Are Modern Cars Too Complicated? What The Future Entails

There’s a digital transformation taking place in our cars; are you ready?
I visited CES 2022 to look at what’s in store for the future of automobiles.
Sponsored By Qualcomm Technologies - www.qualcomm.com/products/aut...
Cars are complicated. They’re a collaboration of nearly every form of engineering, and they’re ever-evolving. To get a feel for what the future of automotive entails, Qualcomm Technologies brought me to CES 2022, an innovation convention showcasing the latest technologies. This video will answer why cars have become increasingly complex, and also focus on three main aspects of future mobility: the digital chassis, autonomous driving, and vehicle connectivity.
We’ll analyze the five levels of autonomous driving and discuss Qualcomm Technologies’ autonomous driving plans, including an experience with the Snapdragon Ride™ Platform on Las Vegas city streets. After wandering the halls of CES, it’s apparent that the future of cars is not a continuation of the mentality that they’re purely a tool for getting from A to B, but that they’re an extension of your daily living and working environment, connecting you to your devices, minimizing the burden of driving, providing entertainment, and creating a safer architecture for transportation.
Don't forget to check out my other pages below!
Instagram: / engineeringexplained
Facebook: / engineeringexplained
Twitter: / jasonfenske13
EE Extra: / @engineeringexplainede...
Snapdragon Ride is a product of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.

[@peteranderson037]

A friend of mine and I were discussing this some time ago. It took us both a long time to realize that we weren't really "car guys". The only reason why we know as much about cars as we do is because we both grew up poor and in a semi-rural area. If you want to get anywhere, including a job, you need a car. The only cars we could afford were cars that barely functioned. If we wanted to keep those cars functioning, we either had to know a guy who could fix them without charging an arm and a leg (i.e. not a dealership) or fix them ourselves. The problem with adding more and more of certain types of technology and sophistication to a car is that long term reparability drops to zero much quicker than a car that doesn't have them. It's the reason why certain luxury car manufacturers have cars that are effectively worthless after a relatively short period of time. It becomes either financially unsustainable or technically impossible to maintain them. Internet-connected systems make this problem worse because the manufacturer could drop support for them at some future point and then prevent anyone from trying to maintain them later. EVs should, in theory, be easier to maintain that ICE vehicles and should require less maintenance. In theory this would be a good thing for people 10 to 20 years down the road who are buying these cars used because that's all they can afford. Unfortunately, most major EV manufacturers have adopted an active attitude of antagonization (that was a mouthful of unintended alliteration) towards third-party repair. I'm sure that this makes some board of directors somewhere very happy that Company has met its quarterly revenue targets, but in the long term the little guy always gets shafted.

[@gqh007]

I think there's gonna be a new breed of car guys that are into the self-driving technology and technical aspects associated.

[@EngineeringExplained]

I think this is very well said, thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[@phasmata3813]

Sadly, auto manufacturers will NEVER think or care about us poor people. We don't buy cars from them. They never see our money. The only people who matter to auto manufacturers are people who can afford to buy NEW, and that will never include us, so our thoughts, opinions, experiences, needs will never matter to them. In capitalism, only the capitalists (the people with capital) matter.

[@welpthatescalatedquickly6495]

I 100% agree. I would want an EV over an ICE IF simplicity is key.

[@Skipsul]

I am in the auto industry on the truck side, where the first line of customers are usually fleet buyers. These fleet operators used to employ many mechanics, both shop-based and in field service. They are culling these repair divisions, and doing so for a variety of reasons. The chief one is that the fleet operators are now often just leasing the trucks for a few years - employing skilled mechanics is costly (this accelerated after Obamacare), the taxes are more favorable for leasing than buying, much less cash is bound up in hard assets (better for stock prices and short term shareholder appeasement), and if the truck fails then the leasing company pays for the downtime. The leasing companies do NOT maintain the trucks either - they offload them onto secondary and tertiary markets when the lease is up, or when the truck fails. Few companies in this loop care about long term reliability, so the complexity issue is often moot.

[@om617yota8]

Touch screen to access windshield wipers and HVAC controls is a 100% dealbreaker for me. If that means I never drive anything newer than 2000's vehicles, so be it.

[@prerunnerwannabe]

Yeah, those two things are my very least favorite parts about my Model 3. Like I probably won't buy another one because it's so annoying. What's really annoying though is that everyone else is doing the same thing 🤦🏽‍♂️

[@Mattyv7]

Enjoy living in the past. No one’s gonna stop for you.

[@om617yota8]

@@Mattyv7 Thank you, I gladly will.

[@boxerbull5405]

I agree

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

@@Mattyv7 This kind of thing gets brought up in the firearms world when it comes to new tech. firearms have barely progressed passed the 70s and 80s and its mainly because a bullet kills just as good then as now. People are not any harder to take out. With cars its kind of the same thing, it gets your from point A to point B just as good. We don't always need better tech for the sake of it.

[@Hartbreak1]

My only problems with the increased reliance on software is that manufacturers can decide to lock out features that are already physically in the car just because they can charge more money for some code. The other problem is that, cars aren't only driven by tech savvy people, a car must be able to be driven properly by anyone with a driver's license, it's easy to bloat a car's software with secondary features and touch screen everything and making the important features hard to access. In that video I saw some cars that didn't have any visible physical controls and that's the wrong way to go about it.

[@crackedemerald4930]

grandma won't know what applecarplay is and the appropriate amount of time to touch a screen

[@TXBlackKnight88]

The vast majority of American drivers by the time they get to driving age will have held/owned/used a smartphone/tablet/computer/etc. prior to getting their drivers license. I do agree that everything doesn't need to be a touchscreen...but it has less to do with technological competence...more to do with the desire of users to have a tactile response that physical buttons/knobs/switches excel in. In terms of software...that is inevitable. That code takes time/people/money to develop so that intellectual property needs to be reflected in all costs (purchase/upgrades/maintenance/etc.).

[@Hartbreak1]

@@TXBlackKnight88 that would mostly apply to new drivers or drivers under the age of 50, older drivers will have a far harder time dealing with all digital controls. Some older people just want to keep it simple and don't want to learn complicated stuff just to be able to go to the grocery store. The thing about having important stuff as physical buttons/levers is feedback and muscle memory. I know where the important switches in my car are and I know if I activated them correctly without having to look at them. With a touch screen not only do I have to visually confirm where a "button" is but also I need to visually confirm that I activated it correctly. That leads to more distraction. It's true that cars have change and evolved as technology has progressed, but there was always a more or less standard approach to the controls even if the technology behind those controls was totally different from previous iterations.

[@ericlotze7724]

Having Open Source software and firmware could make this issue obsolete.

[@wangshuokevin]

Code needs to be written by engineers, and they need to get paid. So charging for software is not wrong, just the same as manufacturers charge more for a suspension upgrade.

[@russellstokke6888]

Here’s my hot take: I would only own an “autonomous vehicle” if I am completely free of liability for it. I don’t see that happening, and I don’t think I’m alone in my POV.

[@HeavyMetalorRockfan9]

yeah what happens in a level 4 system where im not supposed to be asked to take over, but it determines that the conditions are no longer correct for the vehicle to drive, especially if i dont have a steering wheel as many L4 cars don't. This honestly seems like these categorizations (I know they're not formal) haven't really been thought through. What happens in L5? Does your car simply tell you, no we're not going there today?

[@scottfree6479]

I will never own an autonomous vehicle if I have another viable option. I don't even like cruise control lol

[@EngineeringExplained]

I'm with you, which is why I don't have "FSD" (or AutoPilot) on my Tesla. If I'm liable for the computer's mistakes, I'd rather not use it.

[@objective7042]

Some jurisdictions has that regardless if the autopilot is engaged, you're still liable if you're inside the vehicle.

[@ronaldlenz5745]

@@HeavyMetalorRockfan9 Level 4 will have a steering wheel and pedals.

[@williamforbes6919]

Unequivocally yes. As someone who has worked on IoT systems and embedded electronics, I don't want it anywhere near my car. I'm fine with some (standardized) microcontrollers, but I don't trust any system with DRM built in to last or be maintainable.

[@texugooooo]

That's the point. The more modern the electronics get, the less it last and the less maintainable it becomes.

[@T1Oracle]

You sound old. You should try riding horses. Much less scary.

[@T1Oracle]

@@texugooooo Not true at all. Solid state electronics can easily be built to last for centuries. The only ways solid state electronics to fail is, heat, power surges, and physical impact. The tolerances for which can all be adjusted by design. When solid state electronics fail, you just pull the old one out and plug a new one in. It's simple.

[@aygwm]

Once you know how the sausage is made, you stop eating sausage.

[@williamforbes6919]

@@T1Oracle I'm in my 20's, and the reason I don't trust devices built using the software as a service model is due to constant architecture changes required to keep devices functioning in an interconnected environment, especially one which uses DRM to manage end user functionality. This Qualcomm system might promise to last a long time, bit honestly, how long do you expect even the radios in it to be compatible with cellular infrastructure?

[@lescoe]

Planned obsolescence is incredibly profitable. The infotainment system in my 2019 Outback is already dated, and the screen already suffers from burn-in.

[@om617yota8]

Right. Give me a simple bluetooth amplifier somewhere mounted in the car, which doesn't need a display or head unit, and a mount for an easily and inexpensively replaced tablet. All I need for infotainment.

[@redhammer92]

@@om617yota8 Or just dump that junk and give me a car without a cheap tablet glued to the dash.

[@om617yota8]

@@redhammer92 That was kind of my point. Make the cheap tablet optional, instead of built in. If I want a cheap tablet, fine. If I want an expensive tablet, fine. If I want no tablet, fine.

[@stevenyia2778]

Just no point in keeping up with the joneses

[@AHungryHunky]

I have a 2016 Renegade and I put my phone on a stand on the dash and barely look at the infotainment screen except when I put it in reverse. My phone in car mode just handles all the functions of the infotainment screen much better, Google maps is more accurate (my built in nav frequently wants to take me on an exit that was demolished 2 years before the car was even built), Google assistants voice controls are much smoother (and I can control my smart devices on the road, it's nice turning on your front porch light as you turn into your street) and it will actually recognize and play music from Spotify unlike the aging Uconnect system which is basically a glorified Bluetooth speaker now. Software is good until it no longer receives support, and once it no longer receives support it quickly ages within a year or two. Thing is, car sales are currently final. That means once you pay the price for a car once all the current, and future updated features are included in that price. No one wants to support software for years and years for free. Cars are either going to adopt subscription services to keep UI up to date, get obscenely more expensive up front or continue the current trend of being dated two to three years later. I'd honestly prefer the third option since you can at least supplement and work around out of date tech. Imagine a future with an in car store where you can purchase features already on your cars hardware and buy cosmetics for your UI. That's the dystopia I want.

