Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

saveflipper.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 916 posts

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#231

Post by throwaway240221 »

keiferski wrote: post #98

Philosophy warning: I don't know if there is a term for it, or if a philosopher/etc. has written about this phenomenon, but: a noticeable trend to me is what I'll call "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws." Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics ) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pas…

Theology warning:

> "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws"

There are two things that are simultaneously true.

1) This law is not a replacement of ethical expectations, but a poor attempt to codify them.

2) This law is bad on it's own right, and the website is correct.

But I would like to discuss point 1. In an interesting way, you are making the precisely the same error of the people who are proposing to ban Flipper Zero's, just on the other side of the coin.

The anti-F0 people think "If we do away with this tool, car thieves will cease to exist! Since car thieves are otherwise good people, when we remove the tools, they will cease to be thieves!"

You think, "Such people will still exist, we just need to make sure they understand our ethical expectations! Since car thieves are otherwise good people, when we teach them not to steal, they will cease to be thieves!"

> we tend to assume they [people] will behave in the worst way possible

Because they do. The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable fact, and they most intellectually resisted. If you make F0's illegal to own, criminals will still own them. If you "educate" them that this is bad behavior, they will laugh and nod their head. "Why do you think we do this at night?"

Now, your attribution to relativism and cultural exhaustion with regards to religious and ethical norms is SPOT ON! I absolutely agree. But what you will find, if you return to religious instruction, is that Christianity teaches that people behave in the worst way possible. Regardless of education, regardless of law: the human nature is sinful from birth.

The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? - Jeremiah 17:9

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#232

Post by keiferski »

whimsicalism wrote: post #223
keiferski wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it seems like enforce these ethical behaviors and punish the bottom 1% that goes against them is just as much of a solution as redesign society and the environment so that everyone can't act like that 1%.

Great - and how is that different from the law again?

Because the law is only punishing people that break the rules, not teaching them what ethical behavior is in the first place. It’s fundamentally a reactive process.

In other words, you want people that don’t steal cars because they feel bad about it. You don’t want them to not steal cars because they’re afraid of the law.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#233

Post by whimsicalism »

ryandrake wrote: post #217
bryanlarsen wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's anything more guaranteed to turn a 12 or 13 year old into a lifelong criminal than what I think you're implying by "real correction in behaviour"; aka a multi-year prison sentence.

If someone is stealing cars at 12 or 13 years old, they're already well on their way down the path towards irredeemability. Society has to do something or they will turn into a lifelong criminal. A multi-year prison sentence is probably not going to help them, but counseling, a better home and school environment, food in the belly, and so on might. You have to do something besides "catch and release" which has been t…

USA crime is still very low compared to pretty much the entire 20th century, it seems early to proclaim certain approaches as a failure.

FWIW, catalytic converter theft was recently a big problem in the US and the classic approach of getting the FBI involved, identifying the high-level fencers and arresting, was incredibly effective and cat thefts have plummeted.

I suspect disrupting the organized crime in Canada would work similarly well at reducing car theft.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#234

Post by iraqmtpizza »

madeofpalk wrote: post #215
keiferski wrote: post #98

Philosophy warning: I don't know if there is a term for it, or if a philosopher/etc. has written about this phenomenon, but: a noticeable trend to me is what I'll call "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws." Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics ) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pas…

> Instead of discussing how car theft is fundamentally an unethical behavior What's to discuss? Is there any ambiguity about whether stealing cars is unethical? What are you bringing to that conversation that moves us forward?

there is a lot of ambiguity about it in places like san francisco. better to lock up the deoderant than lock up a human being, the logic goes

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#235

Post by rjmunro »

philwelch wrote: post #113
bongodongobob wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has the most prisoners per capita, but go on. "They aren't doing enough about car hackers! Car hackers are just running free and the gubmint won't stop them!" Ridiculous.

