A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone • Hacker News Board

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#201

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:22 AM UTC

nanis wrote: post #195

pa7ch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the sentiment. However, are you saying that you think AC between your legs is a worthwhile feature but airbags are not?

>are you saying that you think AC between your legs is a worthwhile feature but airbags are not? Why should people not be allowed to make that choice? Keep in mind that the only reason we have airbags is because Naderites did not believe that one could rely on people using seatbelts so there needed to be technology that did not require cooperation from humans. Fast-forward a couple of decades. Oooops. Airbags have no…

Crumple zones themselves aren't really that big of a win either. They basically just buy time to set an airbag off unless you just so happen to crash into something approximately like what the crash tests use at whatever speed the relevant crash test is at. A little blow that speed it will be too stiff to do much. A little above that speed the car will blow right through it like it's not even there.

The real benefit is in rigid passenger cabins that keep tires and engines out of the occupants legs.

IMO side curtain airbags are a far better safety improvement than frontal airbags because the safety technology in the sideways direction and space for dissipating force is lacking so something needs to pick up the slack.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#202

Post by ashtonkem » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:24 AM UTC

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #198

ashtonkem wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And buying a pre-2000 car involves giving up a lot of safety. That’s before regulators started looking at partial offset crashes, so older cars perform poorly if you clip a pole or oncoming vehicle with one of the headlamps.

You gain basically nothing in safety from the adoption of airbags in the early 90s to the improvements in roof strength and passenger cabins in the mid-00s (many models had their improvements in the early 00s because the regulations were known in advance). From there nothing changes until the proliferation of side curtain airbags.

Safety as a step function, basically.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#203

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:24 AM UTC

OldHand2018 wrote: post #158

nomuthetart wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is true as of 2018: https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/driver-assistance-technologi... Does NHTSA recommend rearview video systems? Yes. As of May 2018, NHTSA requires this lifesaving technology on all new vehicles. We recommend you look for RVSs that meet NHTSA’s performance specifications when shopping for a vehicle.

The actual requirement is a series of rear visibility tests that are done on a vehicle through the full range of seat adjustability. A rear view camera allows any vehicle to meet the regulation regardless of vehicle styling and design. They are cheap, too. But they are not strictly required. Your average 1980s sedan probably would meet the requirement as long as it had mirrors on the driver and passenger side. Here i…

You're not wrong but in practice they're all but required because the corner that fuel economy and cabin strength requirements box you into is a corner with really high belt-lines and really poor visibility. You couldn't build something that's the shape of a 1990s sedan today.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#204

Post by a1369209993 » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:26 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #107

annoyingnoob wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a SIM card in the glove box that supports the Infotainment system and in-car hotspot if you want. I pulled that one out. The car still has another one, somewhere, as I occasionally get calls into the car but I don't pay for that service. I found the fuse for the factory phone but not the SIM, you're right its somewhere but for all I know its not removeable.

You'll probably need to do at least some disassembly to get to it (maybe next time you take the car for servicing). Then you can either wrap the antenna in some aluminum foil or just cut it (which would probably fry the transmitter). I agree, though, all our devices are becoming hostile to us.

> or just cut it (which would probably fry the transmitter).

I'd recommend physically removing the entire transmitter (the electronics can be removed with a chisel), but if you're trying to fry the transmitter, don't cut the antenna; that leaves a undamaged but low gain transmitter a la [0] (though probably not powerful enough to detect outside the vehicle). Instead, short the antenna to a power rail (or ground, but V!=0 is more likely to damage it) to fry the transmitter and also keep it from moving the antenna voltage enough to transmit anything.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sQF_K9MqpA (at 17:06)

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#205

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:27 AM UTC

nanis wrote: post #195

pa7ch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the sentiment. However, are you saying that you think AC between your legs is a worthwhile feature but airbags are not?

>are you saying that you think AC between your legs is a worthwhile feature but airbags are not? Why should people not be allowed to make that choice? Keep in mind that the only reason we have airbags is because Naderites did not believe that one could rely on people using seatbelts so there needed to be technology that did not require cooperation from humans. Fast-forward a couple of decades. Oooops. Airbags have no…

Read up on de-gloving. Then remember to keep your hands away from the top of the wheel.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#206

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:32 AM UTC

throwawayboise wrote: post #136

kgwxd wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really buy a "dumb" gas car anymore either. I'm holding onto my 2011 Nissan Versa to the bitter end.

You can buy dumb cars, they just won't be new cars.

I don't expect that to be financially viable too long into the future. Once a significant enough portion of the general public's fleet turns over you can expect to see onerous requirements applied to older vehicles to get people at the margins to buy newer stuff (e.g. inspection programs that drive up the cost of ownership under the guise of safety, some states already have these). Insurance lobby wants people in new cars. The Karens don't like seeing old junk. The upper middle class wants everyone driving EVs for the planet's sake. The state wants to be able to track everything. None of these parties care that most of the people affected will have credit scores in the 400s and be forced to do business with predatory "buy here pay here" lots.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#207

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:37 AM UTC

83 wrote: post #152

bdavisx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the next logical step is to allow jurisdictions (cities/counties/whatever) charge more tax on their roads.

Oh boy just wait until the ultra wealthy realize they can lobby to have a $50 per mile road tax going into their community to discourage the poors from using their parks/beaches/public areas.

This is more or less the purpose of toll roads.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#208

Post by ghostpepper » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:37 AM UTC

bashinator wrote: post #180

Loughla wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, non-tactile buttons on a car seems ridiculous. You HAVE to look away from the road to do anything. Tactile buttons let you feel around to do things if you need to. That change has made zero sense to me.

Isn’t Mazda discontinuing use of touch screens?

I bought a Mazda CX-5 last year and in the dealership, one of the televisions was playing an endless loop of Mazda commercials, and one of the commercials was specifically about how all the important controls are on physical buttons / knobs / switches.

Mazda is clearly aware that they work better, but I'm sure customers who don't drive often or don't pay attention to the experience of driving simply assume that a larger touchscreen is better and somehow more modern.

I sometimes even turn the screen off completely, on long drives or at night; I only wish there was a dedicated button to do so.

The car is great too - it has dedicated buttons for pretty much everything else, including a dedicated, physical volume knob in the center armrest and track change buttons on the steering wheel, climate control, various driver assistance features, etc. It was all clearly designed with the driver in mind, and the touchscreen was an afterthought.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#209

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:39 AM UTC

bb123 wrote: post #163

gscott wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is running an experiment that collects all of your location data while in a car to collect a gas tax. Of course once they have it they will make it available for any government agency.

Why not just tax gas? It’s the perfect solution. The more you drive, the more you pay. The more polluting your car, the more you pay. Long term it seems inevitable that tax will need to move onto the electricity used to charge cars.

Yes, the fuel tax is far more perfect if the goal is to tax road usage and pollution but the state worried about future $$ and taxing gas is not future proof in the face of EVs. They want shovel read infrastructure to tax the people with money (the middle and upper middle class) and those people look like they're gonna buy EVs.

I'd like to think it's because EV proliferation makes the gas tax too regressive but I'm not that good at lying to myself.

Re: A CBP contract shows the risks in connecting your vehicle and your smartphone

#210

Post by snapetom » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

Interesting this is paid software. Given automakers sad security practices, I wonder how hard it is for some hacker to make a kit using off the shelf products and release the software open source.