Aug 10, 2016
Jeff4155 Though I know nothing about Hacking a vehicle I do think in time this will be the norm, sins Tesla is only the start of the "smart electric cars" I do think in time you will be able to download patches for upgrading the car for performance or getting that last bit of KW out of the battery pack (60 to 75kw for instance). 50 years ago who would have thought a 1 liter engine would be pushing out 100kw +, and that a car would be upgradable like a cellphone.�
Aug 10, 2016
apacheguy Can you still mount the navigation maps at 192.168.90.100:/opt/navigon?�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia I think it's a lot more serious than that. If you are making changes that could affect how the car reacts to the world around it when it's already expected to act a certain way, puts others at risk too. So far though, the most people have done is flash different firmware onto different hardware and roll back software updates. To my knowledge, no one has figured out how to remove the 5min nag (debatable if this is the actual time in all conditions). But if you remove that nag, how does that affect the rest of the system? We just don't know. Which begs the question, what exactly do you want to accomplish by hacking/rooting your car? If it's to control firmware, I sort of get it. If it's to modify battery output (above established limits) or autopilot function, I'd rather not have you on the same road as me.
Now, I've been in factory/diagnostic mode and what interested me the most was being able to pull up the diagnostic screens where you can see how your car is performing. I think releasing this "nerd mode" as an official app option (explicitly enabled of course) would scratch the itch of a lot of people. That and releasing the SDK for infotainment would essentially remove the need for 99% of people to hack their cars.�
Aug 10, 2016
ged In fact, Tesla broke the features by being lazy and hacking together the software stack rather than designing it. What they should have done is set-up facades for services on their servers and that way backend changes would not require changes to the clients.
Anyway @green1 is right, I suspect he won't find anyone's comments helpful here. TMC has reached the point when it has transitioned from thoughtful/helpful/knowledgeable community of people who understand when they have nothing that adds to a conversation to a forum of rabid fanboys who believe Tesla is always right and infallible and must contribute uninformed opinions to every thread be they on-topic or not. The people who could help don't hang out here anymore because of that.�
Aug 10, 2016
green1 Since gaining factory mode on my car I've had several people get in touch with me privately. It appears that the method I talk about here is not the only way in as others report using different methods to get to the same end result. As promised to those people, I will not give any more information about what those methods are, but I do find it to be an interesting design choice on Tesla's part.
If you are one of those people who have done this a different way and are thinking that just because I didn't do it your way I must be lying... well... I don't know that I'm going to convince you otherwise, and honestly I don't feel the need to either. But if you really can't get that feeling out of your head, there's enough information in my other posts in this thread to replicate what I did and how I did it, so you'll know it's possible.�
Aug 10, 2016
green1 I haven't had the time to try, nor has it been a priority for me as I doubt I'll gain anything by playing around in there. I'm assuming you mean by NFS right?�
Aug 10, 2016
tomas Not sure what forum you have been reading. Having participated since 2011, I recall a pretty good intellectual mix with some lively debates. I would say that in 2011/12/13 there was a pretty strong "enthusiast" leaning, and a ton of people helping people learn about a new product that was quickly evolving. By that, I mean people who were enthusiastic about what Tesla was trying to do, and excited to be early participants. Around 2014, posts moved decidedly more towards criticism of and anger towards Tesla over perceived flaws, perceived broken marketing promises, etc. So, if anything, over the last 5 years I've seen TMC become less "rabid defenders" and more "critical cynics". Regardless, when one opens a thread with a bunch of polarizing comments, one reaps what one sows!
Back to the regularly scheduled program: rooting the car, I guess.�
Aug 10, 2016
jaguar36 What information? The only part that is anything besides "Google the pinout and watch the Defcon talk" is the part where someone else told you how to do it.
