Hacker News Reader

Comment by petabyt | Hacker News Reader

The code running on the ECU on my 34 year old truck hasn't rusted ;)

Because it doesn't talk to other, potentially changing systems. As soon as an application is networked, it requires maintenance.

Someone already mentioned that your ECU doesn't really need to talk to other systems (besides perhaps via the OBD-II port with a well established, industry standard, backed by regulation protocol).

And I'll also add that at no point are you ever going to need to flash the ECU with updated firmware.

So while a cute example, it isn't really a practical example. Typically when people complain about "code rusting", it is in the context of a codebase that needs to adapt to the world around it; whether that is communicating with other systems or even just accepting new features within its own little fief.

Would that ECU pass modern emissions?

Much likely not, and that's a good thing, because nobody has yet found a way to limit emissions without seriously impacting performance (especially concerning responsiveness and low regime). May be damned them who invented drive-by-wire!

If you had an appreciation for emissions technology and policy you would be able to see how it has swung past the point of it's intended purpose. People are dismantling new engines to find all kinds of issues that will severely limit the useful life of the vehicle and/or cost the consumer a ridiculous amount of money in repair or replacement costs.

The lengths to which manufacturers have gone to "hit the numbers" has resulted in these major deficiencies. This has all formed out in the last decade. Previous to that, a lot of the emissions standards had a positive affect (in most cases).

The automotive manufacturers and the regulators are colluding without enough transparency and it has corrupted the process.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com