Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range (twitter.com)

Article summary

A Tesla owner discovered that their 2013 Model S 60 had its battery pack swapped with a 90 pack under warranty, effectively making it a 90 model. However, after a recent MCU2 upgrade, Tesla remotely converted the battery pack back to a 60, reducing its range by about one-third. The car's new owner is upset about the change, which was made without their knowledge or consent. This incident raises questions about ownership and control of vehicles with software-based features.

Main themes

• vehicle ownership and control
• software-based features and safety
• manufacturer responsibility and liability
• environmental impact of technology
• consumer freedom and innovation
• regulation and legislation of vehicle modifications

What commenters say

• Some argue that software locks on cars are justified for safety reasons, while others see them as a threat to ownership and freedom.
• The practice of remotely disabling or modifying vehicle features is seen as a form of control that undermines the concept of ownership.
• Allowing manufacturers to restrict software modifications could lead to a loss of freedom and innovation, similar to the restrictions on modifying other types of products.
• Others believe that manufacturers have a responsibility to ensure safety and prevent potential accidents caused by unauthorized modifications.
• The environmental cost of hiding battery capacity behind software is seen as immoral by some, who argue that it wastes resources and harms the environment.
• Some argue that the comparison to modifying ICE vehicles is not equivalent, as software-based features pose unique safety risks.
• The idea that manufacturers should be able to control and restrict modifications to their products is seen as a slippery slope that could lead to further restrictions on consumer freedom.