[@BillyBobDingledorf]

Tech I'm not ready for: Door handles that retract into the vehicle when locked. It combines the complication of both a mechanical and electric handle for a minimal visual impact.

[@davidmccarthy6061]

It seems like a good idea in southern Cali but not anywhere with lots of ice!

[@rookieman329]

Well, i does improve aerodynamics and fuel efficiency so there's that

[@hectichive889]

@@rookieman329 It’s a handle…

[@rookieman329]

@@hectichive889 no its something sticking out of a car and disturbing airflow

[@georgejungle138]

@@hectichive889 it can be both

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

For maintenance, the thing that I really hate is how they’re designing cars to be too hard to fix anywhere but their own dealer shop. I don’t like how this makes me a captive audience at one maintenance shop…and once you have a captive audience they can do whatever they want with the prices.

[@peekaboo1575]

Don't forget car companies not allowing you to open the hood/frunk on some of the cars. True respect for costumers right there. :D

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

@@peekaboo1575 I was not aware of this yet. Not a fan….

[@ericlotze7724]

Planned Obsolescence and Anti-Repair in Mind Design are seriously becoming issues now, even in cars! Just another reminder in how important it is to fight for right to repair i guess.

[@neovenom9833]

@@SaveMoneySavethePlanet it's is a fact indeed, you cannot simply open a BMW I8. A Porsche as well has been pretty much sealed off. Some brands require you te remove the wheel if you want to replace a light bulb. I had this on a Citroen C3 about 20 years ago. French cars are a quirky in that regard.

[@davidelliott5843]

The franchise dealers often don’t have a clue how to repair their cars. They simply plug in the computer and swap out an (allegedly) faulty part. The costs are charged back to the manufacturer. Present them with an out-of-warranty car and they cant get beyond the diagnostic computer screen

[@jeremiahgaskins9127]

I think it's the integration that drives the complexity. Anymore the systems are so reliant upon each other with respect to data sharing it becomes difficult at times to diagnosis a problem correctly, particularly given the way an error is found and flagged in a CAN network. You may have a faulty ABS module, but you will get errors in ancillary systems such as adaptive cruise, cruise, lane keep assist, and even SRS... I think the integration required for the push for autonomous driving is really the culprit. In my opinion the early 2000's had the best balance. You knew what each module did and the integration was limited... in part because the driver was expected to be a driver.

[@stevemcrichards8768]

You're right about all that. Now manufacturers are building in "scare tactics" into CAN systems to alert drivers of emissions related issues that manifest as a "Christmas tree" of malfunction indicator lights on the display which also prevent you from operating systems like the HVAC until you get it fixed! Do you own your car?

[@21jimmyo]

@@stevemcrichards8768 - Keep in mind that the manufacturers are paying for the repair when the car is under warranty. People often think that a failed cat, o2 sensor etc.. means nothing because the car still runs and drives fine. When in reality in modern cars the ECU is relying on the information to control things like air/fuel mixture, boost levels, etc. One part being bad can cause damage in other systems if not corrected. They are only looking after their own bottom line. I agree it's overkill, but I know why they do it.

[@peekaboo1575]

Cars will be treated more and more like smartphones. Companies won't consider them your property even after you buy them, you'll be able to do less and less with them and they'll be more disposable as time goes on.

[@ericlotze7724]

That’s why we need to fight for Right to Repair !

[@OutOfNameIdeas2]

@@ericlotze7724 and stop supporting Tesla. They are at the forefront of anticonsumer practices by making repairs a pain in the ass and locking you out of features you paid for

[@ericlotze7724]

@@OutOfNameIdeas2 and labor issues too if I remember correctly. And SpaceX’s bomb range in the middle of an environmental preserve chock full of endangered species isn’t exactly saving the planet

[@ghoulbuster1]

Even Apple is trying to be a little pro-consumer.

[@dkdanis1340]

New cars literally have updates that help them to not go outdated. Maintenance is easier than ever.

[@ChuckyLarms]

I’ve grown up being the biggest car guy you can imagine. My disappointment and anger towards the industry and the future they are pushing has made me lose all interest.

[@ajstevens1652]

It's very sad how quickly they are ruining it. No sports cars, no manuals, way overcomplicated electronic systems, autonomous driving and banning ICEs.

[@zappatx]

The real purpose of the tech is control - when you missed your tax payment or said something bad about the mayor or Biden's group the car can divert your trip taking you directly to prison or into a tree.. That's the need for 5G..

[@DigitalDissident]

I have a manual E82 135i N55, that's 6 cylinders, turbo, RWD, Coupe. There's no way you can not like it. Huge aftermarket suppoort since it's an enthusiasts dream & I can do all maintenance myself if I choose. I also have a 2dr EU spec fiesta with 60hp & crank windows, but I love them both!

[@DigitalDissident]

Point is, older is better if you're like me, u want to own, not finance, a driver focused machine, & you want to drive not be driven with minimal tech gimmicks

[@Dailyfiver]

I absolutely agree. I wanted nothing more as a kid to get my hands on my first car and a wrench. Now I’m 25, disappointed, and I simply maintain my year 2000 daily driver when I HAVE to.

[@jfolz]

IMO this is less of an issue of complexity and more one of repairability. This lack of repairability is not limited to modern vehicles. It affects all appliances. And it's not something that comes naturally with complexity, but is designed into the product specifically to limit third-party repair. With cheaper options out of the way manufacturers can increase the price of repair to a point where it's more economical to just buy new. What we really need are regulations that uphold our right to repair.

[@martinsvensson6884]

Complexity always decreases repairability.

[@jfolz]

@@martinsvensson6884 that's simply not true. What is the least complex thing imaginable? A rock to hit things with. When it breaks it shatters to pieces. That's difficult to repair, especially if you're the "hit things with a rock" kind of guy. Just get a new rock... What other thing is good for hitting things? A hammer. How does a hammer break? Usually the handle. Get some wood, put head on, probably good as new. Because it's made of several parts and the thing that breaks is easy to replace, a hammer is very repairable. That's the whole point of right to repair. As long as replacement parts are available and reasonably priced, and there are instructions on how it goes together, your appliance is repairable. You can make very complex things like electronics highly repairable as long as you make them from standardized parts and publish schematics.

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

Increased complexity requires you to know more to maintain/repair something. That means you effectively can't learn to repair as many things with your time, forcing specialization. Specialization increases quality, but it also increases cost. At one point in time you could repair every American and Japanese car with one tool chest and every European car with another. Now you might need a $10k calibration tool just to repair the automatic braking tool in a Subaru.

[@jfolz]

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 why do you think it requires special "tools" to "calibrate" replacement parts? Whatever software is required could very easily be built into one of the many computers (maybe even the part itself) and run the "calibration" routine on first start. It's the exact same reason why a replacement camera module in an iPhone needs to be cryptographically paired to the phone: stifling third party repair. At least unlike Apple Subaru let you buy the part and "tool" (probably just a off the shelf ruggedized laptop with some Subaru program on it), but there's no reason it should cost 10k. None of these issues is inherent to increased complexity. It is all deliberate.

[@martinsvensson6884]

@@thealienrobotanthropologist Doesnt work like that. If you make something more complex it is going to be more difficult to repair. Always. If something is made to a better quality is something completely different. Has nothing to do with complexity. ABS adds complexity and is going to make your braking system harder to repair. And is going to be more costly to maintain. SAm goes for automatic head lights. If they break they are going to be either harder to repari or more expensive to replace. Anything computer is going to make the car less repairable for the same reasons. You are not going to be able to fix a copmuter yourself. But you can be able to fix a cable connection.

[@zacharymurdock6721]

Yes. This coming from a mechanic with 12 years of experience. I had a 2019 Expedition at the shop the other day, and it had 49 different computer modules… 49!

[@420biny]

Great video. Speaking as a software developer my main concern with increased computer systems in vehicles is length of software support. The automotive industry has been pretty terrible about this for infotainment systems where many companies just allow stuff to become obsolete without issuing any updates. If it's a standard double dinn head unit, it's no big deal. You can just swap in a new one. However, with more stuff running through the infotainment system and more companies adopting custom infotainment layouts software needs to be continuously updated otherwise auto makers are just manufacturing waste.

[@tylerbetthauser7647]

Often because the hardware is sourced years ahead of time and cannot support rapidly changing software requirements.

[@Daekar3]

It depends: too complicated for what? To be sold? To be maintained by the owner? To be maintained by the dealer? Today's vehicles, in my experience, often fall into the latter category. These things are so complicated that even the dealer doesn't know how to diagnose and fix many problems. Remember, part of the complexity isn't automakers responding to market pressure, they're responding to government regulations. Increasing complexity is not identical to progress or improvement in core function, and it is always better to have a simple system when it is possible to do so and meet customer requirements.

[@scottfree6479]

It's not just cars either: 99.99% of the employees at google have no idea how any of their code works. The people who initially wrote it are long gone and the current staff are just cruising on borrowed time. We're going to have a crisis at some point where our old code breaks and nobody remembers how to fix it, and we'll be set back dramatically as a result. I hope it happens soon; we need to remember that long term reliability is more important than short term profits or election-year grift.

[@Smjh123]

Gentlemen, a short view back to the past. Thirty years ago, Niki Lauda told us ‘take a monkey, place him into the cockpit and he is able to drive the car.’ Thirty years later, Sebastian told us ‘I had to start my car like a computer, it’s very complicated.’ And Nico Rosberg said that during the race - I don’t remember what race - he pressed the wrong button on the wheel. Question for you both: is Formula One driving today too complicated with twenty and more buttons on the wheel, are you too much under effort, under pressure? What are your wishes for the future concerning the technical programme during the race? Less buttons, more? Or less and more communication with your engineers?

[@richierauscher5131]

Could you repeat the question?

[@atomictyler]

Sadly it's actually just the effect of the technology not being that good if the drivers have to push the buttons. In the future all the stuff that's done by pushing a button will just happen without the need for the driver input and they'll be back to where they were 30 years ago. It's all just part of the cycle of tech.

[@bolt5564]

Formula 1 is supposed to be a test bed for the most advanced technologies to make cars go faster, so I don't mind all of the buttons and such.

[@Lantec1000]

🤣 Beat me to it

[@placeholder2924]

Could I ask who the question was to?