I'm very curious to see where Tesla goes with this. They can go full anti-consumer and lock everything down hard, engaging in a perpetual fight with hackers, they could just leave the exploits available and allow folks who want to have their way with it, or they could actually encourage development, releasing a devkit and such. Would be great to see the last part, particularly as in doing so they could wall off the safety critical parts of the system (such as the AP stuff that everyone is so up in arms about) while allowing folks to create and improve the rest of the car.�
Aug 10, 2016
green1 I stated specifically that this would NOT be a how-to, but if you have enough knowledge to have gotten in to factory mode on your own, then the information I shared would certainly be enough to find the same points I did to know what to do to replicate my work. I mentioned more than the defcon talk and googling the pinout, I also mentioned what exactly to look for while packet sniffing the network.
Again, this is not a how-to, this is me describing where I found the information so that someone else with my level of expertise can do the same. My biggest hurdle to getting where I am now was not knowing where to look, I have helped others in my position resolve that specific hurdle.
And nobody else told me how to do it, I figured that out all on my own from the resources I posted. The other person helped with a bit of minor command formatting after I had already written the command. They had no previous knowledge of how to get in to factory mode either, though after working together to learn the exact command they say they'll try it soon on their own car. Without their help it would have taken me a few more working hours to figure this out (which likely translates to a day or two longer) but I definitely would have gotten there.
As for where Tesla will go with it, they've shown in the past that they will lock it down hard. That has been their MO since day 1. It is unfortunate as they are the only car company on the planet that fights this hard against their own owners and third party repair shops.�
Aug 10, 2016
bkp_duke @green1 - rooting for you (pun intended).�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare That's pretty much the same case with modifications for cars for decades:
- ECU flashes/tunes
- Modifications to braking systems
- Transmission changes
- Engine/crankshaft/cam/head changes
- Suspension modifications
- Electrical upgrades/mods
- Steering modifications
- Body modifications
Any of the above can have a potentially fatal detrimental impact on a vehicle. Stalls, loss of stability, braking failure, steering failure, unintended acceleration, etc...
In this case it's software rather than hardware. But that was already the case when engines went from being governed by mechanical means such as distributors and carburetors to ECU's and electronic injection.�
Aug 10, 2016
msnow The dfference is there are tons of documentation and knowledge on those things.�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare That didn't exist day 1 until people reverse engineered much of it, as the OP is doing in this thread.�
Aug 10, 2016
msnow "Day 1" was a hundred years ago. The landscape (people, cars, regulations) was much different then.�
Aug 10, 2016
bkp_duke Gotta start somewhere, so that really makes this a poor argument.
Also, people are assuming the OP and others with root access can just go in and "change anything they want". That is not entirely correct, since most of the code for AP or any other subsystem is compiled into machine code. I seriously doubt he will go through the arduous process of decompiling it and trudging through that to attempt changes.�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia Then again, what does anyone hope to accomplish with root access?�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare Screwing up mechanical brakes the so you plow in to a gaggle pedestrians was just as much a bummer 100 years ago as it is today.
Screwing up the hydraulic brakes was only 60 yrs ago.
Screwing up the power steering was only 40 yrs ago.
Breaking the ECU was only 20 yrs ago.
Cratering the firmware is only the most recent danger.
To pretend that there wasn't been a spectrum of technological progression over that span of time that all required initial discovery and exploration along the way is ignoring the facts, IMO.
(time references not exact and for illustrative purposes only)�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare I'd love, for instance, to be able to get access to the service modes that engage the pumps to purge the coolant lines, so I could change that myself, for example.
I recently had a charger failure. I had to pay the service center to reconfigure the car to go from a dual- to single charger configuration. I know for a fact that can be done with the correct access outside of a service center. I'd love to be able to do that myself.
Not to mention there's a crapload of diagnostic info available that the car collects..�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia I think you are oversimplifying with the exception of ECU. The other items on the list are all hardware modifications with very real A + B = C results. Unless, of course, the installation is botched in some way. Are you saying that a modification done incorrectly is part of your risk assessment? Because I would argue that if a modification above is done right, then the risk of failure (for that reason) is avoided. Now, your risk is limited to environment, ie. drag slicks on snow, or lean running air-fuel at high altitude. These are incompatibilities we know beforehand.
