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

U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

macdailynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 381 posts

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#281

Post by Gigachad »

ChoGGi wrote: post #204
rsync wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and for those that assume, understandably, that this is strictly a US cultural phenomenon, I must (sadly) report that I saw a very new Ram 1500 dump black exhaust onto a cyclist on the 9 between Saint-Léonard and Crans-Montana. This happened in summer of 2022. In terms of US cultural exports, for every jazz music and snowboarding I guess there has to be some coal rolling and fake service dogs.

I see rolling coal pretty regular in Alberta, Canada. Though not as an intentional act towards bicycles/EVs behind the truck, just people with a rich mixture that like burning money. That and it's legal to do a diesel delete...

I’ve never seen it in Australia. Rarely you see a rusted out shitbox with bad emissions but I’ve never seen a new vehicle modified like this.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#282

Post by vasco »

kstrauser wrote: post #261
vasco wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and not longer after that I saw it up on jacks in a neighborhood auto shop Things that didn't happen for 200 please

#NothingEverHappens In the real world, sometimes grownups have to actively do things to make their worlds nicer. We can’t all just sit around being cynical or nothing ever gets done.

In the real world, in a city as big as San Francisco, probabilities say otherwise.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#283

Post by Barbing »

hedora wrote: post #212
cogman10 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'd HAPPILY report every single truck rolling coal around me if there was a place to report that information. Hell, I've seen a truck roll coal around cop cars and, obviously, nothing happened. This is just gross privacy intrusion masquerading as "protecting the environment". We don't need 100% compliance to the law and simple prosecution/ticketing of obvious violations would go a long way towards solving the p…

If you want to do something about this, given that we have universal surveillance of license plates anyway: Demand that your local government installs PM 2.5 / 10 monitors on each of their spy cams. They'll easily pick up out-of-spec emissions systems. Join the emissions spikes with the license plates. Take the cars that are two standard deviations above the norm for PM 2.5 / 10 increases after they're spotted by the…

>Demand that your local government installs PM 2.5 / 10 monitors on each of their spy cams.

While we're at it can remind 'em Flock politicians don't have our votes

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#284

Post by isodev »

Now can we agree that App Stores as only means of getting software and call home components you can’t disable or replace are a bad idea? We’re slowly normalising that everything happens on whats is effectively a device managed by either Apple or Google.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#285

Post by stingraycharles »

dylan604 wrote: post #168
kstrauser wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched a pickup roll coal in the middle of freaking East Bay, literally within site of downtown San Francisco, on a bicyclist. I reported their license to the California Air Resources Board, and not longer after that I saw it up on jacks in a neighborhood auto shop. That made my day. Asshole.

I'm in Texas, and I get coal rolled multiple times a year while I'm riding my bike. One asshat actually hit my shoulder with his extended mirror. After that, I started using my GoPro as a dashcam since I wasn't able to get the asshat's license plate number.

Ok I’m not from the US. Why do people do this?

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#286

Post by fc417fc802 »

Retric wrote: post #244
fc417fc802 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should that be required? Let people do as they will and impose penalties for problematic behavior (including negligence). I lived in a state with safety inspections and AFAICT it was little more than yet another disproportionate speed bump for the poor and a complete waste of time for society at large. I do see the merit of inspecting larger trailers (such as for boats) once a year given the combined increased li…

For emissions there is often nothing visually wrong with the car. So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement if you didn’t require everyone to get their car checked at least every few years. Doing it every year is IMO overkill. As to safety inspections it’s not a very large effect, but they do save lives and the expense is generally rather small. Yes it impacts the poor more, but that’s because getting unsafe v…

> So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement

Yes, that is precisely what I was suggesting. At least in the general case. Spot enforcement of notable cases when witnessed (such as the aforementioned coal rolling) seems like a good idea to me.

It comes down to the cost benefit tradeoff. Most cars will be used as sold, will be kept in good repair, and will eventually be scrapped due to a failure unrelated to the emissions system. I'm entirely unconvinced that regular testing leads to an overall improvement large enough to matter assuming sufficient requirements were imposed on the vehicle at the time of manufacture.

> it impacts the poor more, but that’s because getting unsafe vehicles fixed or off the road is kind of the point.

That's not what I meant. Try getting a safety inspection in a poor neighborhood. The places are booked out and you probably can't afford the time off work even once you do manage to reserve a slot. Or you end up waiting in line for a few hours. At least that was my experience.

On top of that I doubt it catches many worthwhile violations. People are quite good at looking out for their own lives and pocketbooks.

And again there's spot enforcement. I've lived in states without safety inspections and never felt unsafe. The police would issue "fix it" tickets if they saw anything they thought was truly unsafe after which it was on you to sort it out with the court.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#287

Post by simulator5g »

midtake wrote: post #93

This "car-tinkering app" is used as a glorified GameShark for deleting factory emissions controls, I don't feel sorry for anyone who uses this to roll coal or whatever. Instead of investigating everyone on the list of users of this app, should the government instead ban diesel engines knowing their emissions controls software will be defeated? Should environmental regulations be relaxed? What is really the solution h…

"This "web browser" is used as a glorified-"

Don't go down this road.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#288

Post by bigyabai »

hedora wrote: post #208

I was concerned because I'm about to spend a few coffees on OBD-II scanning apps, but since this particular app is an emissions defeat device, good. This is the... *checking notes* ... second thing this administration has done that seems reasonable, or at least not overtly evil.

This is still evil. The ultimate motive is to ratchet up the abuse of centralized control, and this absolutely sets us down that path.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#289

Post by fc417fc802 »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #250
fc417fc802 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should that be required? Let people do as they will and impose penalties for problematic behavior (including negligence). I lived in a state with safety inspections and AFAICT it was little more than yet another disproportionate speed bump for the poor and a complete waste of time for society at large. I do see the merit of inspecting larger trailers (such as for boats) once a year given the combined increased li…

I live in a country with mandatory (mostly-)yearly car inspections (and all other motor vehicles). Many time you don't even know that there's an issue and they only find it during the inspection. Handbrake works only on one side, normal brakes don't work properly on one of the wheels, there's play in one of the joints or tie rods, etc. You park, pull the handbrake, you have no idea that if you parked on an incline, y…

And yet somehow in the US states that don't have inspections things keep working. It's not as though we don't have statistics regarding the causes of traffic incidents.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#290

Post by Retric »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #286
Retric wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For emissions there is often nothing visually wrong with the car. So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement if you didn’t require everyone to get their car checked at least every few years. Doing it every year is IMO overkill. As to safety inspections it’s not a very large effect, but they do save lives and the expense is generally rather small. Yes it impacts the poor more, but that’s because getting unsafe v…

> So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement Yes, that is precisely what I was suggesting. At least in the general case. Spot enforcement of notable cases when witnessed (such as the aforementioned coal rolling) seems like a good idea to me. It comes down to the cost benefit tradeoff. Most cars will be used as sold, will be kept in good repair, and will eventually be scrapped due to a failure unrelated to the e…

> I'm entirely unconvinced that regular testing leads to an overall improvement large enough to matter assuming sufficient requirements were imposed on the vehicle at the time of manufacture.

Only ~95% of cars pass emissions tests last year (it varies by state). As each car is tested several times over its lifespan you’ll find the majority of IC cars eventually need something fixed to reduce smog.

This isn’t some wildly inefficient system it’s actually quite effective at improving air quality.

Post reply on HN