this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
314 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

39988 readers
717 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

How do I free my television?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Also cars. I want a custom, privacy respecting OS for an EV please

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oh no:
It is theoretically possible to replace the operating system of an electric car with an open-source or custom alternative, similar to flashing a custom ROM on Android smartphones. However, in practice, this comes with significant challenges. Here's an overview:


Theoretical Feasibility

  1. Hardware Compatibility:

    • Electric vehicles rely on specific hardware components (e.g., control units, sensors, actuators) that are tightly integrated with the operating system.
    • A custom operating system would need to understand and control this hardware. However, the underlying hardware specifications (APIs, protocols) are often proprietary and not publicly available.
  2. Software Architecture:

    • Modern electric cars use highly complex software architectures that include real-time operating systems, safety-critical systems, and user-facing interfaces.
    • A replacement OS would need to handle safety-critical functions (like braking and steering) as well as infotainment features.
  3. Open-Source Efforts:

    • There are initiatives like Automotive Grade Linux (AGL), which aim to create open-source software for vehicles. However, these are typically designed for automakers and not readily available for end-user modification.

Practical Challenges

  1. Safety Risks:

    • Operating safety-critical functions such as braking, propulsion, and battery management requires certified software.
    • Modifying the software introduces safety risks, which can have serious consequences, especially on public roads.
  2. Legal Barriers:

    • Many countries mandate that vehicles operate only with approved software to ensure compliance with safety and emissions regulations.
    • Modifying the vehicle's software could result in the loss of roadworthiness certification.
  3. Technical Restrictions:

    • Manufacturers often use encryption and digital signatures to protect access to the vehicle's software.
    • Replacing the operating system would require bypassing these security measures, which could be legally and technically problematic.
  4. Lack of Community Support:

    • Unlike smartphones or PCs, there is currently no large-scale community actively developing user-friendly open-source operating systems for electric vehicles.

Examples from Practice

  • Some enthusiasts and hackers have managed to modify software on vehicles like Tesla cars to add custom features or access internal data. However, these projects remain experimental and risky.
  • Initiatives like Comma.ai focus on creating aftermarket autonomy systems, demonstrating the challenges of modifying or replacing existing systems.

Conclusion

Replacing the operating system of an electric car is theoretically possible but practically extremely difficult due to legal, technical, and safety-critical constraints. While it could be an exciting project for hobbyists and developers, any modifications would likely render the vehicle unfit for legal road use in most jurisdictions.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You AI generated your comment... https://app.gptzero.me/

You should post your own comments on subjects in your own words instead of using a plagarism bot to do it for you. It's no better than just copying other people's comments.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Yeah I obviously did, because I wanted to know the answer and shared it with you. Why would that be a bad thing?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago

You should clarify at the begging of your comment that is AI and what the prompt that generated that answer was.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Its bad because its misinformation

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Then tell me about it instead of downvoting! I'd love a custom rom for my car and was obviously not happy about the AI answer.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Like I just discovered, shared and mourned in my post that got deleted? I really don't understand what's going on here. :). Where was the misinformation?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

i wouldnt call the 1830's modern

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

How about because AI generation is prone to misinformation, is often straight up plagarism, and finally is just lazy and low effort garbage.

@[email protected] Need your input on this as the admin of this person's homeserver, are you thrilled about people on your server posting this kind of lazy ass AI spam in the rest of the fediverse?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How many more of your comments are AI generated?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This one was, obviously. I wrote Oh no! and posted it. I obviously wasn't trying to sell this as my opinion, calm down!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

You should've quoted the gpt part or mentioned it. That's why people are upset, it seems misleading. I get why you did it though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

As soon as you see those sections with bullet points you know.