[@kainagami]

I would like a car that has all the modern features in terms of safety, emissions and some amenities whilst having 90s to early 2000s aesthetics and interiors, no screen that blinds you when driving by night, no unnecessary infotainment system and whatsoever. What I'm seeing on the market today, I can hardly or just can't digest it. If you say that you're gonna be more sustainable, then produce less and you don't have to put out a new model every year.

[@om617yota8]

Completely agree. Looked at new trucks recently. Got disgusted, went and bought a '98. No touch screen anywhere, trailer brake controller is a sliding lever. When I'm done fixing it up the way I want it, it'll be 1/3rd the cost of the newer trucks. I could replace the entire drivetrain, and still be well under half the cost of a newer truck.

[@ColonelBobfed]

@@om617yota8 Exactly that on the cost front. Wish more people realised that

[@Sheridantank]

Imagine taking the super efficient drivetrains today and putting them in a lighter car from then. Like the Civic motor today, in the car then, would be fast and great on gas.

[@LLG47]

Producing less doesn't make money, consumers could get away with driving an older car but "need" is scarce, "want" is rampant. When your 2001 Honda Civic transmission goes, we all make the decision if the worth is there to replace it compared to purchasing something newer. We get a high from the chase of a new object to fill that void. Its exciting. What isn't exciting is 2k for a transmission install, or paying 1k to have all of your suspension parts refreshed at once so the car drives like new. Many cars can be dragged to half a million miles, but we prefer modern styling, a fresher look etc. People buy, corporations produce. Modern efficiency is coming at a cost as well with cost to repair and complications. It's a tough balance, I for one am not optimistic.

[@kainagami]

@@LLG47 yes, I'm aware of these dynamics. Produce more new stuff for more gain, some great examples are Audi and BMW that created models in their Q and X lines that have no meaning to exist, respectively the Q2, X2 and X4

[@allareasindex7984]

How about complexity driving the cost of repair beyond the car’s value? We already see premium brands plummet in value the moment their warranty expires. One example: Perishable rubber seals which require hours of engine disassembly to reach. I can’t bring myself to buy a car which can be totaled due to a predictable malfunction.

[@scottfree6479]

I'm going from a Tesla to an HD truck because of this. Yeah, a Ford Super Duty is a gas-guzzling land-yacht but the engine bay is cavernous, it doesn't have to follow all that EPA nonsense, and the pushrod v8 they offer is the simplest they've put out in years. You can actually see the ground when you open the hood lol. Well, with a step-stool. If something breaks then maybe I can't fix it myself, but a normal mechanic can. If something wears out than a machine shop can fab a replacement if I can't find out off the shelf. We have so many government regulations and greedy corporate policies that normal vehicles are quickly becoming untenable.

[@thisreallysucksbig]

Modern vehicles are amazing tech, but I love the idea of having one you can carry all the ignition parts in your glove box and fix with 50 bucks worth of used hand tools...

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

I did like "easy to fix but brakes often" of the past then "more reliable but harder to fix" of now

[@neovenom9833]

@@pleasedontwatchthese9593 except it's not more reliable.

[@tbdcreations5370]

@@neovenom9833 Kind of depends on the make/model. There are plenty of modern cars that will go 150k miles with nothing more than oil changes and brakes. Personally, I'd call that reliable.

[@Iroc3132]

@@tbdcreations5370 these types of cars are fairly uncommon or fairly expensive because of how desirable they are. And as for the video I agree that OBD diagnostic tools are much more plentiful nowadays, but the repair/replacement of the CAN modules that are required for newer vehicles to function will cause difficulties in the future even as technology progresses. There are products and tools that have been developed for older cars which makes them even easier to maintain and diagnose. Obviously there are many drawbacks with owning an older thing, newer vehicles literally do everything better, i just hate the idea of a software update having the potential to brick my car.

[@tbdcreations5370]

@@Iroc3132 I disagree that they're uncommon. I can't point to many sources other than anecdotes, though. My Honda Fit has 100k on it. All it's seen are oil changes and a couple sets of brakes. The reason I bought the car is my buddy's mom had one that was taken to 150k with, again, oil and brakes. She simply traded it in for a new one. In general, a lot of what is coming out of Japan is pretty reliable. US domestic is garbage, German is expensive, and the rest are irrelevant. I agree CAN modules are hard for an individual to handle. Not much of a problem if you don't work on your car, though. (I do the basics, don't have time or interest for more than that)

[@jungleguybest]

To be precise, only few features are welcome in my book. Too much invasive tech is bad. I start with what's most obvious, activating wipers should be easily accessible with a physical button and not entering an app on a screen then choosing an option. And so on for some other fonctions. Second, since we have the option of disabeling traction control that means in some cases old school is better. Third, even if computer is so capable of diagnosing the vehicle problem, there are still numerous problems that a computer cannot check, few examples, damaged wire, ball joint, oil leak ... So, i admit i like to have many new features, i still prefer old school in general. And i insist that i drive, and not some computer.

[@om617yota8]

@@JP-hr3xq This is me, 100%. I don't even want power seats.

[@bolt5564]

Exactly, the problem is when there is tons of tech that breaks, is extremely expensive to repair, and you can't decide not to repair. Also I think cars should be finished when they leave the factory, and should not require over the air updates.

[@johnnyblue4799]

@@JP-hr3xq You forgot heated mirrors... very useful when rain freezes over the mirrors, or when it snows on them... I also love the self dimming rearview mirror. And the backup camera. The computers are not very great at diagnosing the vehicle. They'll tell you what doesn't work and give you a code, but that is where the diagnose begins. People who can use an oscilloscope and know Ohm's law and also know how to read electrical diagrams will have work for a very long time in the car repair business.

[@VoxelLoop]

Actually a damaged wire, if it's shorting, it can check! Oil leak as well due to monitoring levels. Ball joint is a tough one though, could be done via gyro maybe to check for vibrations. :) Also, many new cars, primarily EVs, don't let you switch off traction control! This is usually because they have too much torque and quickly end up in a ditch if you do turn it off, though some allow 'lowering' the amount of traction control in for example Tesla's 'Track Mode'. I'd agree on the wipers though, but at the same time I'd say it's not a problem with how Tesla in this case implemented the controls, it's a problem with the automatic wipers. If they worked better, you wouldn't need to change the options ever as you'd leave it on auto. (This is likely what they intended. Currently, to override them there's a button on the left stalk to single wipe, pushing this also displays the 4 wiper speeds in a 'somewhat' easy to press location - Far from ideal, but it's made out to be worse than it is, you get used to it) With a software update the automatic wipers did get improved, 'apparently' they learn as you override them. (In a nutshell they over-engineered it and it doesn't really work right. I suppose it'll get overhauled again in the future)

[@jungleguybest]

@@VoxelLoop not always a damaged wire is shorting, it may cause other issues. If it's shorting, trust me you will know without the need of a computer. Oil leak will be noticed by the computer after quite sometime when level is noticeable only. As for functions, yes eventually you can activate them all, but why complicate something so easy like pushing a visible reachable knob in just one simple motion.

[@QueensGTO_Viper]

Increased complexity reduces independence. Yesterday's choice becomes tomorrow's mandate. In the car space it's "Freedom of Movement . " vs "Freedom of movement, unless..."

[@HeavyMetalorRockfan9]

To be honest I firmly believe that the push towards autonomous trucks is going to arrive real quick, especially at least for long haul trucking to depots outside of urban areas, in part because of the current trucker protests. Governments will be quick to remove methods of peaceful opposition going forward, and I wouldn't be surprised if this stays in their minds and they make new programs and regulations to ensure the viability of this

[@QueensGTO_Viper]

@@HeavyMetalorRockfan9 yup, seems like this is part of the plan

[@CarToneHK]

Cost hasn't gone up with inflation taken into account, sure, but wages certainly haven't kept up with inflation

[@dunigan3320]

Yes I agree whit you but thats not car manufacturers fault that the government.

[@geemy9675]

AWI has increased 73% vs inflation 51%

[@CarToneHK]

@@dunigan3320 Governments, EU ones for example are pushing for more and more driver aids and automatic braking tech, all those make cars more complicated

[@mabolzichjjl]

As an aviation mechanic who's familiar with interconnect systems and safety systems I'll happily maintain that even partially autonomous systems should not be left to the Everyman. The number of years and hours of training that pilots go through to be familiar with the limitations of the systems is staggering. From a mechanical standpoint the complexity of the systems and shear cost alone to calibrate and maintain them (much less replace) is enough for most automotive manufacturers to opt out. Even more so if the costs are left to the consumer

[@martinsvensson6884]

Keep the new car bodies (for safety and aero) with their sound isolation and comfortable seats.. and suspension components maybe. For all the rest just put regular analogue 90's resembling stuff in it. A screen could be an option. That just interacts with your phone. But doesnt mess with the rest of the car.

[@InsideOfMyOwnMind]

This video was next level for you Jason. Glad to see you accomplish it. I'm one of those who wants to drive as long as I can. On the other hand, level 5 will change the game for those who can no longer do so.

[@EngineeringExplained]

Thanks!

[@depausvandelilithkerk5785]

Drive safe and throw up the glorious Allpowerfull Lesbian Family street gang handsign otherwhise you will get Corona Smorona.

[@John-Doe-Yo]

@@depausvandelilithkerk5785 wtf lol

[@bmay8818]

@@depausvandelilithkerk5785 Huh?

[@dominiksuk7261]

I just hope no one will ever forbid driving the car ourselves. Under certain achievable conditions at least.

[@mike_svt93]

Personally I think the automotive industry needs to pause and get back to basics, balancing technology with simplicity and not over-design a vehicle. Otherwise the future could resemble a runaway train with destination unknown. In the meantime I'll keep my 90s and early 2000s vehicles for now.

[@Sheridantank]

That's the best time period for simple and reliable. So many cars come to mind that run 300k miles easy, with basic maintenance.

[@LLG47]

That's it though. They would, but most normies are absolutely smitten by tech regardless if it actually improves your life. In many cases it does no such thing. People probably buy several cars because they have larger screens, even if the screens take away your volume knob, HVAC controls, etc. which actively increases your distraction and lowers your safety. People don't know what they want, we are all just sea gulls entranced by shiny objects.

[@dpla9752]

The 90s were the golden age. Everything you need, nothing you don't.

[@07wrxtr1]

They would but people keep voting for more big DADDY government = more regulations = more cost… and not to mention you have a lot of beta males that want Safety > freedom and ownership

[@ChiefsFanInSC]

Cars today, are significantly safer and more fuel efficient than the cars from 20 to 30 years ago. I guess it depends on what you are looking for?? For me, I want a car that can get me from Point A to Point B in the safest, most cost effective manner possible while providing a reasonable level of comfort.

