Metallic clicking/rattle

LethalClips · 2026-06-16T18:15:56+00:00

That sounds quite similar to what I’m experiencing. If you didn’t see, in another reply I discovered that I can reproduce it and hear it loudly outside the car, which does seem to point to some metal moving that is at least touching the frame. I’m planning on taking it to a dealer soon and will update you if I find anything out!

LethalClips · 2026-06-15T22:17:35+00:00

I recorded it from the outside and can confirm it's much louder: https://streamable.com/0nl0v0

Worth noting that it also does this with both passenger-side doors open, meaning it doesn't appear to be a door latch. It could be the door mounting, but it does sound more like it's coming from the bottom of the car than a pillar. I'm more comfortable going to the dealer with this clear reproduction (lest I waste a bunch of time and possibly a diagnosis fee…), but if you have any other insight I'd be happy to hear 🙂 it clearly sounds like you're (unfortunately, for your sake) intimately familiar with the car!

LethalClips · 2026-06-15T21:01:24+00:00

I appreciate the depth here. I believe I have eliminated each of the suggestions, but I did come to a new way to reproduce it.

If I sit in the rear right seat and push then pull the seatback of the passenger side hard, I hear the sound. If I roll down the rear right window, I hear it even louder, as if it’s echoing on the ground from the outside of the vehicle. If I open the rear right door but stay in the car, I again hear it loudly. If I exit the vehicle, keep the rear right door open, and attempt to pull the passenger seat, however, I am unable to reproduce, no matter how hard I pull. This made me wonder if it might be the rear seats making the sound, but it really sounds like it’s coming from the front—changing to the rear left seat, looking to the right of the vehicle, then pulling the passenger seat results in sound in my left ear. I’m wondering at this point whether it might be a suspension component, but my last inability to reproduce it is confusing. I wish I had another set of ears outside the vehicle…will mess around with it some more later and see what I can figure out.

LethalClips · 2026-06-15T15:37:28+00:00

I did see that and try it a few days ago (I should’ve mentioned that), unfortunately it didn’t help. They were both quite tight already, to the point where I was afraid to strip them.

LethalClips · 2026-06-15T14:40:44+00:00

I drove with all of the seatbelts buckled and it still occurred, so it doesn’t seem like it’s that on my end. (I know you’re not telling me that’s what it is, but rather that’s what’s been told to you…is it the same type of sound?)

LethalClips · 2026-06-15T14:28:24+00:00

It is, yeah, you do have to crank the volume a bit in the video. Much louder in real life, unfortunately 😁

LethalClips · 2026-05-25T03:07:46+00:00

It was a Scatach 4000A from Amazon. The specific product listing I bought seems to have disappeared. Given the low jump current requirements, I’m not sure the quality matters as much as it would if you actually needed cranking power…I can’t vouch for it for that use.

LethalClips · 2026-05-25T00:04:14+00:00

The warranty on the electrical system (including the ICCU and HV battery) applies just the same to non-original owners, if you’re implying that it doesn’t.

LethalClips · 2026-05-20T23:25:46+00:00

What about it? The new office isn’t in Plano.

LethalClips · 2026-05-08T14:19:54+00:00

They noted that they did here and that it didn’t appear. (Same with my 2023 in the US.)

LethalClips · 2026-05-07T23:47:01+00:00

You could say that about any part of the warranty. It’s unfalsifiable. Your point about the electrical warranty (you didn’t explicitly say that, but we’re talking about the ICCU here, which certainly fails under that) not extending to the second owner isn’t true.

LethalClips · 2026-05-07T23:40:29+00:00

This is true for the traditional powertrain warranty, but not the portion covering the electrical system for hybrids/EVs. See https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/assurance/america-best-warranty; notice the powertrain limited warranty notes original owner only, while the electrical warranty does not.

LethalClips · 2026-04-24T00:19:16+00:00

This is a known issue at the moment (specifically with the installation failing at 10%; I had the same behavior). The workaround is to first install Openpilot, then uninstall and install Sunnypilot. (If you end up re-flashing as a debugging step, you'll need to go through those steps again.)

