Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - Tesla does not allow people to repair their own vehicles (newrepublic.com)

smooth wombat writes: A decade ago, Rich Benoit bought a used Tesla at auction. The car had been flooded and he thought he'd repair it. When he reached out to Tesla to buy parts, they said no.

“They literally just said no,” he said. “I thought it was going to be a lot easier: ‘Hey, I’ll just buy a battery, put a battery in, put a new motor in, you know, buy some new interior parts.’ They literally said no. I’ve never seen anything like that before, and I think that’s what started the journey for me.”

Benoit’s professional background was in I.T., but this launched a new career in fixing electric cars, and he also runs a now 10-year-old YouTube channel with co-founder Carl Hewitt about his work, called Rich Rebuilds. He says nearly every electric vehicle company has responded the same way Tesla did. So his new career intersected quickly with the right-to-repair movement, which argues that companies shouldn’t be allowed to refuse access to the information and equipment people need to make repairs on the products they’ve purchased.

At least nine states have passed right-to-repair laws—most of them blue, along with Texas and Kansas—and every state has debated similar laws that would require at least some manufacturers to provide the tools people need to make repairs on their products. A federal bill is sitting in the House, waiting for potential consideration in the lame-duck session, but it’s unlikely to rise to the top of Congress’s long to-do list. For Benoit, though, this is about much more than just fixing cars. “This kind of encompasses a larger overarching theory that the corporations own what you have,” he said. “You don’t own anything. You just rent it.”

Comment Re:China is a totalitarian hell (Score 2) 142

These were people who worked in defence so anywhere behind the Iron Curtain was right out and I imagine Cuba would have been too. Even Austria was considered a risk, probably because so many spies would hang out there from both sides.

Or so they told me. I can't be entirely sure they weren't exagerrating.

Yes, certain destinations were off-limits to people who chose to work in defense, however that falls far shy of this "Exit Ban".

The US saying "If you travel to Cuba, you may face charges when you return" or even "You have been charged with a specific crime, so you cannot leave until the charges are resolved is significantly different from China saying "You are important to our plans, so you cannot leave the country at all, and neither can your immediate family", or forbidden a US citizen from leaving because of visa inconsistencies, much less the common situation where Chinese employers require staff to surrender their passports.

Yes, a judge can require the defendant to surrender their passport as a condition of bail, but the USA lacks effective exit controls, so that isn't actually a high barrier to exiting (but makes it tough to come back).

Comment Exit Bans (Score 2) 142

If, as the article suggests, this is an "Exit Ban" on certain individuals and extending to their family members, that's significantly more restrictive than anything the US has imposed on defense workers and top scientists other than during wartime.

Yes, people with sensitive jobs and a security clearance are strongly discouraged from visiting hostile nations, with a subset even being required to submit their travel plans before any foreign travel, but this is explained clearly when you accept employment directly with the US government, or start working under a government contract, and you're always free to not accept the job offer. And yes, all US citizens were for many years prohibited to travel to embargoed nations (Cuba). But this was nowhere near an "exit ban" on key personnel, much less on their family members!

When I held a clearance, I was never forbidden to leave the USA. I might not have a job when I get back, but that's not the same thing at all.

Comment Re:This didn't have to happen twice (Score 2) 162

It only applies to black men.

Per the statistics, police shoot and kill quite a few white men as well. Nobody gets worked up about those dudes.

OTOH, when you dig into the individual incidents, pretty much all of those dead white men were actively attacking the police, usually with a weapon (), so it's difficult to get to worked up about those deaths.

Comment FACES uses driver's license photos (Score 2) 79

The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office submitted the poor image to a statewide facial recognition database maintained by the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office (PCSO), running a facial recognitio program called Face Analysis Comparison and Examination System (FACESNXT). This draws from a mix of sources including booking photos and all Florida state issued IDs and driver's licenses.

So good luck keeping your face out of that database if you live in Florida.

Comment Re:My home network is nearly pure IPv6 (Score 1) 73

To me the hoops that smoothbrains will jump through to avoid IPv6 and stay on legacy IPv4, especially when hosting, is pathetic. NAT, port forwarding, tunnels, blah blah blah blah.

I have something like ~1.2 trillion times the number of routable addresses that the entire IPv4 space has. Not all are reachable, of course, just the services that need incoming access and they're each on their own isolated DMZ.

Comment My home network is nearly pure IPv6 (Score 1) 73

Started the move about 18 months ago when I decided to get off my lazy ass. My ISP gives out a /56 prefix, so that lets me run 256 /64 subnets/VLANs in the house, currently there are ~10 in use. Everything get a GUA through SLAAC and I use RAs (Router Advertisements) to give ULAs to everything. Any external facing services get their own VLAN and /64 for the system(s) as needed. Firewall blocks all incoming as they usually do by default and I punch a hole for the external-facing systems. They can't reach back into the network, they only answer the phone. All the systems update DNS dynamically if the prefix or full address ever change.

I have an SSH bastion set up. In all this time there has not been a single SSH attempt from the internet. On IPv4 it was constant background noice.
For those legacy IPv4-only systems on the internet, I set up NAT64. I have an IoT VLAN and IoT 2.4 GHz wireless network that are only IPv4 because a lot of IoT network stacks are junk.

I'm still farting around with it, but man oh man, there's no way I'd go back to IPv4. It was one of the best moves I've done in ages.

Slashdot Top Deals

How many hardware guys does it take to change a light bulb? "Well the diagnostics say it's fine buddy, so it's a software problem."

Working...