[@gryphon123456]

I would actually pay more for a car from a company that shed the technology for real mechanical engagement and investment in purity of driving. Manual, no touch screens, cable driven accelerator, no aids, hydraulic steering. I hate how soul-less and character-less cars are becoming. There must be a company that focuses on purity at an affordable price.

[@peekaboo1575]

I was going to say "Caterham" or "Ariel" right up to the moment you said "at an affordable price". Yeah, it sucks.

[@RomainCavallini]

well, there is also the safety aspect and at one point cars that don't have the safety systems won't be allowed on the road And about the price, electronic steering is cheaper AND much more efficient, and in no time the cable driven accelerator will be more expensive than a servomotor and sensor (if its not already less expensive ?) car are only a mean of transportation for the great majority of humans, and any company that want to market only to "pure driving" can't be affordable because of the insane economics of scale in the automotive industry The car you want will disappear very soon, not because there is noone that want it, but because there is not enough people, and after, that car won't be allowed on the roads, because it will be much more dangerous to let a human drive where a computer will be able to do it infinitely better (give it to 2050, tops....)

[@Sheridantank]

@@peekaboo1575 He said "pay more", and then "at an affordable price". So that's kinda confusing. An Ariel is cool, but most people want something that can be driven most every day. Maybe Ariel should make a full body, but still ultra light and basic car?

[@peekaboo1575]

@@Sheridantank That could work, yes. Westfield makes (or made, I don't know if they're still in business) a Lotus 7 replica (just like Caterham) that was actually enclosed and fully weather-proof. I couple of decades ago fun, simple cars that were practical and could be driven everyday weren't exactly hard to find. We still have some today but they're fewer and fewer as time goes on.

[@peekaboo1575]

@@RomainCavallini I sure love when politicians take more and more of our freedom away in the name of safety.

[@martj1313]

Simple answer, yes. I am from a time when you got in a car for the first time and drove off in it, a lot of new cars need 30 minutes of training to operate.

[@curtisj2165]

More than 30 minutes

[@individual1-floridaman491]

They say every joke has a kernel of truth: "The best anit-theft measure currently being offered is a manual gearbox". I enjoy DRIVING and a lot of this new tech is removing more and more of the 'driving' experience. I know it's for convenience but have we forgotten what driving a vehicle actually should entail?

[@sammiller6631]

what driving actually should entail is getting from Point A to B in one piece. Talk about 'driving' experience is _extra_ instead of essential.

[@doctorsmoothy]

Wow, that car full of screens is a nightmare come to life.

[@Welterino]

I was thinking the same thing... leave GPUs for computers for fuck's sake.

[@BmacRDX]

My main gripe with most newer cars is the proliferation of screens. I deeply understand the logic for them, but that same logic ignores fundamental reasons to not use them. They are in general, less safe to use while driving, and less serviceable for the future. I absolutely will NOT buy a Tesla for these reasons.

[@mikevale3620]

But most cars have these screens and multiple menus to navigate, all whilst apparently watching the road ahead and the traffic around you. A recipe for disaster.

[@BmacRDX]

@@mikevale3620 screens just off the line of sight view to the road are inherently safer than one in the middle of the IP that makes you take your eyes off the road completely.

[@mikevale3620]

@@BmacRDX Nevertheless, are you looking at screens to adjust your seat heating or are you looking where the car is going...you cannot do both.

[@BmacRDX]

@@mikevale3620 neither. I can glance at a button and press it without taking my eyes off the road for any significant amount of time at all.

[@lonesomecricket7721]

Yes Yes and Yes.............

[@aleblanc3547]

Lol

[@miniaturemachinist6098]

I'd much rather have an old, fuel efficient, small car with a manual transmission than a modern car. I can open up my cars hood and see an engine, there's plenty of space on either side of the engine to work on things as well. It would be really nice if some company were to still make cars that are simple and reliable without any unnecessary electronics.

[@cgRui34]

Some Japanese manufacturers still do, but mostly their economy models in Asian markets.

[@jhndijkman]

The thing is I enjoy driving my vehicles. Every day I love driving my vehicle and in the way that I wish to enjoy it. Mostly this video talks mainly that cars as just transport. Cars have never been to me just a form of transport. And so long as there is air my lungs and blood in veins I never desire just transport. The guy that made this very video more understands that than most.

[@kingofank]

I read an interview recently with the president of Qualcomm, in it he said that car companies were spooked when they realized how reliant they were on the semiconductor supply chain. He went on to say that the answer to this was for them to invest more in their supply chains. I can see why he would feel that was the answer, because it puts more money in his own pocket, but I think the obvious answer is to reduce exposure to that supply chain by removing and simplifying the computer systems in cars.

[@ervinm.5065]

What about programmed obsolescence? What about the semiconductor Crysis? What about people who can't afford cars anymore due to how expensive they become? What about spare parts? Keeping It simple It's not just about leaving a fun drive experience to car enthusiasts, It's about keeping It affordable and accessible for everyone instead of just the elites.

[@StatusQuo209]

But does the car run Crysis?

[@Mr.DontKnow]

Simple answer, YES!

[@robinhede7467]

Absolutely. A car from let's say, 1995 can still work just like It did when it came out, with minor flaws. A car from 2020 will be dead LONG before 2045... if used prices stays the same as they always have (like a car is worth 1/6-1/8 of the original price at 10 years age) some of the parts in modern cars will cost way more to replace than the car is worth... my brother is a mechanic and he have seen 5 years old cars go to the scrap yard because of dead hybrid systems and so on.

[@Sheridantank]

That's disgusting. You'd think we'd eventually make enough cars to be like "ok, let's take a break from making cars for a while and use what we have". But we switched to making unreliable junk. Imagine if someone made cars like 90s cars today how cheap they would be. We mass produce trash as a species at this point.

[@musek5048]

@@Sheridantank as long as giant profits are to be made there's not much any single person can do about it other than consume and participate.

[@robinhede7467]

@@Sheridantank I think no matter how good cars is, people will still buy new ones. It's that feeling of getting something new that's so great... things get boring fast? Maybe because cars today are soulless plastic pieces of junk that they don't appreciate once they've gotten used to it. I must say I do get it when people who don't have the knowledge or the opportunity to fix their own cats get rid of them fast, because once the varranty from the factory has run out, you're basically screwed if it breaks down... some of the cars my brother worked on was just past their varranty when things like the electric motor on the hybrid systems went bad... those could be 6+grand to replace and at that point the car was worth maybe 10grand... this is especially hard on the cheap hybrids such as the suzuki swift that starts at around 20k (in Denmark where I'm from) when that car is 5 years old its worth around half of that, thing is, the hybrid system on those is a large starter motor with 16-20ish hp, if that thing goes bad, you'll need to pull the engine and transmission to replace it. The part alone is 3-4 grand, then there's the hours + if you're going to rip the engine out on a 5-6 year old car, you might as well change the clutch too while you're at it... all in all, that's probably an 8k repair on a 10k vehicle, might as well buy a new one at that point.

[@jongoode3296]

@@robinhede7467 I must not get that feeling of getting something new. Just anxiety about how I'm going to pay for the new thing.

[@robinhede7467]

@@jongoode3296 me too, I've never bought a new car and I don't plan to ever. Most expensive car I ever bought is my current one, I payed 8 grand for it. That's why going electric is a problem for many people, when used electric cars are finally cheap enough for me to afford, they'll be useless since the battery will be 10 years old by that time.

[@Nick-jq5nl]

The issue I have with tech, personally, is if/when it impedes the ability to operate the vehicle or its features. Generally, I have no issue with adding tech if/when it's additive; eg: adding a HUD to display information. On the other hand, things like automatic emergency braking or automatic lane departure assistance are much more controversial, and often undesirable, because manufacturers do not (or cannot) bias their implementations to eliminate false-positives (see: Tesla, BMW, etc.), and as a result the systems often increase the danger of operating the vehicle, compared to a stock vehicle without them. Good tech should make vehicles unequivocally better (or at least, not worse); bad tech (such as the emergency braking systems from manufacturers like those mentioned, and others) is bad, and is making vehicles worse.

[@PedroMDIX]

The more i see modern cars,more i love cars from the 70's and earlier, to me none plastic computer crap will never clome close to the superiority of a simple mecanical system.

[@peekaboo1575]

The sweet spot was the 90s IMO.

[@PedroMDIX]

@@peekaboo1575 still had an ECU but you could tinker with common tools and make bolt on upgrades without headache,is not for free why tuners love them.

[@peekaboo1575]

@@PedroMDIX Aye. These days the whole car goes haywire if you change the radio. It's ridiculous.

[@PSNeko]

@@peekaboo1575 80's and 90's yes. Really comes down to the manufactors. Mercedes diesel for me basically until 1996 and BMW petrol until maybe until 1998 Just an enthusiasts opinion!

[@peekaboo1575]

@@PSNeko Mercedes' were world class all the way up to the mid 1980s but then something went wrong. They still made some good models of course but by the late 90s it just wasn't the same anymore.

[@baileybehzadi2308]

I love manual controls and analog gauges. I’d take the technology loss to have a simple reliable vehicle at a lower cost. Instead of autonomous driving invest in better public transport and let those who want to drive have a car.

[@fireboyandy]

I think that more options and technology is ok ONLY if there is also consumer right to repair along with this. If there is not improvement in the right to repair side then many problems will come up which will prevent certain technologies and options from being widely adopted.

[@dkdanis1340]

They are literally easier to repair than before.

[@billyjoejimbob56]

@@dkdanis1340 You will need to explain that to the owners of aging Teslas... who experience battery module failure and are told there is no plan to repair or remanufacture the single most expensive part of the car. Tesla will be happy to charge you $20,000 for a new module, and keep you waiting weeks? months?? to get your car back. Your sweeping statement is not universally true by any means.

[@Monaleenian]

You do have a right to repair. If you own something outright then you can perform whatever modifications or repairs you'd like. You have that right.

[@billyjoejimbob56]

@@Monaleenian True, but... You need to have access to necessary tools, data, and software. And you are fully responsible if you compromise safety or environmental performance. No big deal if you tweak the aftermarket carb on your old Camaro. A bit more serious if your Tesla burns your house to the ground after you fix the battery pack yourself.