With software, I think the complexities and the dependencies are still a big unknown (and a reason to not attempt as a "lone wolf project"). And without a complete grasp over how all the cars modules interact (there could be upwards 2 dozen of them depending on car config), I don't think most of us are capable. Wk057 had an interesting tidbit when he did that AP conversion for his wife's P85. He had all the hardware lined up and ready, but suffered a firmware failure on one of his early attempts to flash. It turned out the interior temperature sensor wasn't compatible with the AP firmware and needed swapped out. Now, I have no idea what that sensor has to do with autopilot, but some verification check somewhere, thought it was important enough to throw an error. I can't even imagine was a seemingly simple change in software could affect in some seemingly unrelated module or algorithm elsewhere.�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia So you bring up very good points. And if you had access to ToolBox, you would have been able to perform those functions.
Would it be fair to suggest that what you specifically are requesting is an interface/avenue to perform general maintenance?�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare At m
At minimum.
But the car is mine. If I want to tweak it to change the wiper sensitivity, so be it.
If I want to overdrive the inverter for more power and risk blowing up the drivetrain, that's my prerogative too.�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia Then I can only meet you half-way in agreement. I think you should be allowed to make the wipers more sensitive (that is not a capability in ToolBox, to my knowledge). But I don't think you should be allowed to make them any less sensitive than the lowest settings Tesla has entered. This is because the wipers are used to keep the auto-pilot camera free of debris and impairing their ability could cause a malfunction in AP.
And I don't think you should be allowed to blow up your drive-train via software. I'm trying to keep you safe.�
Aug 10, 2016
msnow Nope it's a strong argument and there are some AP settings available as I recall from the old Let the Hacking Begin thread. We don't want people just futzing around in there while families are on the road right next to them. I can't see Tesla allowing unfettered access.�
Aug 10, 2016
mmccord I think you should be allowed to blow up your drive-train via software if you so choose, or remove the speed-limit on AP, or any of the numerous other options available by rooting the car.�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia Then we will agree to disagree. I think you might not realise that the car does have hardware limitations and that processing of auto pilot data cannot happen if data is coming in too quickly.�
Aug 10, 2016
hiroshiy Can we just focus on @green1 's posts sans criticism? This is his thread. People who want to discuss whether hacking a car is good or bad, can start a different thread.�
Aug 10, 2016
scaesare And I'm very content to not have you manage my personal property or actions, thanks.�
Aug 10, 2016
Lon12 LOL. Apparently not. Kind of like saying "Don't look! There goes a model 3".
�
Aug 10, 2016
supratachophobia You could potentially create a situation where blame could be placed at Tesla's feet. I don't believe that's acceptable or fair to them.�
Aug 10, 2016
msnow Some people are pretty selfish when it comes to weighing what they think is their personal liberty versus the safety of those around them on the road. If you want to take risks fine just stay off public roads.�
Aug 10, 2016
eloder You know, there are many, many, many other cars to choose from, none of which have the protections or restrictions Tesla does.
Go buy them. You buy Teslas, you play by their rules. No different than how if you buy a cell phone, you can't use it for illegal activities on the carrier's network--they will shut you down.�
Aug 10, 2016
ohmman I want to mention that as a 17 year old kid, I rebuilt the entire suspension on my vehicle. I had absolutely no clue what I was doing, and even severely damaged a tool (coil spring compressor) upon which the task depended. In hindsight, it was irresponsible, but it wasn't out of the ordinary in my group of friends. We were doing all kinds of things to the "classic" cars of the time. They were imminently accessible for this kind of modification, and we were young kids craving control over our machines.