That’s actually not true anymore. El Salvador has the most prisoners per capita now. They also have a lower murder rate than the US. The lowest murder rate in the entire Western Hemisphere, actually. Previously they had the highest murder rate in the world. Mass incarceration works. It doesn’t work in the US because we didn’t do enough of it.

Download the CSVs of https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/homicide-rate-unodc and https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/prison-population-rate

Plot them on a graph. There is basically no correlation.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#236

Post by ceejayoz »

fargle wrote: post #189
ceejayoz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what egregious means.

yeah it kinda is

No. Windows balance a variety of competing needs - security, ventilation, egress during emergencies, mental health, lighting, etc. It would be, perhaps, egregiously negligent for a maximum security prison architect to install large plate glass windows in their cells, but having windows isn't automatically egregious. A car without windows (or with unbreakable ones) is a deathtrap in an accident; omitting them would be egregiously dangerous.

The same isn't true for, say, Kia/Hyundai's decision not to include immobilizers:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/autos/kia-and-hyundai-vehicles-in-can...

> CNN reported that only 26 per cent of Hyundai and Kia models from 2015 to 2019 were equipped with electronic immobilizers in the U.S., compared with 96 per cent of all other vehicles in those years, making the Hyundai and Kia models roughly twice as likely to be stolen.

Those stats make it pretty clear that immobilization was already the industry standard. Skipping them was like knowingly writing open SQL injection holes in a web application.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#237

Post by nox101 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #144
keiferski wrote: post #98

Philosophy warning: I don't know if there is a term for it, or if a philosopher/etc. has written about this phenomenon, but: a noticeable trend to me is what I'll call "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws." Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics ) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pas…

> Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pass laws to supposedly prevent that behavior from manifesting. This is a necessary consequence of civilization. If you have a city of 8 million people, then you have 80,000 people in the bottom percentile of behavior by normative ethics. If some…

The largest metro area on the planet, Tokyo, 34 million people, is also the one of the safest with the extremely low crime. Seoul, and Singapore are both around 10 million and are also safe with low crime.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#238

Post by mp05 »

Szpadel wrote: post #227
keiferski wrote: post #98

Philosophy warning: I don't know if there is a term for it, or if a philosopher/etc. has written about this phenomenon, but: a noticeable trend to me is what I'll call "the replacement of ethical expectations with specific, written down laws." Rather than expecting a human being to behave in certain ways intrinsically (i.e., normative ethics ) we tend to assume they will behave in the worst way possible, and then pas…

I observed the same, especially with recent abortion movements (from what I heard those were also in USA and I'm assuming from what I saw on internet, it look similar to what is happening in my country) I believe that car thieft could be exactly the same. basically people behave like legal abortion means that women will have to perform it and that's bad. especially I hear that from religious people that they don't ap…

> basically people behave like legal abortion means that women will have to perform it and that's bad

So let me get this straight: you're suggesting that because abortion may be legalized at a federal level that religious people are upset because women will "have to perform it"? And this is your broad stroke assumption of why people are upset?

Not to derail the thread but you just made a wild statement to me and I want to ensure you're saying what I think you're saying.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#239

Post by whimsicalism »

keiferski wrote: post #232
whimsicalism wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great - and how is that different from the law again?

Because the law is only punishing people that break the rules, not teaching them what ethical behavior is in the first place. It’s fundamentally a reactive process. In other words, you want people that don’t steal cars because they feel bad about it. You don’t want them to not steal cars because they’re afraid of the law.

Sorry - you edited your comment substantially, the process you initially described was identical to the law.

Re: Insecure vehicles should be banned, not security tools like the Flipper Zero

#240

Post by electriclove »

keiferski wrote: post #220
RandomLensman wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why put all Western countries into the same bucket? Car theft is much more prevalent in the US than Germany, for example.

Fair point. It may have more to do with Anglo or American culture than with the West at large, although I think the same deeper trends are still at play.

There is little or no consequence in America to breaking the law - especially for those who have nothing to lose
Post reply on HN