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

561–570 of 916 posts

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

#561

Post by mydogcanpurr »

kerowak wrote: post #472
GenerocUsername wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a melting pot, the US takes in a lot of folks from countries that are not doing very well... so in a way, if we keep importing folks from cultures that failed without trying to integrate them to our culture, and instead celebrate their original culture, eventually our amalgam culture will fail just like theirs did. Its why we have signs that say to "sit, not stand on toilets". You dont think we would need to write…

If American culture "fails," I'm gonna blame xenophobes like you who are incapable of adjusting to a dynamic world, not the "toilet standers."

Your terms are acceptable.

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

#562

Post by gepeto42 »

One of the authors here. Someone just told me we were on the HackerNews front page, made me happy we just went with a static website on GitHub pages.

I will go through the comments later, but for now, if you are Canadian, please get in touch with your MPs.

I am working with some media as well for additional coverage in the next week, but if you know Canadian journalists that might be interested in this, please get in touch with them, educate them directly if you want or send them to me (my LinkedIn is in the signatures, the first two names in bold = authors).

Thanks for helping this story reach more people.

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

#563

Post by nonrandomstring »

robertlagrant wrote: post #533
nonrandomstring wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what may be missing from the discussion at this point are distinctions between law and equity and different kinds of judgement in statutory versus common law. The ideal in jurisprudence is that we _always_ have equity - the ability to interpret the law and apply it in each specific cases. The "opposite" is statutory law. Like you get a speeding ticket regardless of any mitigating situation. So you were rushin…

> Statutory law fits perfectly with our capitalist society, efficient, inflexible, uniform, quick and cheap. Judges and juries are expensive. This seems a bit of a false equivalence. Capitalist societies are the ones that are based on liberalism and think individuals are important - important enough to make companies and agreements between each other. They quite often are the ones that also think individuals are dese…

Are you not confusing democratic societies with capitalist ones?

I mean, there's some overlap, but if we're talking about clumsy equivalences... :)

And to be honest I see ever less intersection between actual current "late stage" capitalism and the "rule of Law". Those I know in the legal profession complain we are in state of "lawfare", a state in which most of the common principles of justice have broken down in favour of "justice for the rich" (I realise many Americans take that to be perfectly normal)

How about I use the expression "greed driven societies" instead?

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

#565

Post by HPsquared »

riskable wrote: post #547
sidewndr46 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can extrapolate this argument to almost anything about a vehicle in North America. I've been working on them for decades. The way manufacturers make money is by half-assing things. Where a chain should be used, a belt is used. Where a 10 cent switch should be used, a touchscreen replaces it. Where a shifter should be, some knob is used to replace which actually kills a guy because he didn't realize his SUV was in…

You are so wrong it's unreal! Quality switches suitable for use in a vehicle don't cost $0.10, they cost $0.01! -at the volumes they'd be purchased for auto manufacturing.

You don't need just the switch. It needs a housing, a cap, lighting, wiring, and connectors at the other end of the wire too. And all this needs to be designed in a "waterfall" style, with long lead times. Overall, a virtual button is going to be cheaper to engineer and manufacture than a hardware button. It's not big, overall, but these small savings accumulate over the whole vehicle.

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

#566

Post by HPsquared »

eli wrote: post #564
HPsquared wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any examples where that is the case?

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-po...

I mean places where the police do have such an obligation.

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

#567

Post by toss1 »

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…

Great concept.

But the reality is that there IS, and likely always will be (short of wholesale genetic engineering of the race), a significant portion of the population that WILL act as you describe — i.e., have zero ethical boundaries and will behave according to whatever they can get away with.

The prevalence of psychopathy in the general population is about 4.5% [0], so about one in 20 will be entirely immune to any ethical expectations.

Moreover, up to 30% [1] have significant tendencies including low empathy and remorse, grandiosity, impulsivity, and/or aggressive or violent behavior.

So, the large majority, around 70-85% of the population will indeed be subject to, and indeed welcome a society primarily based on high ethical expectations.

However, a far too large minority will be immune to ethical expectations and will relentlessly prey on that majority.

Simply put, your idea is wonderful, but does not match reality, and would fail badly in practice.

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8374040/

[1] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy

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

#568

Post by jakelazaroff »

nonethewiser wrote: post #477
jakelazaroff wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That anecdote is a non sequitur, but nonetheless: I assume you didn't see the full video, where it turned out that the police assaulted the "illegals" unprovoked? https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/02/08/times-square-migrants-arr... That Fox News article is mostly information-free, but my takeaway is that it's blaming "bail reform" for the release of the people the police assaulted, which is abjectly false: they were charg…

> I assume you didn't see the full video, where it turned out that the police assaulted the "illegals" unprovoked? I did see the full video and that's not assault. The police are well within their right to break up a congregation of disorderly juveniles outside homeless shelters. When they resisted that they arrested them. Good. Why are you bending over backwards to protect people with this sort of history? > At the…

> I did see the full video and that's not assault. The police are well within their right to break up a congregation of disorderly juveniles outside homeless shelters. When they resisted that they arrested them.

It's very easy to verify that this is not what happened by simply watching the full video, which has been made public. The fact that the police omitted the first half of the video showing how the fight started is a tacit admission that they were, in fact, at fault.

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

#569

Post by ActorNightly »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #10

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've read in a while. All vehicles are insecure. I can hook a tow truck to almost any vehicle, including an 80,000 lbs tractor trailer and drive off with it. That'd actually attract less attention that outright hotwiring a vehicle. The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US.

>The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US.

The solution is to pass laws that allow citizens to defend property with the same force that they can defend their own and others bodies from injury.

It should be pretty clear that humans are pretty good optimizers. Its never about if the activity is legal or not, its about what is the reward is, vs what the actual risk is (i.e, getting arrested is not really a risk when your source of income doesn't depend on your criminal history)

The only way to stop humans from doing said behavior is increase the risk of doing it. If laws were passed that allowed citizens to freely own guns, and use those guns to defend themselves and property, you would see massive decrease in property crime.

And yes, you do get an increase in shootings. Statistically though, the shootings happen more in alteractions where tempers flare rather than home invasions or robbery situations. Suicides still preside overwhelmingly as the leading cause of gun deaths.

Overall, from a personal harm perspective (amount of harm * risk), its much safer if you have loose gun/self defense laws. Unless of course you are so well off that you can just replace stole stuff indefinitely, but again, the humans taking your stuff will optimize for that over time as well.

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

#570

Post by CrimsonCape »

brabel wrote: post #417
AussieWog93 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make a similar argument about capitalism. We _should_ have grown past it by now, but we haven't, and every time we try to invent a replacement system we end up making things worse. You can see the ethical decay unfolding in real-time as societies turn replaced the old, rigorously tested system of religion with shiny new secular ethics.

> You can see the ethical decay unfolding... The Nordic countries are all among the least religious countries in the world, yet they seem to have some of the most ethical societies on the planet if you consider human rights, democracy and low violence to be the result of an ethical society. The most religious countries in the world are all at the very bottom of rankings taking into consideration any of those factors.

I think your example is not a good one. Nordic countries have the concept of Jante law. If you can verbalize such a concept and also recognize that it exists in your society, by definition it makes your society more intolerant than a culture that has no such concept (such as the USA).

In fact, I would argue the open-ness and tolerance of nordic culture is specifically exploitative of the cultural expectation that you do not raise concern or object and are expected to be in agreeance with everyone else that "this here is a tolerant society". It's a valid theory that the fastest culture to adopt any philosophy will be the one that has the population with the greatest number of people who don't disagree.

Post reply on HN