this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
589 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
59429 readers
3080 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No. There are three main bullshit arguments being used by lobbyists actively making the world a worse place by fighting against this type of legislation.
All three are demonstrably used in hearings to convince legislators to not sign right to repair bills into law. And all three are absolute bullshit.
Replacing the brakes on your own car is not generally seen as introducing safety risks, so why would software be any different? The only things that actually make cars safe are competent drivers (wether flesh and bone, or digital) and proper manufacturing (so no malfunctioning during use).
There is a reason full self driving is not legal in most places worldwide, and likely won't be for a very long time. We've seen too many examples of software fuck ups and the legal responsibility in case of an accident is still a difficult part of the equation.
If we're able to integrate full infotainment systems into cars, and all kinds of AI gadgets for driving assistance. We should be able to make cars safer even if the software is user servicable.
No more gatekeeping bullshit.
Good point.
Add newline between line 1 and 2
TIL, thank you. Edit has been made.