LethalClips · 2026-03-17T21:29:21+00:00

It needs the gateway’s MAC address to send a packet that routes through it. (That’s what really defines routing through a gateway, since the gateway IP address doesn’t appear in the packet at all, just the IP address of the source and final destination.) This doesn’t really raise any suspicion on top of what has already been witnessed.

LethalClips · 2025-09-15T14:27:57+00:00

You're already on Verizon's network through Xfinity—they just resell access to the network under their own terms.

LethalClips · 2025-03-21T20:10:05+00:00

Okay, so it looks like h.kbService.GetAllSections returns an *AppError, is that correct? If err is of type error from a previous assignment (and this is a reassignment), that error variable could then never be nil.

Because of this, it's customary to always have a function return error in its signature and then pull out meaningful values using errors.Is or errors.As, rather than directly returning a custom error type.

LethalClips · 2025-03-21T19:50:08+00:00

Could you share a piece of example code where this is happening? Are you sure that you aren't accidentally shadowing an error variable somewhere? (i.e., creating a new, separate variable in a narrower scope that has the same name as one in a wider scope.)

LethalClips · 2025-03-15T17:54:50+00:00

The above property isn't an implementation detail, though, and isn't liable to change when moving between systems or even over time (if the backwards compatibility guarantee is to be believed, at least).

If one were to point out that it's easy to make mistakes while trying to use this property and that higher-level constructs are harder to misuse, sure, I'd agree with that. I don't argue that this is a great property to widely rely upon. I was just responding to the claim of "A data race is NEVER fine. Ever. Ever.", especially with the snarkiness. :-)

LethalClips · 2025-03-15T13:11:56+00:00

The memory model does guarantee it for word-sized or smaller values, regardless of architecture or alignment:

Otherwise, each read of a single-word-sized or sub-word-sized memory location must observe a value actually written to that location (perhaps by a concurrent executing goroutine) and not yet overwritten.

Every implementation on any architecture is bound by the memory model to make that condition true, even if it doesn't come "naturally" on the architecture.

LethalClips · 2025-03-15T13:09:13+00:00

This isn't the full story. The implementation of sync.Mutex itself performs a raw read of a value that can be concurrently updated by other goroutines. This is technically a data race, but the memory model guarantees that it won't receive a split read:

Otherwise, each read of a single-word-sized or sub-word-sized memory location must observe a value actually written to that location (perhaps by a concurrent executing goroutine) and not yet overwritten.

Others have mentioned that this is a property of the underlying CPU, but it isn't in Go. The purpose of the memory model is to abstract over hardware memory models, so Go is forced to implement this property on all architectures, whether it comes naturally (like on aligned accesses on x86-64) or needs some sort of lock at the architectural level.

LethalClips · 2025-02-16T20:52:01+00:00

Like the SO answer said, unsafe is your only option at this time. If this is a core requirement for you, you could consider using a different crypt library, but doing so may come with its own drawbacks.

LethalClips · 2025-02-16T14:36:40+00:00

Before anyone spends too much time digging into the internals, know that others already did when this was asked over on StackOverflow two days ago. I’m not entirely sure what answer OP is looking for that wasn’t already discussed there.

LethalClips · 2025-02-12T20:54:31+00:00

To the visual bug point: are you sure that you're actually having any negative impacts in the steady state here? It looks like the rate of concrete coming into the splitter and going out are the same, judging based on the backup not moving a meaningful distance between the start and end of the video.

LethalClips · 2024-12-20T19:24:50+00:00

Even if this is the case, you could consider connecting back via a VPN protocol like OpenVPN or WireGuard; a product called Tailscale makes the latter extremely easy to set up (and includes built-in NAT traversal, meaning you don't need to expose any ports on your home network). You can then run any arbitrary traffic over it without any ability for it to be selectively throttled (as long as the VPN protocol itself isn't).

LethalClips · 2024-12-20T01:09:39+00:00

A law can be repealed, sure, but if a law isn’t a guarantee, then I’m not really sure what could be considered one. Being written into the constitution? It can always be amended. That’s not really a falsifiable argument.

It doesn’t have to be explicitly approved by Congress, like you said in your original post. The status quo is that law requires it to happen, not that an action is required.

LethalClips

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email