Some efficiency improvements sacrifice emissions, unfortunately. With that being said, I am still optimistic on what they are trying to do.
I don't think their actions are as insidious as you make them out to be.
Why would a business want to make their product harder to service? Wouldn't that give them a reputation for high cost of ownership? Wouldn't a higher cost of ownership drive (excuse the pun) customers to purchase competing products?
It isn't in a car company's best interest to screw their customers.
I know this is slashdot and DRM is bad, but what are VALID reasons for having secured functionality hidden away from the customer? How about ensuring:
- government mandated emissions controls aren't disabled
- fuel economy functions are not disabled
- safety related functions are not modified
- traceability information isn't altered (prevent swapping stolen parts)
In my opinion people should have a right to competitive service, but don't attribute the "DRM" usage to negative intentions.
You are mostly right but the problem isn't that the vehicles don't spit out all of the codes (they will), the problem is interpreting them in a meaningful fashion.
Base 8 is just like base 10, if you are missing two fingers. -- Tom Lehrer