I am willing to bet this continues readily in the automotive enthusiast community. I personally don't think that someone else "hacking" the systems associated with their Tesla puts me at a statistically significantly higher risk of an accident. Especially not when you consider my anecdote above. Hacking isn't something I'm doing or care to do, but I don't think the discussion about the "danger" is reasonable.�
Aug 10, 2016
wk057 Protecting Tesla from blame sounds like something that's simply not our problem to care about, nor something we should care about... that's their job. Next time you see someone tuning up a non-Tesla vehicle, make sure to tell them that some situation they might cause through their modifications could somehow maybe be blamed on the manufacturer... be sure to continue that stance as they carry you off in a straight jacket laughing hysterically. This level of defense for a private corporation from the general public is just absolutely ridiculous. If Tesla doesn't want people modifying the cars they shouldn't sell them, and they should only lease them. That way they actually own the property and can actually tell you what you can and can not do with it. I don't think that's something that's going to happen, since Tesla is a publicly traded for profit corporation and they need to actually sell cars to stay in business.
Anyway...........
Congrats on getting Factory Mode. If you want to dissect your car, hack it, mod it, blow it up, re-wrire it, reprogram it, whatever... more power to you. It's your car. You can do whatever you d**m well please to it.
Even if you somehow hack the car to be able to run autopilot indefinitely while you napped in the passenger seat or trunk... not our problem. Really, people, get over it. People do things with their cars that are FAR more careless every day than anything @green1 could possibly do through tinkering with software on his car. Get over yourselves. This is why there just can't be any actual technical discussions on this forum and a big part of the reason why I've stopped bothering with it almost entirely. Too many self�righteous individuals making a lot of noise over nothing preventing actual discussions with substance from continuing. This thread is 150+ posts... out of those maybe 10-15 are even close to on topic? That signal to noise ratio is crazy. "sell the car!" "get your money back!" "buy a different car!" etc... WT* people. Are you offering to pay full retail to refund the cost of the car in a misguided attempt to protect Tesla? You aren't? Didn't think so. Enough already.
And @green1, I am glad you're not posting a step-by-step for this for the masses. One of the things unique about Tesla would be the OTA update ability. While today they don't seem to care enough to close off this particular attack vector, I guarantee that once someone posts exactly how to pull it off it will just be patched out within a week... which is a big part of the reason myself and others have been reluctant to share such information. It is obvious Tesla knows this particular method of gaining factory/dev mode access exists, but closing the hole likely just hasn't been a priority just yet. And honestly, as may or may not be evident from my feeling expressed here, I don't think most people deserve the fruits of such work for nothing... especially given the fact that you'll just be shooting yourself in the foot when Tesla locks it down later. Half of the people whining about what you're doing and how horrible and dangerous it is would likely try and do it themselves if they had the info available, and probably still keeping crying about how terrible it is.... lol.
More on-topic, there really aren't a whole lot of useful things that can be done with just factory/dev mode and no root. Lots of cool data available, but not many changes can be made or anything without unlocking more of the "apps," which can't be done on the production firmware, to my knowledge, without root.
There's some simple things that can be done/changed with dev mode, but just be careful. And whatever you do, do NOT reboot the gateway while the car is on (ready to drive)... really, since it could potentially result in the need for a service center visit depending on how badly things freak out.
I figured it's worth mentioning here as well: Factory Mode/Dev Mode does not give access to the autopilot dev app that I posted about a while back (which is what you're looking for). Further, Tesla has removed this "app" entirely from some of the newest firmwares, so it's not even possible to enable *with* root either anymore.
Not 100% sure where I was going with all of this... I'm just really annoyed seeing what @green1 is having to put up with from supposed peers here. It's absurd. Go on a forum for (insert ANY other car maker here) and start bashing people for modifying their car... half of the nonsense in this thread is probably ban hammer worthy on other forums.
