GM trying to keep you from modding your vehicle

BenK wrote:
Forgot about this on the computer analogy...you are dealing with compiled software
NOT source code

Once you get past the API level, you are into source code territory

Ditto any automotive software...at the API level, compiled software and no
source code

Once you go past that and into actually changing the software...that is at the
source code level...

A case can be made that the tuner only changes at the API level and I can totally
make that case...but if something requires warranty or liability coverage...I'd
be the first to say 'you touched it, you own it'...that is business in the
software world (world wide, not just here in North America)

I do agree with the idea that users should not be allowed to load in their own code to the ECU's or have access to hack the ECU's, especially with the litigous happy environment we have, I could see people modding their vehicles and blaming everything on the OEM. The whole overclocking thing was a good analogy actually (and I've fried some AMD cores back in the day). I'm enjoying my air-cooled sandy core overclocked 4.8 ghz i5 thank you very much. but then my computer isn't an 8,000 lbs device hurtling down the road that could put my and everyone around me's lives in possible jeopardy should an ECU fail.

However, I do believe that diagnostics of all those ECU's and such shouldn't be proprietary which it seems like they're trying to do. Consumers should also be able to purchase new modules and replace them themselves (or have a qualified independent mechanic change the unit). Hell, Tesla updates their ECU's over the web and give new functionality to existing customers. However, I believe the old school OEM's think it would cut into their bottom line if they adopted a similar strategy.