• aard@kyu.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    156
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Recall is a legal term for the car industry which includes stuff like reporting obligations. So if the defect meets the severity level of a recall it should be called as such, even if it is ‘just’ a software update. Ambiguous terms for safety violations are dangerous and may cost lives.

    • Gork@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      2 months ago

      Recall is also the plural term for a group of Cybertrucks.

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Le thx for the gold, kind stranger! You are a gentleman and a scholar. Updoot for you, fellow narwhal bacon. You are certainly a gem, Anne Frankly I did nazi that coming.

    • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Rear view cameras have been federally required on passenger vehicles since module year 2018 in the US market. So yeah, regardless of the error, it’s a recall because the result makes the vehicle noncompliant.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        I still think its stupid that the requirements for that didnt require that they have a seperate screen from the dash, im convinced car manufacturers used it as an excuse to put fucken tablets in the dash. Congrats by trying to solve one problem ya made 50 others, especially since it makes it harder to remove the fucken tablet.

        I refuse to use the term infotainment except to say that I hate it and want to pour pitch on whoever came up with it.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can’t imagine the threshold here isn’t different though. If each of these recalls required hardware modifications Tesla would either hide the data or lawyers would be able to argue they weren’t major safety violations. I think it’s a plus that many things can be fixed expediantly with software updates and the threshold to do so is low.

      • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        NHTSA are the ones who investigate safety issues and issue recall notices. Once they have done that then the manufacturer has very specific legal requirements to follow. Hiding data from them would eventually come to light, and that would be very bad. Look at the diesel emissions scandal for one example. Volkswagen payed billions in fines for that, and a dozen or so employees including the CEO have been indicted. A few have pled guilty and been sentenced to jail.

        • ggppjj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          (Apologies for not otherwise contributing to the discussion, you want “paid” instead of the nautical rope-handling term “payed”.)

        • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          That is only one method for recalls. Many (maybe most) of the Tesla recalls have been voluntary and not mandated by the NHTSA