GM trying to keep you from modding your vehicle

Yawn... just buy your modified software from the aftermarket software vendor and install it. Replacing the original code. GM may own the code they sell you, but they can't prevent competitors from selling code.

Just as fast as the OEMs work to lock up PC's, phones, and vehicles others will devise an alternative. If there's a market, someone will fill the need.

Written on a computer sold with Windows on it and now running Unix.

The OEM's provide a standardized interface for all sensors and switches. In OBD III it developed performance panels that test the more complex systems. The comments in this thread are 100% wrong! Think about is it, how would there be so many independent tools in the market without a standardized input and out put.
MM49

what's next , the farmers will claim what they produce cant be modified ?so that means you can buy it but not eat it or it will be modified,

That was already mentioned here, hope repeating it makes you feel better tho.

Ford is the same or worse.
Anyone shocked I posted that?
Just the facts mame

Unless their software folks, systems folks, etc...especially management understand
robotics...there is a HUGE safety issue, IMHO

Example is on the largest robots in the world, circa 1980's, had a HUGE argument
with software folks. Even though I was a partner of the startup.

They wanted to remove all of the RED Mushroom Head EMERGENCY STOP buttons...because
they would write that into all of the software (OS, apps, layers and layers, etc)

The majority owner almost went that way, until these same software departments
were trying for the first to control the +500,000 lb robot from the SF Bayarea
to Alabama where the steel mill was. Only one of these monster robots

Command they thought they sent was 'move 4,000 clicks south'...what the robot
heard was 'move 400,000 clicks south'...

At 25Ft/second/second it smashed into the 5,000 lb bumper stop. That bumper stop
blew up, showered the crew and knocked down three guys by both the blast and shower
of rubber bits

No cable, no fiber, etc from SF area to Alabama...anyone remember a 'Watts line' ?

What regular software folks don't understand is that when a computer goes
bonkers...there is *NO* way the computer can self stop. Sure redundant systems
but not on those things...to expensive...does our vehicles have a redundant system?

The level of safety from that old career in industrial controls is missing
in automotive vehicle computing...or think that is the case and hope they
did hire some industrial *CONTROLS & SYSTEMS* engineers

First...today's vehicles are now totally controlled by computers the
the only thing the driver really controls are the steering wheel, pedals
and that is pretty much all

Notice said 'steering wheel'...the computers today control the steering
wheel signals to the actual power steering unit (electric, the old
hydraulics still has a semi direct link)

Throttle is by wire. Meaning the pedal is connected to an electronic
sensor (potentiometer or some such) that then tells the computer what
the driver 'wants' and it will decide if it will or not listen

Folks should educate themselves by reading up on the legalities of
OS (operating systems), open source, source code and a host of other
software/computer technologies

Apple, Microsoft, etc all guard their OS and sue anyone, everyone who
touches it without a source license. Yes, they do publish API's, but
once you get into their OS itself, law suit.

My last job's OS was Solaris and just like Apple OS and MS based on
Cal Berkeley Unix 2.x. We also had an open source version that was
free and semi supported. Hope you folks understand that is one of their
crown jewels and is a revenue position (think of your own paycheck)

Now that just about everything on any vehicle is 'highly integrated'
and their buyers love the fact that everything is 'highly integrated'...now
be ready for the onerous side to crop up...they now own you via hos
the vehicle works/behaves/etc

Am glad Burbman commented that he knows that his Burb (GMT800) is
now a network (LAN). So true and more so with newer vehicles

I know a bit of this, as in the 90's GM gave my group at Sunlabs
a prototype EV2. JAVA was the buzz and on this proto, but it was flaky
and had a mind of it's own

My scientists were pulling their hair out, as JAVA was our invention.

Took a look at the logic diagram and noticed no real time (industrial
level, or real, real time...with hierarchical timing in whole to
fractions of milseconds) and the biggie...NO MASTER SLAVE established

Since no master established...they all thought they were masters...

Now folks...'we' have what 'we' asked for in our vehicles.

An example is the debates over my desire to have component trailer
brake controller that *I* can manage vs those who think 'highly
integrated' so much better...yes on the good days out there...but try
to diag a problem...it will take a computer tech/engineer and even then
if they don't have the right tools, almost impossible to tell if the
ABS computer is flaky, its sensors flaky, or the integration with the
toque management computer, or the transmission computer, or the ECU,
or whatever else is in that 'hightly integrated' system

I expect the tuner folks to go away for a while playing with the APIs
via poke it here and see what the computer does...till they 'think' they
have figured it out...but then, that is only on the good days and
what about the time when the computer systems lose a sensor over there
way, away from the tuner?

Someone should find out how many lines of code there is for EACH
computer and the system code level.

What level of 'real time' does it have. Real, real time is industrial
level, not what most computer folks 'think' is real time

Like a sensor says something is wrong...real, real time will set a
high order flag that will have the main computer slap all of the other
computers NOW (milliseconds)...not like most non real time system that
will just place that flag into the queue...

Then know that in real, real time...there are different levels that
it manages to...there are some that will be placed into the queue...

Amazes me why all the hubbub, as everyone, or most everyone has been
praising how wonderful the computerization of our vehicles have become...

To now complain of that computerization ?!?!?

Most any/all software is copyrighted

Yes, huge safety issue.

Their argument that someone can modify the computers and make the vehicle dangerous is just silly. First, that's not even a copyright issue. Second, safety is not their concern. There's a lot easier ways to make a vehicle dangerous. Suck air into the brake lines, leave lugs loose, drive at night with no lights, drive inappropriate speeds for conditions, badly worn tires, absence of brake pads, etc. If safety was really a concern then we would have vehicles loaded with sensors to check everything by now.

John Deere's argument literally made me laugh out loud. They believe that allowing farmers to fix their own equipment may allow them to pirate copyrighted music through the entertainment system. Anyone who knows a farmer knows that they have much bigger concerns than pirating music while in the tractor.

The truth is GM only wants GM wrenching on their vehicles. John Deere only wants John Deere wrenching on their tractors. They don't want anyone looking through their code, exposing their dirty little secrets they may have.

Yep, need more universal API's/interfacing standards. The gov did it with OBD-II, why can't we have OBD-III to include those items eh?

Developers do this by creating an API: Application Programming Interface that allows other programmers to work with your application without changing the original code. The car manufacturers need to do the same sort of thing.