(Dislike if you must... the ratings here don't count for anything anyway.)�
Aug 10, 2016
green1 What I've learned so far here is that factory/dev mode is overrated, but what's severely underrated is the API calls you can make on the Ethernet network (like the one that got me to factory/dev mode in the first place)
There appears to be a ton of stuff you can do that way, though without root it's hard to know what they all are. (or maybe it's not, there may be some other way of finding them, I just don't know yet)
There's a reason I've been referring to this as an "adventure" or a "journey". This isn't simply a task where you do one thing and you're "done", there's so much to explore and try, and always another step to be taken.
I also want to thank all the people who have reached out privately with support. Seeing the ridiculousness in this thread and others I fully understand why you don't want to post publicly, but the outpouring of support does help none the less.
@wk057 is correct, the signal to noise ratio on this site is horrendous. Like him, I too don't come here nearly as much as I used to for that very reason (and the site re-design fiasco, but that's a different rant)
It really is too bad, it would be nice to have a forum for Tesla enthusiasts, somewhere where people can post all the great things they do with their vehicles, without being overrun by the haters. I'm not aware of any other car forum on the internet where tunning, and modding is greeted with disdain rather than enthusiasm. I have never had a vehicle I didn't modify, and I don't see that changing any time in the near future, I've always posted my mods on enthusiast forums too, and I've always gotten such a positive reaction to them, it's too bad Tesla is "different" (and really too bad that that isn't always in a positive way)�
Aug 10, 2016
cronosx If you remember my previus post, i said clear enought that i'm let people have free (editing) access to the firmware etc
But there are settings/action that usually are hidden to the final client in a way that he can't damage himself using it or get thinkering with something that he doesn't know and the saying "oh! but the car doesn't work as stated", but if you don't modify the routines and you just call the API, for me it's perfectly fine and this SHOULD be allowed, like the factory mode.. i would really like to have it free to access and of course all the diagnostic data and all of it.
It's stupid don't leave the access to the diagnostic data to the customers, sometime a problem can get solved easily without cramming the service center just knowing what's wrong�
Aug 11, 2016
diamond.g @wk057 @green1
Do you guys not think there is a market for a VCDS type harness/software for the Tesla?�
Aug 11, 2016
Brunton It's not that simple.
When your modifications may make unexpected changes to the way such a highly integrated kinetic missile may function, the question of your rights to make such modifications becomes much less cut and dried.�
Aug 11, 2016
kort677 wow, tesla needs you to look out for their interests? really?�
Aug 11, 2016
habanero69
I don't really agree with having complete, free reign over the software as delivered by Tesla, but that's obviously what this thread is about, and you've made it clear you don't care. Fine.
What I personally care about is mostly, that I hope, that Tesla can determine if you are running anything software-wise on the car that is not from their code repository/version. They should be able to in order to protect themselves from any liability should your so called hacking lead to a malfunction or unintended consequence that could harm yourself or others. I'm not sure I care or want them to try and stop what you are doing, it's just that they should know you are operating the vehicle on unapproved software. If you blow something up and somehow you get it replaced under warranty, that hurts all of us owners by making the cost of vehicles and/or maintenance higher. And I'm not OK with that.
My $.02, if even that.�
Aug 11, 2016
scaesare Folks here seem to misunderstand they've been modifying their "kinetic missiles" for years.�
Aug 11, 2016
tomas I too am tired of the self righteous. Now if we could only agree who they are!
