I can't speak directly for these aftermarket infotainment replacements but implementations of aftermarket ECUs for example record CAN bus traffic to build a database of the various node IDs, messages, and values.
What nonsense are you talking about? This sort of stuff happens in construction all the time. If the wrong materials get delivered to you site they absolutely can and will come take what you didn't pay for and bring you the correct materials.
Same thing if any enterprise hardware or software is provisioned incorrectly. Same thing with telecom.
Same thing with cars. If the wrong car gets dropped off they can and absolutely will send a truck to retrieve it.
Uhh no that's not at all correct. The taxes are paid to whatever jurisdiction you register your car. If you live in Texas and you buy a car in Wyoming the Taxes get paid to you local tax accessor. It doesn't matter if you buy it from a dealership or a manufacturer.
Manufacturers also have employees in the regions they sell because they need staff for their delivery and service centers at minimum.
The history of how we got here with dealership laws is long and complicated but basically boils down to starting with something useful like a verifiable local agent in a time when many small car manufacturers were selling essentially carts with primitive engines through mail order catalogs. Then slowly gaining political and economic power and protecting that power through local and state laws limiting competition and legally enforced monopolies. In short, corruption.
You'll notice many influential and wealthy lawmakers in state governments own dealerships. Unsurprisingly they're near uniformly anti-taxes and 'big government' so the "but dealership pay taxes" argument rarely holds sway as they're constantly fighting against it.
If you order a Toyota Camry and the transporter drops off a Ferrari at your door screaming WELL IT SAYS FERRARI ON RIGHT THERE ON THE CAR isn't in any way a valid argument.
They're just going to tell you that's nice but so what that's not where the discrepancy is in the first place. The order says Toyota, the invoice say Toyota, the transport slip says Toyota, etc, etc.
If you read the story or the comments the car had a 60kwh battery replaced under warranty but only a 90kwh was available. Procedure was to set the battery firmware to 60 kwh but for whatever reason that didn't happen. The car was then sold twice until someone found the discrepancy and fixed it. Nobody received anything less than they paid for from Tesla.
The current owner may have been deceived by one of the previous sellers but that's not something your can really blame on Tesla
In many states car dealers are either the single largest or one of the largest groups that donates to state and local politicians. They use those markups to make massive donations to politicians ensuring there are middle men laws on the books guaranteeing they can continue to charge more markups in the future.
Many people would rather their money go to the people actually designing and building the product their buying, ideally maximizing the value of their purchase.
From many consumers perspective they're just paying extra for someone to rip them off in order to be rip them off again later.
If dealership provided an genuine value the should be able to charge what they charge in fair competitive market conditions.
I think they should be able to mark stuff up all they want. They just shouldn't be able to have laws enabling their status as forced middle men. If a consumer wants to pay extra through a dealership because they value something they provide so be it. If a consumer doesn't want any bullshit though they should be able to easily bypass them and go to the manufacturer directly.
Something being "supported by market conditions" is not a valid test for reasonableness. During disasters for example, all manner of unethical practices can be "supported by market conditions". Yet we enact laws against those things for good reason.
You also seem to forget the fact that much of those market conditions are a result of anti-competitive and anti-consumer laws guaranteeing their the status a middle men by force.
If for example consumers were able to buy directly from manufacturers but chose to pay more at a dealership because they thought the extra cost was worth some surplus value provided then you might have a point.
That would be a silly way to approach it. You would be paying $40k+ per month in just demand charges some places. A much better idea is to have battery packs you can charge at constant slower rates and feed the charging station at higher burst rates. Tesla and Electrify America already do this.
Not really for cars at least. That's right up there with NCA and NMC chemistries and those seem to do just fine for 200k miles. LFP can do 3000+ cycles with the trade offs being lower energy and power density. Which is why it's usually relegated to models with lower range and power, or vehicles that have the capacity for larger packs like buses.
Scrum master here (amongst other things). Just want to point out that nothing mentioned in your comment is "Scrum". Though they can certainly be characteristics of terrible attempts at implementations of scrum and other methodologies.
The first thing to do when considering scrum is really understanding the problem to be fixed or process to be potentially improved and if the best approach is an Agile methodology (Not just Scrum, it isn't the only thing out there and isn't always the best solution). Then only adding as much as you need.
Scrum really shouldn't be adding any bureaucracy. Not any more than a sufficiently complex project would already have inherently. In fact just the opposite, it should cut down on bureaucracy and make teams more (drumroll) agile. Which is the whole point of self-managing teams.
Sounds like this guy did a hacky job while calling it Scrum, and was not at all the right hire for your situation.
"Project 4 is written in the computer’s assembly language, and
projects 9 and 12 (a simple computer game and a basic operating system)
are written in Jack—the Java-like high-level language for which we build a
compiler in chapters 10 and 11."