You may not be aware but there are a lot of proprietary PIDs on your OBD2 bus you can't interpret without specialized software - you can get like oil pressure and temperature, but not say, shift points or anything the manufacturer doesn't think you should see. True right to repair would mean all of the PIDs get documented and there is a marketplace where I can purchase software or documentation without having to be a certified brand X mechanic.

▲

jonhohle 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I’m not sticking up for car manufacturers, but at what size or capacity should you be required to document and publish these things? It requires employer time and effort and has a cost associated with it.

As a counter argument: I was just looking at a small open source utility. As I was going through the code I found cases where certain arguments could be set to magic values that cause useful, but undocumented behavior. Should the developers be forced to document these options?

I don’t think a manufacturer should be able to lock you out of reading diagnostics on your own devices, or that anyone should be prevented from reverse engineering what those values mean. But I also don’t think there should be any requirement that they are forced to do additional work. That seems just as immoral.

	▲	skeeter2020 2 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		the issue is not that this information is undocumented, it's that an "authorized service center" gets information that an "owner" does not. Also cars are not "small open source utilities" with undocumented arguments; do you think that an auto manufacturer has hidden, untested diagnostics that only the dealer uses? >> don’t think there should be any requirement that they are forced to do additional work At one time seatbelts, airbags, emission controls, etc were all viewed in this category. Now we have regulations enforcing aspects of all of these. Why would diagnostics be different?
	▲	vlovich123 7 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> I don’t think a manufacturer should be able to lock you out of reading diagnostics on your own devices, or that anyone should be prevented from reverse engineering what those values mean. But they do do that. Also what’s the difference between a lot of obfuscation and prevention and how will you enforce that without lawsuits and discovery? Also, what is those values have the ability to do damage and cause safety issues? Like losing your own software onto a control by wire car? Then you can rent a car and install your own software surreptitiously.

▲

nvme0n1p1 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes and I'm just pushing back against GP who seems to think gatekeeping that access is a good thing. And it's still way better than John Deere who (according to TFA), when the tractor detects that some wires are disconnected, wants you to pay $195 to find out which ones.

I'd love to move towards a world where owners can access everything, flash the firmware in the headlamps, etc. But all I can do as an individual is vote with my wallet and avoid the 2020s computers-on-wheels.