Seriously, there's nothing wrong with a forum that allows lots of passionate people to post their views. If anyone is so sensitive that they view it as cruel and unusual, just read past the ones you don't like. If you can't do that, then retreat to a world where everybody thinks just like you. Warning: it gets lonely.�
Aug 11, 2016
msnow The poster was referring Tesla's and you are talking about ICE's. The disconnect here is some people think it's the same risk and others think modifying the Tesla software is a unique risk.�
Aug 11, 2016
supratachophobia I think that's my real point here. I think the risks are different and cannot be assumed to be the same. That being said, wk057 really has gone the furthest in this field and his general sense the last few posts is that maybe we are overreacting to just how much damage can be done at this level, especially if some of the auto pilot interface has been removed from the end user firmware. There are always can bus methods of changing things as well, but perhaps that's not what is intended. All that being said, I would prefer not to have green1's car driving down the road next to me while he is taking a nap in the backseat.�
Aug 11, 2016
kort677 the safe place crowd, people who are intolerant of views that are divergent from their own.�
Aug 11, 2016
scaesare There are folks for whom software tinkering as much of a known quantity/risk, just as there are folks for whom custom fabrication of suspension components is a known quantity/risk.�
Aug 11, 2016
tomas I spent a career in software and I believe that is incorrect. Construction of a physical component from known materials is a very tangible thing where six sigma is commonplace and can be achieved with reasonable level of skill/expertise. It is rare for software builders to achieve six sigma. Software tinkerers? Oops! Having said that, I do not care what people choose to do as a hobby. Root away. Hope tesla firewalls crucial AP functions.�
Aug 11, 2016
supratachophobia Not intolerant, I just don't want green1 taking a nap in the backseat of his car while he is driving down the road beside me. I think that's a fair request since the AP v1.0 sensor suite was not designed to do that. Now, it probably *can* do that 95% of the time without issue. But it brings us back to the Simpson's episode where Homer gets a deep fryer and Marge says: "Homer, I didn't say you couldn't fry your shirt, I said you shouldn't."�
Aug 11, 2016
scaesare Of course there are people who are not aware (or don't care) of the risk as well, just as a google image search of backyard suspension lifts will tell you there are similar folks unaware that wooden 4x4's don't make great lift blocks.
Then there are folks like yourself who are aware of what's risky. I'm not a software dev, but even I'd know better than to decide I should start screwing with the AP stuff, as I'm aware of the risk. But I'd be much less hesitant to adjust the delay-on time of my headlights because I'd prefer they don't pop on every time I spend 2 seconds in an underpass.�
Aug 11, 2016
kort677 his taking a nap could happen regardless of any mods he might make and is completely irrelevant to this discussion.�
Aug 11, 2016
malcolm How about encoding the car's radar and ultrasound so that nearby Tesla's can exchange stats?
Things like Firmware version and whether there are any buttocks in the driving seat.
Then you can set your car to maintain minimum safe distance or "go convoy" for that authentic CW McCall experience.�
Aug 11, 2016
green1 If you've seen any of my other AP related posts that are scattered all over this forum, you'd know there is no risk of that. I've been a huge advocate of the driver being in charge of the vehicle at all times, and that at no time is the car actually driving itself.
I don't need Tesla to "nanny" me. I'm fully capable of being an adult on my own.�
Aug 11, 2016
supratachophobia I like the cut of your jib sailor.
And perhaps a little more of topic, geohot gave a few good examples of why car to car communication is a poor primary mechanism for self driving ques while driving down the road. AI should act like humans and pick up on the ques already available, like, is there a person in that seat. Which of course, could be hard to tell if the headrest is in the way now that I give that example. His example was observing brake lights via AI in addition to radar readings. But think how much trouble simple Bluetooth is from time to time. I'd rather not have that controlling the driving features of a car.�
Aug 11, 2016
malcolm It would only be an exchange of stats.
Might be useful in poor visibility if 3s, Xs and Ss could share images of their immediate surroundings. Sort of instagram for Autopilots.
But yeah, possible source of hassle.�
Aug 11, 2016
CuriousG How would you feel if Tesla implemented something like the 'performance' code? It would work something like this:
- Hold down the T for a few seconds until you get the prompt for a code, then enter 'nosign'.
- Upon using the correct code, a pop-up message ensues (similar to calendar) with the warning that it disables reading the speed signs and to monitor your speed accordingly.
- Everything time your car goes back into park, it will display the message again until such time you reenter the same code to disable.
�
Aug 11, 2016
ged There are 16 posts on page 9, maybe 2 of them are close to being on topic... The rest including this one are noise and nothing to do with the process of gaining control of the car.
