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

Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

popularmechanics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 535 posts

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#71

Post by lotsofpulp »

overscore wrote: post #54
nexuist wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla probably has the best solution to this so far; they have cameras around the car that record movement and send it to the cloud. A tracking system would work only until thieves figure out how to disable it; at which point it just becomes another part to sell. The Tesla solution is nice because it live streams the carjacking to the owner, enabling them to pick out details about the thief that could be useful to ar…

This implies that Tesla can view the vicinity and location of your car at any time. Is that true? That would completely destroy any desire to own one.

This is one example of when it’s useful:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SALEM/comments/l0nohv/mischievous_a...

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#72

Post by sithadmin »

josefresco wrote: post #2

I'd rather see a tracking system attached to several parts of the vehicle. This would allow law enforcement to track the vehicle, and/or the parts if the vehicle is broken down and sold. In the United States we have "LoJack" but it's not a standard feature rather a dealer upsell.

>and/or the parts if the vehicle is broken down and sold.

In the US, there's a product/service called Phantom Footprints that many dealers offer as an add-on. They affix tamper-evident stickers (the sort that leave a 'tattoo' if removed)/laser engrave a unique identifier that ties the vehicles/parts back to the owner in a database maintained by Phantom Footprints. On some vehicles, getting it installed and registering can even get you a discount on car insurance.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#73

Post by esrauch »

vocram wrote: post #60
dangerboysteve wrote: post #55

In large cities people ignore car alarms and are more and likely going to attract a brick through the window from pissed of neighbors. The biggest issue is people with car alarms have the sensitivity so low anything triggers them. I used to live in a condo, owned a Fatboy and when I fired up the bike and rode up the underground parkade 6-10 cars alarms would go off.

You meant sensitivity so _high_?

I think this is a case like high/low granularity or bi/semi- annual where either directions are sometimes used mean either meanings.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#74

Post by 01100011 »

inetknght wrote: post #62
dangerboysteve wrote: post #55

In large cities people ignore car alarms and are more and likely going to attract a brick through the window from pissed of neighbors. The biggest issue is people with car alarms have the sensitivity so low anything triggers them. I used to live in a condo, owned a Fatboy and when I fired up the bike and rode up the underground parkade 6-10 cars alarms would go off.

Your loud-ass vehicle shouldn't be legal.

Seriously. I've been considering bricking a couple of the street racers in my neighborhood lately. One of the idiots likes to rev the engine to vent his frustration as he drives back and forth looking for parking.

The funny thing is, a lot of the loud cars aren't even that fast. My 2.4L SUV beats a lot of those fools sporting straight pipes.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#75

Post by thelean12 »

Anyone with a car alarm enabled in a city is just straight up rude and inconsiderate. I can't imagine the mindset involved for someone to put a device outside someone's bedroom window that will somewhat randomly start blasting loud sounds at all hours of the night.

I'd support legislation making it illegal. Why are car alarms exempt from noise ordinances?

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#76

Post by 01100011 »

josefresco wrote: post #2

I'd rather see a tracking system attached to several parts of the vehicle. This would allow law enforcement to track the vehicle, and/or the parts if the vehicle is broken down and sold. In the United States we have "LoJack" but it's not a standard feature rather a dealer upsell.

I don't know if that would help. There are enough independent auto repair shops out there who don't care and would provide a market for stolen parts.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#77

Post by lotsofpulp »

reaperducer wrote: post #56
josefresco wrote: post #2

I'd rather see a tracking system attached to several parts of the vehicle. This would allow law enforcement to track the vehicle, and/or the parts if the vehicle is broken down and sold. In the United States we have "LoJack" but it's not a standard feature rather a dealer upsell.

I'd rather see a tracking system attached to several parts of the vehicle. I'd rather not give law enforcement or anyone else the ability to "track" me on a whim. If it's stolen, I'll take the hit on my deductible and also keep my privacy. If it becomes ubiquitous, is only a matter of time before it becomes mandatory. Or, the car maker sells your data and pretends that doing so helps offset the cost of making the car…

> I'd rather not give law enforcement or anyone else the ability to "track" me on a whim

I assume license plate readers make that moot, especially in areas with toll roads.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#78

Post by dharmab »

andai wrote: post #47
harperlee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in Spain* it does not work like that, there are very stringent limitations on what you can record on the street, e.g. through dashcams or tesla sentinel mode: https://www.aepd.es/sites/default/files/2019-09/informe-juri... For example, you can't use dashcam recordings of an accident in trial. * And I don't want to spend a bunch of time reading law but quite sure this is very tied in with GDPR, so I'd say tha…

> you can't use dashcam recordings of an accident in trial. Doesn't this entirely defeat the purpose of having a dashcam?

No, because an insurance claim is usually not a trial.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#79

Post by overscore »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #71
overscore wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This implies that Tesla can view the vicinity and location of your car at any time. Is that true? That would completely destroy any desire to own one.

This is one example of when it’s useful: https://www.reddit.com/r/SALEM/comments/l0nohv/mischievous_a...

I don't think the security benefits - while considerable - would be enough to allow a car manufacturer to surveil everywhere I go.

Re: Why do they still make car alarms? (2015)

#80

Post by chc »

buro9 wrote: post #65

> This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io Is Popular Mechanics just a SEO site?! That was in a hidden piece of HTML at the end of the article:

Based on that note's placement in the page, "this content" appears to refer to the newsletter signup form.
Post reply on HN