| ▲ | xnx 3 hours ago |
| "recall" = applies software update |
|
| ▲ | tim333 a few seconds ago | parent | next [-] |
| Wikipedia has >A product recall is a request from a manufacturer to return a product after the discovery of safety issues... I think using the term for a software update is abusing the language a bit. And may confuse people who have a real recall where the thing has to go to the dealer. |
|
| ▲ | fudged71 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also I think it's wrong to call something a recall if it's not owned by customers. Waymo is a service. |
|
| ▲ | asdff 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The difference between that and usual software updates I'm guessing is the cars are pulled from service until the update takes place. |
|
| ▲ | dang an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We've updated the title above. Thanks! |
|
| ▲ | dawnerd 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Recall makes for better headlines. |
| |
| ▲ | rogerrogerr 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I really want car companies to just automate publishing “recalls” for every commit pushed to any car ever. Flood this broken term and force a distinction between “the airbags will literally explode and destroy your face” and “the radio volume is too quiet sometimes” | | |
| ▲ | nickthegreek 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | A "recall" is a specific regulated action. It is announced as a recall because that is what is legally required according to the NHTSA. There is no wiggle room here. | | |
| ▲ | rogerrogerr 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, we need to change the rules to create a distinction. The meaning of “recall” in common understanding vs. industry has diverged, and it’s almost certainly causing car manufacturers to do suboptimal things to avoid having “recall” tied to their name in the press. | | |
| ▲ | nickthegreek an hour ago | parent [-] | | There is no issue in understanding unless you are talking about only reading the headline that a media outlet decides to use. How about we all just use our brains and understand that things can be fixed in different ways, but it is important that they get fixed. Suboptimal behavior from companies is what leads to recalls. I cant even understand an example of what you are talking about there. And now you want to carry water for the industry by creating some diluted term. Does the car have a safety issue that is should not? Then its a recall. The manufacture can now decide how to resolve it. Sometimes that can be done via an OTA update. I think its is in the interest of consumers to know ALL the ways these corps are putting your life at risk through their engineering efforts or lack there of. If your car manufacture is doing weekly OTA bug fixes on the vehicle that you drive you kids in everyday, you (the apparent beta tester) should sure as well know. Then you can make an informed decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | Sohcahtoa82 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Legally and technically true, and I hate it. We really need a better term for when an urgent software update for a vehicle is issued. The extreme majority of the population completely misunderstands it when a "recall" is done when it's actually just an OTA software update. |
|
| ▲ | paconbork 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Gah, thanks for this. Thought I was used to that slight-of-hand but this one got me |
|
| ▲ | jagged-chisel 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| aw, I was having fun imagining 3,800 Johnny cabs just immediately changing route to go to headquarters. |