If I was running TMC, I would make it so the thread's author could "collapse" off topic posts (click to expand and read). That would discourage the attention whoring that is going on here (i.e. let me find the most popular thread and just spew some O/T stuff into it, so people will read my *sugar*)�
Aug 11, 2016
green1 I would feel that it is more restrictions than I currently have, and that any added restrictions are inappropriate after I have bought and paid for the vehicle.�
Aug 11, 2016
CuriousG Aside from the keep hands on wheel nag, what other restrictions may you be referring to? I don't see Tesla removing that one.�
Aug 11, 2016
green1 I'm not asking for them to remove any restrictions. I'm asking that they don't add new ones after purchase. See my other thread as I won't be discussing this any further in this one as it's way off topic.�
Aug 11, 2016
wolfson292 The credit on this one goes to Green1. I just assisted in getting the message formatting correct as he has mentioned.�
Aug 11, 2016
green1 Give yourself some credit. You saw the same thing I did given the resources I mention in this thread. I didn't have to spoon feed it to you.�
Aug 11, 2016
Doug_G Moving several posts to snippiness
Play nice folks.�
Aug 16, 2016
apacheguy Any news?�
Aug 16, 2016
wilheldp @green1 and @wk057, I wish you guys would post more and could do so without your threads devolving into unrelated debates like this one has. I wonder if TMC could set up a password-protected or whitelisted forum for people who really want to learn how to modify their vehicle or are just interested in the process.
I would never do the stuff to my car that you guys do, but not because of some moral objection to it. I just don't trust my technical expertise enough to not brick my car, and have to go to Tesla with my tail tucked between my legs to fix it. I find wk057's Autopilot installation and battery pack disassembly information to be endlessly fascinating. And I am enjoying (trying to) following your quest for root access on your car.
Whaddya say, mods? Can we get a Tesla Tinkering forum with green1, wk057, and @Ingineer as the forum mods? Does the forum software that TMC uses have a whitelist feature?�
Aug 17, 2016
green1 Unfortunately I simply haven't had time to play more. I have a full time job, a one year old daughter, a wife who works shift work, and I also spend a lot of time volunteering. Time to play with the Tesla has to fall somewhere near the bottom of the list unfortunately.
That said, this journey isn't over, I will continue to explore more as time permits�
Aug 25, 2016
Mjsais Keep it up Green1. Although I don't have the skills to do what you and other are trying, I really enjoy reading about it. Thank you.�
Aug 25, 2016
NikeWings I suppose you could set up your own group and allow 'members' as you see fit but I'd be disappointed if you took that route (not that I matter) Despite the debates of all ilk, I am thinking more deeply about the moral things and learning much more about the technical things. One man's noise is another man's knowledge. Thank you for sharing both.�
Aug 26, 2016
wilheldp That's fine if one is looking for a debate or your advice on whether or not to perform a modification. Green1 specifically stated in his first paragraph that he was unconcerned with other opinions regarding whether what he wanted to do was right or wrong, and people couldn't help themselves but to offer unsolicited opinions. That is why a separate forum for people that don't wish to debate "morals" but simply want to have technical discussions would remove this problem.�
Aug 26, 2016
msnow Okay, so take it a separate forum then, no one can stop you from doing that.�
Aug 26, 2016
tomas If OP had started with 4th paragraph of original post, there would have been much less moralizing. The first 3 paragraphs invited it. It only takes a little while on this forum to understand the nature of the beast. Futile to try to change it.
Catch 22 is that audience for mods discussion is here. But so are the critics. Starting a new site good in theory, but difficult to get traction.�
Aug 29, 2016
apacheguy Can someone please point me to these captures?�
Aug 29, 2016
green1 They're available in another thread on this very forum. Search JSON and HTML. I believe it's the old thread about gaining access to the internal Ethernet network which, shortly after posting that very useful information, devolved in to the same shouting match you see in this thread.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét