Fuck right off with over the air updates to my life saving devices. I have enough over the air updates to my regular devices that break things thank you very much. I don't want my ribs or life to be next.
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
52 points (91.9% liked)
Technology
41428 readers
437 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
67
Someone remind me to adjust my opinion of volvo when they also release this tech pattern to the world for free.
I do not care how safe your system is in theory, if you are gatekeeping it so others can’t replicate it its more dangerous to the world then if it didn’t exist at all, which at least allows the chance of someone with ethics to still invent and share it.
That's nonsense.
That's why patents are relatively short. A patent grants exclusivity for the inventors, which incentives people and companies to invent in the first place. But it's limited in time so that the whole world benefits eventually. Everything that was invented over 20 years ago is now public domain. This includes a ton of safety mechanisms, some in cars, that never would have been invented if there wasn't a financial incentive for it.
I don't like this all that much from a moral standpoint, but this is a good compromise for the world we live in. To say it would have been better if it didn't exist it all is just plain wrong.
“Volvo has a history with the modern three-point safety belt, which was perfected by in-house engineer Nils Bohlin in 1959 before the patent was shared with the world.”
This story is a famous example of seemingly putting human safety before personal profit.
In a direct comparison this innovation on it is worse because it lacks the defining feature that makes it truly applaudable.
The original 3 point seatbelt patent would also expire after 20 years but they (presumably) saw the amount of people they could save and chose not to wait.
Though you might have reasonable argument on corporate motivation that is commonly accepted i personally am in very strong disagreement with the notion that profit incentives are anything but harmful.
In my own reasoning and experience i found that a desire for profit or personal success sabotage the effective value of any potential invention.
The objective value of a product that i attempt to perceive is directly correlated to how many living beings can successfully use it without losing value in return.
For example the most advanced designer cars that exist that can only the super rich can buy… those are complete worthless junk and leaching valuable assets and energy from our planet trown in the proverbial bin.
A text file that explains in detail how to fix and maintain a generic bike written by some passionate nerd and freely available online has in comparison uncountable value.
Chances are a for profit product is also build needlessly complex just to stifle future competition (Apple likes that one also) or intentionally flawed so a new later patent can save the day and sustain the practical monopoly on it. If you look around you see this everywhere.
I see the same trends in digital development. Closed source only exist to exploit people who have not learned how to property own and maintain a computer and to block off ways open source devs could use to innovate for the benefit of everyone.
This is why i prefer the proprietary systems not exist at all. So someone else can invent it instead. In theory all knowledge is out there and so are all inventions, to be discovered and shared for enrichment of the species as a whole.
If you ask me, if the benefit of everyone including yourself is not enough motivation to build something better then what already is. I don’t want you on my team.
If your motivation requires a self serving result, i would prefer if society paid you to STAY AWAY from any important work decisions because the losses are too great to give that power to what subjectivity understand as a mental illness.
If everyone benefits, i benefit. If no one suffers, i don’t suffer. You can keep the ego happy and still arrive to the same conclusion, i am award this is considered an extreme stance but i will die on this hill unless someone can point me to a higher one,
That's great. That's not the world we live in.
That is the world we live in, sure capitalism is dominant but you can’t simply dismiss open technology movement as non existent just because you aren’t aware of them.
Have a few:
Free beer, https://freebeer.org/blog/
Open bikes, https://openbike.cc/download/
Open source ecology, https://www.opensourceecology.org/
Wikihouse, https://www.wikihouse.cc/
And as long as you continue to ratchet progress, it always will be.
Enjoy being part of the problem.
They patented it?
They have to...otherwise some other shmock can come and patent it...
But what you do with the patent is your choice, you can still allow the use of the technology.
Volvo’s new central computing system, HuginCore (named after a bird in Norse mythology), runs the EX60 with more than 250 trillion operations per second. It has been developed in-house, together with its partners Google, Nvidia, and Qualcomm.
“With the HuginCore system we can collect a lot of data and make decisions in the car instantly and combine that with the belt’s ability to choose different load levels,” says Åsa Haglund, head of the Volvo Cars Safety Center. “A box of possibilities opens up where you can detect what type of crash it is and who is in the car and choose a more optimal belt force.”
Thanks for the ad.
It's an article published on ars technica, written by a journalist with more than a decade of experience writing about the automotive sector. Sometimes a story about a product is just a story about a product.
Wow, seatbelts that work for everyone! What a novel concept
Actually thank you for sharing, it’s good to know these things are cared about