[@Monaleenian]

@@billyjoejimbob56 Yes, to do the best repair possible you would need access to everything that the manufacturer had at their disposal when making the part originally. That has nothing to do with a "right to repair" though. To have that kind of access, there would need to be some kind of obligation to allow people to use the property of someone else, where they claim a need exists. Obviously that would be crazy and would be a fundamental change to property rights and will never happen. What could happen is that customers of companies like Tesla and Apple, and every company really, could provide feedback on their desire to have the company provide the data they'd like, or to sell the individual parts or tools that they'd like and then boycott the company if they don't act upon that feedback. The company would decide then to listen to what the market is demanding or choose to ignore it based upon what they see as the correct course of action to allow them to earn the most money in the short and long term. That's all this "right to repair" talk is. It's just user feedback. Bakeries have been getting user feedback for hundreds of years without anyone claiming that the baker has an obligation to provide his secret recipe or allow access to his ovens to people who claim that they have a need to those in order to do the best possible job in repairing a bun that their dog took a bite from!

[@james2042]

The issue is from the creation of the automobile up until about 1980, a car could be fixed with a replacement part, a jack and a basic tool kit. From 1980 until about 2000, a part, a more advanced toolkit, a jack, and now a multimeter. But beyond that era where everything went digital and you can have a problem with a system and the vehicle will not run despite the entire system being physically perfect, only for some software issue. For example an engine turning but not starting, and you know mechanically it's sound to start. Turns out there's an oil pressure sensor not getting a reading and the computer thinks there's no oil so it won't start the engine. In my current vehicle, there is an EVAP code that won't go away, I've replaced literally every component that could possibly be causing the issue, every hose, valve, sensor even the whole pcm. It's still there and none of the original components remain. Engine light is on and they had to void that code on the inspection, but the vehicle still doesn't run right. New cars are superior when they work, but they are far worse when they don't. It makes me wanna buy a 95 suburban and ride that baby out until gas is banned in the US

[@FestyDog]

I think in looking at how car prices have changed over time in relation to inflation we must also consider changes to income over time with relation to inflation to make an effective statement about car affordability changing.

[@vinzenzgeske8987]

There's one really big point you forgot in your video: The ecological footprint of our cars. The base models may have gotten cheaper over the last 20 years and they have (about) kept their power-to-weight ratio. But they still have added a lot of complexity in sensors and systems. And most of them are going to end up getting replaced regularly due to failure or as a precaution. They also will make (and have made) mishaps or accidents way more expensive to fix. When you drove into a wall at 10 mph 20 years ago chances were all you needed was a new bumper, some cheap front lights and maybe some brace for the hood lock. Today you will probably need new parking assistance sensors, the radar sensor for your adaptive cruise control and maybe even a new camera as well. And since your headlights are LED with automatic leveling they will be so much more expensive to replace as well. And all those old electronic parts will most likely end up in landfills - if not completely than at least to an extent. Just look what Tesla does to its customers with their policy of always changing the whole group instead of just the part that is broken. Granted this is something that happened as long as cars existed (and with other systems before that as well): Apart from some O-rings a (quality) carburettor was made completely out of metal. Then we added automatic choke and switched over to EFI. And I *love* EFI. I hate carburettors so much. But you cannot deny that we suddenly added a lot of hard to recycle potential waste when switching over to EFI. Complexitiy is always an issue when talking about systems. It makes a system more vulnerable to errors and/or attacks. And it makes you more dependent on the decisions of the company that built the system and now maintains it... You talked about your mobile phone and how customizable it is. But wether it is Android or iOS: Both have had huge vulnerabilities that weren't fixed for years allowing bad people and governments total access to the lives of those they spied on. Imagine having your car hacked by someone overwriting all safety protocolls and keeping you from intervening while you drive off a cliff. People will say that this is insane and that it will never happen. And I would agree that there's a good chance we will never know that it happened. But if you look at the last 15 years and what the Snowden disclosures taught us: Whatever will be possible people will do. They will find a way to defend their decisions to themselves and others after the fact. You don't even have to go that far: Both Android and iOS had huge design changes people weren't happy about. Imagine getting in your car one morning and all the nice square app icons are replaced with ugly round ones (or the other way around). You might laugh about it but if I spend 70 thousand (or even only 20 thousand for that matter) I don't want people being able to simply change the way I have to interact with my car. I bought the car the way it was because I liked it exactly the way it was...

[@derekisthematrix]

You know you're getting older when you love tech yet want nothing more than simplicity in your driving experience. I want to depend on myself, not centralized and fragile infrastructure.

[@scottfree6479]

Me too. Sometimes I think I should just stop buying newer vehicles and pick up something from the 60s, learn how to maintain it myself, and never buy another vehicle.

[@ALVINTDRIVER]

@@scottfree6479 makes sense if parts are available @ reasonable cost. I have a new MT Bronco, '91 Miata, '91 240SX where values are currently high, parts (still) available, and they're mechanically accessible. Bronco likely safest in an accident but I prefer driving the 30-year cars cause they're more fun..

[@GalvayraPHX]

I disagree with the maintenance conclusion. Increased complexity always always ALWAYS makes things worse. Even if you don't do the repairs yourself, if they are more complex, you'll get charged more. Same story if they require specialized tools/training - the bill goes up. Second, while we currently have tools available, that's not where the manufacturers want to be. Just look at right to repair and John Deere. Finally, a lot of those so-called features are not safety/security focused, but rather "comfort" features - which isn't bad on it's own. However, already the manufacturers are requiring consent to gather a lot of OUR data supposedly for those features to work. I can only see that get worse as time goes on. Finally, you mentioned multiple times how Qualcomm doesn't dictate to manufacturers, just provides the tools and they choose what to use. I'm sure that same reasoning is what IBM used when they were selling their products to nazis so they could better count the concentration camp inmates.

[@jongoode3296]

Um, the digital computer was JUST invented before WW2 and wasn't patented or sold until afterward. The enigma machine was the height of technology used by the Nazis to encrypt communications was a mechanical device. However, I get what you're saying about providers selling their platform and not taking any liability for it because it was up to the manufacturers. They could easily open source their platform, provide open source tools for diagnostics, and charge for support like some software companies have, but none of the manufacturers would buy it.

[@GalvayraPHX]

@@jongoode3296 Mechanical and electro-mechanical "pseudo-computers" existed quite a while before the first digital ones, and that's what IBM sold. I agree open-sourcing will turn off a large number of manufacturers, and I don't even blame them about that. But I still don't think platform providers should be absolved of all responsibility. Just look at the recent developments with Pegasus. The makers of it said they are only selling to government entities and washed their hands clean, yet it's been abused all over.

[@yubentrolled7097]

Simplicity is the ultimate complication.

[@pfunk34]

KISS method is always best.

[@jongoode3296]

@@GalvayraPHX I read your comment only thinking about computers because that's what all the other comments are talking about, but you never said computer, oops. I honestly have no idea what IBM sold before the vacuum tube mainframe behemoths of the 60s. A logical method of assigning responsibility wouldn't be all or nothing. The vendor should be responsible for some modules, particularly the ones they default, the manufacturer should be responsible for anything they choose outside those defaults, and the driver should be responsible for any modifications they've made to what the manufacturer provided. Of course that'll never happen. We'll keep getting tons of finger pointing like whether Chevy or LG were responsible for the Bolt fires. Regardless, we're going to see a whole new area of law precedence being set about autonomous devices.

[@davepaturno4290]

Many are starting to or already have realized that having only a touchscreen to control or set everything represents a major safety issue. Vehicles need to have quick and easy electro-mechanical controls (not requiring visual focus) for commonly required activations/setting while the vehicle is being driven. So even though having a giant screen and computer in your car seems futuristic at first, common sense should prevail before too many accidents force changes.

[@noelaguirrechavez4462]

As someone that enjoys driving, I kinda think that all the self-driving is a bit too much. I think that's gonna make the cars way too complex and we'll get too little of a benefit just because people thought we shouldn't be driving. Driving is an activity that takes most of the human judgement every step of the way, and I think you'll need something overly complex in order to teach an algorithm something like all the little things you do while driving. Of course the fact that an algorithm can learn that could make self-driving a bit less dangerous for all of us, because in the end all accidents come from a failed judgement of the risks some human made. And, as some people said, making cars more complex will give the people a lot smaller of a shot at repairing them when something goes wrong. It would completely suck if cars become as something as disposable as a cheap phone, where if anything breaks the repair costs are almost the same as buying another phone. If we're all trying to make things greener to save whatever's left of the environment, then making anything harder to repair goes against it

[@ajstevens1652]

Exactly. Advanced driving aid + improved driver training makes much more sense than fully autonomous driving.

[@dkdanis1340]

Autonomy doesn't make car more complex. It uses the same motor as does for normal power steering. Tesla has software that is way safer than human.

[@FutureSystem738]

You’re working on the principle that humans are good drivers. They can be, when they’re paying attention, sober, not on drugs, not suffering a medical issue, well rested, not on the phone, not thinking about relationship or work problems etc etc. Sadly, that’s very often not the case. Humans are very often TERRIBLE drivers. Just look at the road toll, about 3,700 deaths, AND waaay more serious injuries every single day!

[@chrisluttor2275]

When a Qualcomm-equipped car in mode 3, 4 or 5 has an accident, who is responsible: the driver or Qualcomm? I'm sure that the driver's insurance company will blame Qualcomm and Qualcomm will blame the driver for having chosen the wrong autonomous mode for the driving conditions. The likely outcome is that the injured parties will wait years for the courts to decide who should pay for the medical treatment.

[@OutOfNameIdeas2]

You, the consumer will always get screwed over.. no doubt about it.

[@westonkoenig4003]

I am in the LCD industry. You bring up a great point about physical buttons still being needed. I think that is a big complaint amongst Telsa owners is the fact that what should be prominent settings are burried in a menu. One solution I see in the near future is haptics, similar to what your phone and smart watches have. With tailored software, manufacturers will be able to mimic button and knob feels giving a virtual replacement to common button and knobs. I saw a demo at CES a few years ago. You will also see gesturing come about. Instead of touching the display, making gestures with your hands will be able to handle some functions.

[@farmonious420]

When they started with power windows, people were freaking out. When they started with abs...People freaked out. When they started with autonomous driving....People started dying. Seems a little different to me. It will only become safe when every vehicle is linked, and that is a long ways away. My biggest concern is the ability to build in more and more obsolescence. I don't know how many phones, tablets and computers I've had to throw out over the years, because they were no longer supported. This gives "My computer just crashed!" a whole new meaning. Keep up the great vids. Stay Happy and Healthy

[@Micamicamico]

Hello, in the finance section of this video you forgot to compare the inflation to average income. So the standard transaction price of vehicles has increased as well as inflation, but the average wage hasn't risen to meet that. So in terms of purely monetary value, you are correct that the price for what you get hasnt risen, the cost to a person and their family has definitely increased quite significantly.

[@mceajc]

I'm going to write my answer now, and see if I still have the same opinion at the end of your video. Yes - and my reasoning is: 1) modern cars are not only complicated, but more complicated than they need to be. 2) in order to differentiate themselves (since things like reliability, customer service and so on are broadly - emphasis on broadly - similar), car companies keep adding bells and whistles. 3) Cars ought to be possible to diagnose and service yourself or have independant repair shops do it. Too many things are proprietary, and can only be fixed by a dealer (and even then, they are sometimes unable to diagnose faults in their own vehicles). 4) Too often, I cannot choose what level of complication I want. Do I want heated seats? Well, you'll have to put up with out janky and outdated Sat-nav! Do I want an auto-darkening rear view mirror? You'll have to have the "comfort pack" that includes a vastly over-priced entertainment system. Do I want keyless entry? I have to have a car that receives software updates that I don't control. OK, got to the end. There are some definite points I will concede there, though I think my points still stand. That said, I have never and probably will never buy a new car. Part of my refusal to buy a new car is having to pay for things I don't want and will never use, or are so new as to be "untested" in my eyes. Something I want to gripe about here, though it is only tangentially related: ability to turn things off. There are some "driver aids" that are unhelpful or downright dangerous in some situations, and I will always want the option to turn things of either temporarily or permanently. An example: My parents have a fairly new Honda Hybrid, and it comes with some driver assistance features - one of which is to stop you from crossing over a solid painted line, and it will actively steer the vehicle away from the centre line if you cross it. On the narrow country roads in Scotland, it nearly put my mother into the wall of a narrow bridge. And it isn't possible to permanently disable, so she has to turn it off EVERY TIME SHE GETS IN THE CAR and wants to travel the back roads.

[@yup8388]

People are people and they forget. If you love your parents, tell them to get rid of that car. Alternatively, (let them) try putting a tape over the camera watching the road. If it works then paint it.

[@jpe1]

There exists a subset of car buyers who are car enthusiasts, people who want their cars to be highly customizable to their preferences. If the “digital chassis” is an open standard in which manufacturers, aftermarket suppliers, and individual hobbyists can all participate on equal footing then I see a very bright future for car enthusiasts, and for the larger car buying population, in which cars are easily upgraded and customized to their owners preferences and whims. If instead the “digital chassis” is kept a trade secret and vertically integrated with no ability for aftermarket or hobbyist modifications then I expect to see a new car landscape where cars are treated as simply another household appliance, with all the excitement and diversity of refrigerators or washing machines, and car enthusiasts will grow increasingly disjointed from the broader car market, focusing instead on cars from the last millennium, or truly custom built one-offs.

[@BuckingBronco]

I always enjoy your insightful commentary. Great food for thought.

[@bolt5564]

Manufacturers should make sure a car is finished before it leaves the factory, including software. I don't want to drive around in a car that needs over the air updates because the automaker wanted to sell a car before it finished the software. There are no problems with the software on my dad's 2012 Chevy Volt, so I know it's possible to get the software right out of the factory. The ability to do over the air updates (especially in regards to essential systems) can be exploited. There have been multiple instances where people have remotely hacked into Teslas, and at least one where they hacked the company Tesla and got remote control access of every single Tesla.

[@ajstevens1652]

Exactly. The fact that Teslas are updated as if they were steam games is very concerning.

[@jurisdarwin5487]

A car should always have manual operating possibilty no matter how good autonomous system is, because when it fails, car has to be able to be driven

[@GregHassler]

That's levels 1-4.

[@jurisdarwin5487]

@@GregHassler so when level 5 in your carfails you have to walk?

[@zackklapman3569]

Great video, Jason. Thanks for putting the complexity in perspective.

[@davidsawyer7880]

While parking at a local retailer next to a Tesla couldn't help but notice the huge screen in the center of the dash. After opening the door for the Love of my life. I mentioned the car to her. This is her response. "How do you drive with that big monitor in your face." Her take was the driver would be distracted and not keep their eyes on the road.

[@colty7764]

one reason Toyotas hold up well over time is simplicity.. their Zen culture. I buy basic Toyotas (base level Corollas)... they get the job down at very low maintenance and few issues.

[@-DC-]

Likewise got a base model manual transmission Civic 90k miles not a single fault.

[@TrulyMotors]

Living in Pittsburgh, I've always thought there is no way fully autonomous vehicles would work without a major change to infrastructure. I'd love to see an autonomous vehicle have to use a mirror to see around a blind curve at a stop sign. Or maybe deal with a 6-way intersection with two trolley lines in the middle and only half the directions of traffic have to stop. My town has 4 of those. How about stopping and honking the horn at the entrance of a two way, one lane tunnel with a blind turn and wait for a response to see if anyone is coming the other way? My town has 3 of those. Just using one of the many two way, one lane, on the side of cliff, with cars parked on one side, roads we have here in Pittsburgh, I can see why most of the autonomous driving companies use Pittsburgh as a test bed. That said, I don't think it's impossible and am always excited to see what engineers come up with!

[@scottfree6479]

I agree completely. Plus, then the car would have to deal with Steelers fans.

[@NoName-st6zc]

When i think of questions like "are modern cars too complicated" i instantly compare the MK7 vs the MK8 Golf and the only conclusion i can draw off of this is that the best cars have already been build. The next car i'm going to purchase will be an MK7 Golf (GTI or maybe R) and that's going to be it for me. It's going to be my car for at least the next 20 years, if not more. I think i'll rather call that sustainable instead of Electric Vehicles that, at least as a whole, are very likely going to go through batteries like no one's business. What's sustainable about that? Also : i'm a simple man and i see it like this : i want to drive my car, not the other way around. The MK7 (not even 7.5) is the last Golf i can get without lane assistant, without front distance control, with an analog speedometer and an infotainment unit that is mostly navigated with buttons. Perfection. That's not only all i'm going to ever need, it's all i'm going to ever want. As i've said before : the best cars have been build and when it comes to the Golf, that was the MK7. My next and most likely last car. Looking forward to it.

[@LordWartog]

I will also say that I know when I was looking for a new car I struggled to find any base trim model cars. I wonder if that's the real reason why the transaction price has gone up as it has; people need a new vehicle every so often and if you can only find base+2 level trims, you have to do what you have to do when you need a vehicle.

[@GodOfDonuts]

Base trims have the smallest profit margins; Luxury SUVs the highest.

[@jongoode3296]

This is one thing I don't get about car shopping. I've gone with multiple people that go to 1 single dealership and decide to buy whatever is available in stock. I get that things happen and sometimes you need a car NOW (I once bought a $1000 Focus off Craigslist because it was summer and it's A/C worked), but why buy a car from a dealership without planning? At least before COVID you could know what trim levels existed and order what you needed. Of course that's not possible on any reasonable time scale right now. In case you're wondering what happened to the Focus, I spent a few weeks that summer searching for a truck I actually wanted, bought it, and resold the Focus for $900. I kept that truck for 9 years until my family outgrew it.

[@ice44567]

The shortages since covid have made manufacturers spend their resources on the highest margin stuff. Base model cars were rarely produced before, now there are a trivial amount being made.

[@yoted]

I had to manufacturer order my base model car since no dealers had it with a manual anywhere near me.

[@jamdoodles]

I dunno. Electric cars are fundamentally pretty simple, but the anti-right to repair moves made by Ford, GM, John Deere & Tesla are all concerning. It doesn't matter how simple the functional bits of the car are when the manufacturer's gatekeep the tool shed. I think technically-minded people are capable of fiddling with things to a much higher level than many give them credit for, so the qualcomm bonkers system isn't too worrying to me... It's the way the developers of these machines & systems want to prevent people from not paying them to fix them that I find concerning. I understand the need to keep people from doing things in the software that will get you, the company, sued for reckless endangerment or whatever. Especially if you're dealing with autonomy. But these companies are doing a lot more than that. They don't want you to be able to fix much of anything.

[@TheDefender123Plays]

You are right about Electric cars being fundamentally simple. Of course engineering is about finding the right balance of voltage, cooling etc. However, an electric motor is really just some magnets and some wire.

[@CelticSemperTyrannis]

Omg yes a normal guy used to be able to fix most stuff on his car now there's proprietary software that you need to do anything

[@piotrmazurek5660]

The problems with maintenance complexity and cost in modern cars is a result of car manufacturers decisions to make it so, not technology itself imo.

[@aristhrottle6843]

I appreciate you addressing this question. Ultimately to get a somewhat accurate view of what the future holds for complexity, we have to be objective. Most of us watching this video are gear heads, which isn't a bad thing, but we have to set aside our subjective desires in this topic. With the introduction of an electric future, I think the answer is yes and no. Yes because with the technology/ computers being jammed into cars today, we have to be mindful of the pitfalls that can come with that area of the industry. On the other hand, electric motors require less maintenance than the traditional internal combustion engine. Could we see that cars start succumbing to the same fate that smart phones do with updates and planned obsolescence? Possibly. It would be nice if cars were more viable in their technology long term to accommodate those who just don't want to buy a car every 5 -7 years but are in for the long haul of 10+ years. Ultimately, I'd like to see electric/combustion/more technologically stuffed cars start to become more selective and streamlined with what is necessary for a car to function. The less bells and whistles the less stuff breaks. But that is just my opinion at the end of the day.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

As a non-gear head, I feel like you perfectly summarized my concerns with the future. We’ve already seen some instances of companies using the new tech to create hurdles (Toyota remote start and BMW heated seats?) which really worries me about the future. I just want to buy a car, and drive it until the wheels fall off. The idea that the dealer can step in and disable features after a few years really worries me.

[@MF-rtard89]

Planned obsolescence has been a thing in cars for decades.

[@aristhrottle6843]

@@MF-rtard89 Agreed, but how we define what that means always shifts. Especially with today's cars. But you're not wrong, it has always been a thing.

[@ScBroodSc2]

Well, even if the cars are "futur proof" and will get update and keep their capacities at their best over time, I'm sure there will be a point where, you're old car that was awesome because it could drive for 400 km will feel obsolete in 10 years when batteries will allow cars to go 1000km+. We genuinely don't know what sort of tech will pop up, but we do know there is alot of researches going on batteries. So car might be able to drive for 10 years as much as when it was new, but in 10 years, who knows what it will be.

[@jongoode3296]

@@ScBroodSc2 Which is exactly why EVs should be designed with the intention of the battery being replaced or upgraded

[@RogerM88]

And BEV cars aren't getting "simpler" either. Also very expensive to repair, if they start a trend of big structural casting pieces, and integrated battery packs, that could easily totaled a car due to some accident. Similar already happening with many super cars using monocoque tubs.

[@Argedis]

They also have a definite limited lifespan due to battery life being ~10 yrs estimated. Battery replacement will cost as much as the vehicle is worth so it will likely just be thrown away. That also means buying a used EV over 10yrs old is not a very good idea. With ICE you can buy a 10+ yr old car that was well maintained and still drive it for many years. My truck is 20 yrs old and still runs like a dream

[@batymahn]

What happened to me, about 2 weeks ago, is I was driving on the highway under slippery conditions, with an eAWD Prius. I decided to slow down a little bit and the rear end began to fishtail (going straight). I instinctively let up on the accelerator which put the car into regen mode and I lost control. I believe that if the car would have been more intelligent it would have only done regen from the rear under slick conditions but engineers, and people are not there yet.

[@lint2023]

Very important comment. Thanks. Disable regen in slippery conditions.

[@RomainCavallini]

the regen is always active when releasing the throttle, its not something the car "think", but its more up to you to remember the regen, and not let go fully when you want to just roll. In this case, its not the car fault, its how its designed, it would be the same as saying "my new car is automatic, and when i let go of the brake, the car moves forward, i'm not used to this as I used to drive a manual, its the car fault" There is instance where the car are not smart enough, like in some condition the ESP is a PITA, and that because of the limitation of the current system, but your experience is not really that problem

[@jongoode3296]

I can see regen adding to an existing lack of traction. I've had several AWD systems that took a second to engage, just long enough to make the lack of traction worse instead of better, but I don't understand how slowing down while going straight causes fishtailing without severe differences in traction from side to side that traction control wasn't able to mitigate.

[@batymahn]

@@jongoode3296 I grew up on rear wheel drives and we did doughnuts in empty parking lots. If I ever get another hybrid I will play with dynamics again. I did have a similar experience in my Escape Hybrid, also going straight. My brother has a Model Y and experienced fishtailing, going straight, when the car wasn't in snow mode.

[@jongoode3296]

@@batymahn Strange I haven't experienced anything like that in my leaf (doesn't even have a snow mode), which is why I wanted to understand more about it. I was cautioned that something similar could happen in corners if I only put snow tires on the front drive wheels, but I've never even thought of testing anything other than the ABS while going straight.

[@celestialmedia2280]

This is awesome Showing informative content with pic and video clips ..

[@ltborg]

Thank you for your comment on physical buttons! I completely agree. Hopefully the OEMs will listen.

[@Jiewicz]

Complicated is one of the problems (well described in other comments). To me, the bigger issue is connectivity. Soon we'll not gonna be able to do anything without global control from bodies that oversees us. And I'm not talking just about cars...

[@musek5048]

careful now, that kinda talk usually comes with a tin foil hat lol hey, at least when our owners have full control of us we can look at each other and say "hey looks like we were right??!"

[@Jiewicz]

@@musek5048 we don't have to go straight to the goldwin point, but those last 2 years were beyond a lot of fictions of anticipations. We can expect to be more and more controlled and an aluminium hat will not start your car. You'll just look funny. But a qr code, an identity verification or insert your licence in the car, could do that in the futur. Hell, just today I had to give my id to an app to continue to use it in my job (an only agenda with online booking for my patients)... I've been paying them for 5 years, they have all the data they need on me but I had to take a picture of me through my laptop for "the security of my patients". Insane.

[@musek5048]

@@Jiewicz all if it done in the name of security. and you never know, aluminum hats may become a new fashion trend in that dystopian future lol

[@zefautino]

Cost hasn't gone up, but quality has gone down. Materials used today are much cheaper than 30 years ago, and there's no over engineering to boost reliability. Quite the opposite. Efficiency on production has also been improved.

[@tophan5146]

Quality has not gone down.

[@jeffs2809]

I really don’t see how quality or materials are worse today than 30 years ago. About the only thing I can think of is the migration from real leather to imitation leather. A lot of vehicles from the ‘90’s into the early 2000’s are a sea of cheap plastic.

[@zefautino]

@@tophan5146 really? How old are you again?

[@zefautino]

@@jeffs2809 That's because you don't work on engine bays. A large amount of components are built from much cheaper and fragile composites, many are deliberately built in a manner that will inevitably fail, be it with time or use. On the interior, if you want the same level of quality you had 20 years ago, you can't. The plastics are nowhere near as good as the ones used 20 years ago. You can have good quality leather seats, if you pay for it. But don't think you getting the same treatment for the rest of the interior, you won't.

[@AHungryHunky]

I don't know, I got out of my 20 year old GM truck with it's cracking dash and into my wife's modern GM crossover and the plastic smelled exactly the same. I'll admit though, my truck had softer armrests and actually had some padding next to the window because they knew if you bought a truck, your arm was on the window not the armrest, now it's just solid plastic even on cars that adjusted for inflation, still cost more than that truck new.

[@ilovetotri23]

Amazing video! Thanks.

[@MillionMileDrive]

For a daily driver, yeah... give me all the tech... hell, drive itself so I don't have to... I hate commuting... but for a weekend car, give me analog. It's why I still keep an MR2 Turbo in my garage

[@ajstevens1652]

This is my view on EVs. I don't care if I have to catch the train to work everyday, but let me keep my ICE sports cars for the weekends.

[@roary4092]

Today it's possible for the manufacturer or malicious actors to remotely control and even disable any technology that is connected to the internet like a phone, a laptop, or a TV. None of these devices can cause physical harm to anyone but a car can. This is a huge problem in itself not to mention that it further erodes our freedom, liberty and privacy. Affordable low tech cars which are not connected to the internet need to be available and legal.

[@leftaroundabout]

Low-tech is one option; consequent open-source mandates, principled design instead of proprietary feature-bloat, and offline-by-default is another way, which I'd prefer.

[@davidkucher5.0Coy]

I think all this technology takes away a lot of the enjoyment of driving the vehicle, and that would be totally boring. I think it will be a long time before autonomous vehicles will be able to mix with regular driving in most part. Just a thought. 🤔👍

[@ChiefsFanInSC]

The problem is that we don't realize what bad drivers we are. I know, we all say, "Oh, I am a really good driver" when in fact a large percentage of us really suck. We get distracted. We talk on the phone. We get tired. We multi-task. And we crash and kill others everyday. Autonomous vehicles are already A LOT safer than the vast majority of human drivers.

[@daviderhahon]

Very insightful and inspiring. Enough food for thought here.

[@zachc1297]

IT employee at work said it best in my opinion, "we will have self driving cars when that is all we have." Basically the cars (C-V2X) will have to talk to each other to learn and etc. You cant have a car with logic driving it at the same time you have a human going by instinct.

[@VoltLover00]

Too much of a security nightmare

[@MattBrownbill]

Very interesting. My 'unwinnable' scenario occurs every day I drive anywhere. School traffic/parking on a country lane that is barely wide enough for two cars, that also has pedestrians, horses, cyclists and rubbish collections. I cannot imagine the car would proceed, and it would just panic and sit until everything had left! How do they know when someone is letting them go with a wave of a hand?

[@ktkace]

And too damn expensive to fix it yourself. A software lock can screw you if said part won't link up with the ecu without a dealer computer *cough KTM cough*

[@feedbackzaloop]

Genuinely loved the robot-vs-driver argument! Especially the mention of low bridges

[@metor36]

I think one of the most interesting things about increasing digital complexity is the possibility of planned obsolescence. Just a few years ago, Apple was sued for intentionally limiting batteries with updates. With electric cars and highly digitalized controls, there is the possibility of manufacturers intentionally reducing performance on older models.

[@1drummer172]

I love the power, efficiency, comfort, and convenience that technology has brought to the auto industry; not looking back to the days when I could or had to do my own repairs. In the recent past I purchased new vehicles with extended warranties and replaced them when the warranty ended or when repairs became annoyingly frequent. I realize that not everyone can afford it but my plan going forward is to lease a new vehicle every 3 years.

[@MikeR65]

That’s the future.

[@Sheridantank]

That's their plan more than yours. Never owning things and planned obsolescence

[@om617yota8]

No thank you. I prefer to own my vehicles, not rent them. Takes me a few years to get it modded just the way I want it anyway, definitely not getting rid of it as soon as I get it how I want it.

[@michaelm6964]

As a dealership technician…. Yes and to an almost unnecessary amount.

[@yubentrolled7097]

I'm no Luddite! I like the idea, that when my washer fluid is low, my transmission won't shift out of reverse, the steering wheel locks ALL the way to the left and the doors won't open from the inside! I think that's a great thing!

[@Bullwinkle056]

The reliability and durability today is amazing. I remember my Dad's '63 Impala that my family used into the mid 70's. It seemed like we had a repair project every weekend on that car. (Alternator, starter, water pump, thermostat, points and plugs, exhaust system rust, etc.

[@imthedarknight-8755]

I've daily-ed a 66 C10 for the last handful of years, and actually never gotten stranded. One thing I think people forget about is how easy to repair those things are. My alternator went out, I got a new one and replaced it in probably 10 minutes with 1 wrench. I replaced a starter in a gutter in 20 minutes. The starter was the first time I've ever really attempted a repair on a car, and it was still that easy. I watched 1 KZbin video. A thermostat replacement is 2 bolts on the top of the engine. Whereas a dead alternator on a new car could mean pulling the radiator and spending hours or the better part of a day repairing it. Heck a horn went out on my dad's new f-series and it took the _dealership_ 6 weeks to repair it; they had to replace the entire engine wiring harness, pull the dash, the front seats, radiator, and ac compressor. All for a horn relay. One thing to consider is it wasn't the old car that was unreliable, it was the old thermostats. A new thermostat lasts substantially longer. So an old car with a new thermostat won't go out any sooner than a new car with a new thermostat, and a new car with an old thermostat isn't an improvement. Just the new car will be harder to repair when it inevitably does fail. So the complication of a new car isn't really justified by the reliability, because it was the quality of the thermostat that increased reliability. Same when people talk about how engines didn't last as long; that has a lot to do with fuel, bearing, and oil quality, so an old car with new oil isn't much different than a new car. Roller cams are definitely an exception Now if you made a simple car like that 63 Impala, but with modern machining tolerances and production quality, you'd have a car that'd last as long as a new one but would be significantly more simple and cheap to repair. A sort of Goldilocks in my opinion. I can forgo power steering, power brakes, infotainment screens, automatic transmissions, keyless entry, automatic wipers, adaptive cruise control, and power seats. Just give me some updates like dual master cylinders, disks, and a roller cam Best part of how I didn't get stranded, my starter when out so I push started it to get home (since it was a manual). Alternator went out, but the truck has such little electrical demand I was able to remove the accessory belt and had time to drive it home before it died. Old cars are easier to road side repair and sort of macgyver up a solution to, which is a big benefit in my opinion.

