Re: Brainless Cars - Honda Recalls Masses for "Software Error"

On 1/30/25 4:15 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

On 1/30/25 4:31 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But by and large it is that way, and software upgrades are so simple
that the necessity of testing everything is somewhat lower.

>
   Um, not so "simple" if the thing conks out on
   you in the middle of a blizzard or giant fire
   evac ....

 A few years ago firefighters were complaining that the new
Mercedes-Benz G-Wagons that the state forest fire service had
converted to small fire trucks were limiting speed to 40Km/hr if
their computer detected smoke.

   It is so absurd that it is probably true.
   Nanny states, nanny cars too  :-)
   Probably had to put duct-tape over some little
   sensor ....

All cars have some quirk or other that is removed in updated parts or
some such.
My [automatic] car will respond to simultaneous application of the
accelerator and brakes with a warning, disabling the anti-skid,
rendering the cruise control inoperative and shouting 'Handbrake fault'
'gearbox fault' and one other which I forget.
I have to reboot the car twice to stop all of it.
>
Apparently there is a brake switch update that fixes it.

>
   Over-complication. Should be banned in critical systems.

 In your original case of fuel injection mishaps, the emissions
regulations probably mean they're banned from omitting complex
computations that work out the ideal mix to make minimum CO2,
which may well have been the source of that bug.

   Nanny states ...
   Yep, air-qual & 'economy' regs have become so absurd
   in certain places the it's amazing IC engines work at
   all. We remember just a couple of years ago when VW
   had to install cheat-ware on their vehicles just so
   they'd have enough performance to be tolerable.
   Makes you want to yank out the factory engine and
   shove something meant for fishing boat or whatever
   in there instead.
   As such I *understand* Honda's problem here, but
   cannot sympathize with all that created the problem.
   Likely these auto companies could profit by having
   just or or two concerns make/program 'brains'.
   You write almost dead-standard code you CAN debug
   and then have a few variables for params specific
   to the particular engine. Right now it seems like
   too much of that stuff is kind of one-off, which
   means never-ending issues.
   I wonder how many curves have to be combined to
   arrive at a here+now mix/timing solution ?