hahah.
Radio Shack did that with their hard disk drives 35 or so years ago. If you had bought a 5 megabyte drive for your TRS 80 computer and sent it back for repair under warranty, they replaced it with a 10 megabyte drive formatted to 5 megabytes.
I presume that didn't go over so well
To roll with the 'accidentally installed more RAM into computer during repair' comparison, what Tesla is doing here is essentially remotely logging into the customer's computer to disable access part to the RAM. If that was a feature with MacBooks or so, I bet there would be an outrage about it. Imagine if Apple sold a base model that has features (battery capacity, RAM, storage) locked behind software locks, like what Tesla is doing here. They could sell it as 'save money now, upgrade later'.
In this particular case, if Tesla had discovered the accidental upgrade right afterwards, they could have contacted the owner at that time and requested that a 60 battery pack got swapped in instead. At that point it would have been annoying, but like the RAM example it might be acceptable to the customer.
After a few years and multiple new owners (who bought a 90 car, not a 60 model), however, Tesla has to own up to this mistake, them discovering it this late and just take the hit. It's called 'taking responsibility'.
Apple would have no outrage. Apple people take it up the ass all the time, zero outrage.
You can't ask for the customer to come back just like that without him charging you money for it.
Exactly
apple does worse than that.Icloud is storage on our macbooks,cellphones...
Intel had an i3 that could be "upgraded" by enabling more clock and cache. Obviously it backfired hard.