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

Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

freightwaves.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 180 posts

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#161

Post by [deleted] »

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #152
hansvm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a stretch. The person interacting with the hardware need not know or care about the software. Under that same logic I think you could: (1) Buy an alarm clock with an embedded chip (2) Contained in the packaging was a link to a license agreement. You never read it and certainly didn't agree to it. (3) A year later, weekday alarms are remotely disabled because you've used up your free trial. The license spec…

Have you seen the recent rulings out of the Supreme Court? They’re ruling off of their feelings and poorly justifying their conclusions by working backwards and making stuff up from whole cloth whenever necessary.

[deleted]

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#162

Post by Gordonjcp »

mitjam wrote: post #93
gambiting wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just doesn't make any sense if you know anything about physics. Sun provides about 1kW of power per square meter.....at noon, at the equator, with no clouds. Automotive solar panels like they use are about 20% efficient. Your average car roof is....let's be super forgiving and say 2sqm. So in the middle of the day, at the equator, you are generating about 400W of power. The average EV battery is 50kWh. So you'd ne…

This illustrates how inefficient cars are for individual transportation. An eBike takes between 10 and 20 Wh per mile. Gas is so inexpensive and energy dense that we just got unware how ridiculous it is to drive by car even on short distances.

eBikes are extremely slow. What's the point of them? Just ride a normal bike.

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#163

Post by aidenn0 »

astrange wrote: post #83
aidenn0 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume the mistake was the proper romanization of アイドル is aidoru.

Indeed. Idoru would be pronounced like "ee-dol".

As a kid I pronounced the title of the book ee-doh-ru

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#164

Post by bluGill »

tialaramex wrote: post #145
bluGill wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the biofuel is a lot more energy dense. People do buy large tanks of fuel so they can drive long distances where there are no gas stations. Think trips across Alaska, or Northern Yukon. Most of us live in range of a gas station and so just stopping for gas every few hundred miles is more reasonable than a large tank (which has issues), but you can do that. You cannot get nearly as much range out of a batter…

It is true that if you need energy density then you want to carry fuel and not use batteries, although whether biofuel makes a good choice I'm dubious about. 'course if you're just driving a hundred miles to see Aunt Tilly, and then fifty more to see Grandma, and then a hundred more to see your old friend from high school, well, those people all got electricity, and as we saw the EV doesn't care that it's not that pr…

Those 1% trips just outside a EV range are a problem. Liquid fuels are everywhere and fast. Charging infrastructure is still lacking, though if you plan at least most trips are possible. The time to charge is still ... though realistically you should take those breaks anyway most people don't

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#165

Post by pc86 »

teddyh wrote: post #160
pc86 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If software is licensed, and you don't comply with the license, you don't have a right to use it. Seems pretty straightforward. In this example, if you steal a piece of hardware with embedded software on it, it seems unlikely that you're licensed to use that piece of software.

> you don't have a right to use it. Seems pretty straightforward. But why do I have to accept a license? I already have a copy of the software; what law says I can’t run the copy I have?

For the same reason "finders keepers" isn't codified law. By that logic, nobody is allowed to controls the means by which their software is run. You don't get to decide if people have to pay you, or if people have to have your permission first, or if they're allowed to (legally) copy it, etc.

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#166

Post by Thorrez »

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #152
hansvm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a stretch. The person interacting with the hardware need not know or care about the software. Under that same logic I think you could: (1) Buy an alarm clock with an embedded chip (2) Contained in the packaging was a link to a license agreement. You never read it and certainly didn't agree to it. (3) A year later, weekday alarms are remotely disabled because you've used up your free trial. The license spec…

Have you seen the recent rulings out of the Supreme Court? They’re ruling off of their feelings and poorly justifying their conclusions by working backwards and making stuff up from whole cloth whenever necessary.

Examples?

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#167

Post by Thorrez »

pc86 wrote: post #147
teddyh wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a “right to use” of software?

If software is licensed, and you don't comply with the license, you don't have a right to use it. Seems pretty straightforward. In this example, if you steal a piece of hardware with embedded software on it, it seems unlikely that you're licensed to use that piece of software.

But to use software you acquire, you have to copy it into your computer's RAM and maybe hard drive. That's relevant to copyright law. To use this hardware device you stole, you don't need to do that. So it's much less clear copyright law would apply. Reflashing the device with new firmware though, then copyright law could apply.

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#168

Post by Thorrez »

teddyh wrote: post #160
pc86 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If software is licensed, and you don't comply with the license, you don't have a right to use it. Seems pretty straightforward. In this example, if you steal a piece of hardware with embedded software on it, it seems unlikely that you're licensed to use that piece of software.

> you don't have a right to use it. Seems pretty straightforward. But why do I have to accept a license? I already have a copy of the software; what law says I can’t run the copy I have?

How are you going to use it? You have to copy it to your hard drive, right?

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#169

Post by fuzzfactor »

nathanaldensr wrote: post #40
zardo wrote: post #14

Also, a rash of power train control module failures leaves Freightliner trucks inoperable, and a shortage of spare parts sees commercial trucking companies turning to the black market for stolen parts.

I was thinking that, too. The thieves just steal the same modules over and over as each trucking line buys them from the black market. Nice business if you can get it.

During the T-top days of the 1980's, thieves were stealing the removable hardtop panels from lots of Camaros and Corvettes and cars like that. These could not be pawned for much since it was unlikely that a buyer for that exact T-top would come in looking for that one any time soon. Unless the shop developed quite a collection. Eventually they would be unloaded to the used parts dealers.

I went to a police auction where a lot of the recovered stolen property which went unclaimed was being sold along with their surplus vehicles, office furniture, etc.

There were loads of T-tops and naturally the used parts T-top dealers were there to pick them up at rock-bottom prices. They all knew each other.

They knew exactly which car model each one would fit and this had become an increasingly more detail-oriented business.

When a theft victim showed up to a used parts dealer, if the dealer did not have the exact part in stock (or in his network) he would tell the victim that it would take a few days to come in.

Basically, when an actual willing buyer was identified, if the part was not available already, it would be stolen to order from a compatible vehicle by street thieves who had become more detail-oriented over the years themselves.

Re: Rash of parts thefts is leaving Freightliner trucks inoperable

#170

Post by Red_Leaves_Flyy »

Thorrez wrote: post #166
Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the recent rulings out of the Supreme Court? They’re ruling off of their feelings and poorly justifying their conclusions by working backwards and making stuff up from whole cloth whenever necessary.

Examples?

https://www.fivefourpod.com/

Don’t take a random dudes word for it. These lawyers put their real names with their opinions when calling out the ideological hacks masquerading as Supreme Court justices.

Post reply on HN