[@nerd1000ify]

@@imthedarknight-8755 Downside is that your '66 car is much more likely to kill you in a crash. I certainly wouldn't forgo modern collision safety features (most of which are passive or simple mechanical systems in any case, the only complicated electronics are related to the airbags) or fuel injection (emissions, cold starts, better fuel economy... and it can run on an '80s 8-bit CPU, for simplicity). I'm also very much in favour of emissions control, so for example I'm not hoping for the return of mechanically injected diesels or cars with no catalytic converter.

[@schro311]

With technology capabilities rapidly increasing, it seems like the tech heavy cars will soon get to the point that cell phones have been for a while. Anyone who has had a smart phone over 2 years old understands, eventually the updates surpass the capacity of the physical hardware and it becomes more useless with every update, or can no longer be updated. With the average age of a car in the road being 12 years, I'm reminded of my bmw that I recently sold. It was 7 years old and when it was built 3g cellular service was the most advanced. 7 years later and 3g service is being shut down, something outside the control of the automakers, but it rendered many of the features marketed so heavily at the time of sale useless, only 7 years after purchase. This particular problem affected cars no longer in production and therefore offered no financial incentive for bmw to offer any sort of fix. For most new car buyers, not a problem as they will have traded in by then, but for people who regularly buy used cars it just seems things will lose functionality much too quick.

[@shraka]

We've had nearly fully autonomous cars for a long time now. They just only go to certain places and are called buses, trams and trains. Can we get more public transport, and go back to having cars that actually serve their purpose? ie. that can provide mobility for people living in or traveling to the country?

[@Monaleenian]

No, they're called taxis

[@shraka]

@@Monaleenian Taxis are only slightly better than personal vehicles. They're still very expensive in terms of fuel use, infrastructure, as well as personal injury / death.

[@clemkadiddlehopper7705]

I saw a title on a thumbnail, paused a video, opened this on another tab, haven't even watched the video yet, just to say YES YES YES YES YES

[@The_Smith]

My Dad started as a garage mechanic in the mid 30's, he retired in the mid 70's because he said vehicles were getting too complicated to work on . . .

[@alexlevy4581]

I worry in the future about the concept of driving in a level 4 or 5 autonomous world. I see huge privacy concerns about many corporations and governments knowing exactly where you are driving and the power they can hold with it. The possibility of shutting down a car in that scenario would be easy if a subscription wasn’t purchased or a charge wasn’t paid. Lots of people who need their cars to work consistently for work and regular life would have that reality stripped from them. Let’s also think about insurance of driving a car then, the costs would be astronomical if not impossible to get. Although the level 5 future will be smarter on the road, there will still be people with an urge to drive, and both insurance companies and regulators will have none of that. It would help the insurance companies save money and make the regulators popular in future votes for “saving lives”. I see a sad future ahead if something isn’t done now.

[@leftaroundabout]

Yeah, but... this future is already pretty much set out, regardless of autonomous cars. Do you have a phone? ISP and government knows (potentially) always where you are. Do you have a number plate? Government knows (potentially) always where you drive, thanks to ubiquitous cameras. Do you use public transport, and buy tickets, in any way other than cash over the counter? Transport company and government knows (potentially) always where you are. ...For that matter, use KZbin? Google and government knows (potentially) what you're up to. The only way you can still be relatively sure you're not tracked by someone is by not having a phone and riding a bicycle. Now, I don't say we should all go tinfoil hat, what I'm getting at is that there's not much point in being luddite about car electronics or any other single application - the real problem lies elsewhere, namely in the lack of transparency and open-source hard-/software, and in the pervasive trend to put everything online mandatorily. Unfortunately most consumers don't mind any of this, at least not enough to offset the perks that industry offers them for giving away their privacy, so the trend is unlikely to change. Meanwhile, companies that actually push for thorough open source and offline capabilities don't get the investor money that would be needed to get their product out.

[@alexlevy4581]

@@leftaroundabout the problem isn’t just about privacy, it’s the implications of those breaches. The fact that teslas currently can stop features in a car that you paid extra for just on a whim is ridiculous. As well, you aren’t taking into consideration who this data is going to. There was a big fuss before COVID about Huawei and tik tok about data being sent to the Chinese government. Now think about who is about to take over the EV market, BYD, NIO, Faraday future and more. More car companies from North America and in Western Europe are collaborating with that government to gain market share, of which helps their government grow their political influence on free countries. At least with my iPhone, the data goes to California and my KZbin data goes to the google headquarters and not to the Chinese government.

[@leftaroundabout]

@@alexlevy4581 Better California than China, but really your data should be going _nowhere_ except when you explicitly want to publish them to the world, or end-to-end encrypted through a peer-to-peer network to your friends only. All would have to be implemented in open source so it can be scrutinized by independent developers for backdoors. It's not that there aren't projects pushing in that direction, only unfortunately they're much less commercially valuable and by extension aren't advertised as much, don't have as polished user features, and most consumers just don't care.

[@lukefuller284]

I think it's odd that airlines are still concerned about cellular interference, yet we expect countless phones and cars to share the same communications space in densely populated areas. Sure, 5G towers are _helping_ with this, but how much more bandwidth can we squeeze out of conventional cell networks?

[@davidfulginiti5985]

thanks- - well done

[@bentnickel7487]

I've been struggling with this question for 30 years. Thank you.

[@LazerLemonz]

I think there is a huge issue with EV cars going all out on technology and here's my reason. Like Hartbreak1 said companies could lock you out of features that are already in the car and make you pay a mass amount of money to unlock them forever or on some kind of subscription plan. And my next reason is the biggest fear. If these cars are connected to the internet in any type of way than how easily can a threat actor (hacker) get into your car and cause you to get into accidents or take full control of the car? If this happens than EV are a no go for pretty much everyone. I think money should be used to perfect ICE engines to make them more clean and to advance the hybrid systems to have us go a longer range. Its overall a better and cheaper tactic. We can travel far and for cheap, while car enthusiast and mechanics can still work and make a living doing what they love doing. I am not saying that there shouldn't be any EV's out there. In fact I find them cool but I think they will always fall behind a good, reliable, cheap, easy fixing ICE vehicle.

[@jongoode3296]

I think it's unfortunate that EVs are touted along with high tech, self driving, wireless updating features. I blame Tesla for that, but they are separate issues. My Nissan Leaf doesn't have anything fancier than basic cruise control and a bluetooth radio. There are lots of EVs sold in China, India, and even to some degree Europe that are cheap little commuter cars with shortish ranges, mediocre acceleration, and lower top speeds, which is partially why those countries are adopting EVs faster than the US. Generally nobody in the US wants to buy anything that isn't ridiculously huge, go hundreds of miles, 0-60 in less than 8s, have massive rims (19" rims are standard now?), go at least 100mph even thought the highest speed limit in the country is 80, be shiny. Those requirements are expensive, and people want tech loaded vehicles if they're going pay that much. Most of those are ICE vehicles, but they have wireless updates and level 2 and 3 "self" driving features too.

[@D3M0Netized]

Great reasoning. But your second reason is relatively moot. Almost any new car made after 2015 to 2017 depending on model has an automatic, electric steering, brake and throttle by wire, electric handbrake etc. My point being, all the controls you 'control' as are essentially switches that tell the computer brain ie CAN bus system to do the corresponding function. Also most modern cars are connected to the internet. In other words almost any car made post the 2015 era can be hacked and taken over similar to any ev. Infact there's a video of this exact thing on KZbin. Some students took over a 2014 jeep Cherokee. Complete control remotely from their computer. It's truly scary. I'm not sure if this would be possible with a manual transmission. As you'd get stuck in gear. Or you could just clutch in or pop the transmission into neutral. But take rate on manuals is so abysmal I don't think it even matters.

[@LazerLemonz]

@@D3M0Netized Oh how I wish we could save the manuals... Can you link me that 2014 Jeep video please? I'd look to watch it, it sounds interesting and entertaining lmao

[@jongoode3296]

@@D3M0Netized You're still conflating electronics with over the air updates. You might have brake/steer/accelerate by wire, but if they're not wireless malicious actors would have to have physical access to subvert those systems. 1 hacked car is no big deal, 1 million cars hacked simultaneously is. And, no, nobody would get anywhere with a manual. Mechanical clutch, shift, and usually parking brake. Long live the manuals, too bad they're disappearing.

[@andrewmattera6205]

internally GM has put a 7 year life span on the electronics in their current generation (T1xx) trucks, i'd say it's gone too far

[@theelite1x721987]

Considering the price of trucks and most people doing 7 and 8 year loans that means you'll be in for massive repairs or a new vehicle before you are even done paying it off. Its madness

[@andrewmattera6205]

@@theelite1x721987 i can understand a seven year life span on something like a Cadillac, ok fine, most people buy one and then trade it in after two years or they lease them anyways, but the pickups really piss me off, here's a vehicle that's designed for utility, but they've gone berserk with comfort and luxury features driving the prices through the roof, it makes no sense, and now trucks that would've lasted decades will last far less than that. purely because of all the bloated garbage that the manufacturer dumps into it, it's too much. it's the apple mentality of planned obsolescence

[@theelite1x721987]

@@andrewmattera6205 its why I'm looking for a used Tundra in the 2015 to 2018 range. New enough that miles and wear won't be bad but its basically same model Toyota introduced in late 2000s (they only redesigned it on 2022). Has some nice features but the core vehicle is a older and proven design. Some saw that as a negative. Since I plan to drive it until it dies I see that as a big plus.

[@andrewmattera6205]

@@theelite1x721987 i drive a 2004 Cadillac Escalade ESV, simply because (apart from the electronic shock absorbers) it's mechanically and electrically identical to a suburban or a chevy pickup, and those are everywhere, it's a very very simple platform and if any issues arise, parts are always available and can be fixed very quickly. for me, i understand that the vehicle will brake no matter what, i just want as simple as a design as i can get, because that generally brings repair costs way down

[@anthonyxuereb792]

Very informative and I like your comment @ 0:52, very true.

[@christopherschein]

Great video. I would love to see more on the longevity, maintenance and cost of maintenance associated with more complicated cars. I drive an 2017 S P100D. My experience is newer complicated cars get a part replaced rather than repaired. New transmission rather than rebuilt. In my case A master charge controller replace for $2700 to fix a blown fuse integrated into the board.