Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

[joecct]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

MountieBoyOz retweeted this

https://twitter.com/Stephen_Bailey1/...45608481083392

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

Well who didn't see that one coming a mile away... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-0...fa-10-miles-aw

[St. Clown]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

Well who didn't see that one coming a mile away... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-0...fa-10-miles-aw

I read about that breach from reputable news sources earlier today. It's amazing that these manufacturers are trying to incorporate all of these networking interfaces with their vehicles, but then fail to keep essential systems unrelated to the networked components on a separate, unconnected systems. Allow my phone to connect with the stereo system, but don't tie in the traction control, engine components or any other portion of the vehicle. Pre-define the networked systems and design around that. It should be simple and cost effective, when you think about the potential liabilities if someone's ever injured by hackers attacking an occupied vehicle - epsecially if it's already traveling down the highway.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

I read about that breach from reputable news sources earlier today. It's amazing that these manufacturers are trying to incorporate all of these networking interfaces with their vehicles, but then fail to keep essential systems unrelated to the networked components on a separate, unconnected systems. Allow my phone to connect with the stereo system, but don't tie in the traction control, engine components or any other portion of the vehicle. Pre-define the networked systems and design around that. It should be simple and cost effective, when you think about the potential liabilities if someone's ever injured by hackers attacking an occupied vehicle - epsecially if it's already traveling down the highway.

I wouldn't be surprised if that tie-in is related to a "self-drive" feature on the vehicle that has to connect those controls, and is presently being tested by Google and other companies. Even if the feature wasn't going to be present on all models (or makes, as I'm sure there's just one company at this point that supplies everyone with this sort of thing due to patents), maintaining several separate embedded controller versions can be expensive, so they'll consolidate it all into one to save on development and support costs. Regardless of your feelings on the link that I provided, the point still stands that it can be quite the issue, even if the vehicle were to be self-driving.

[St. Clown]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

I wouldn't be surprised if that tie-in is related to a "self-drive" feature on the vehicle that has to connect those controls, and is presently being tested by Google and other companies. Even if the feature wasn't going to be present on all models (or makes, as I'm sure there's just one company at this point that supplies everyone with this sort of thing due to patents), maintaining several separate embedded controller versions can be expensive, so they'll consolidate it all into one to save on development and support costs. Regardless of your feelings on the link that I provided, the point still stands that it can be quite the issue, even if the vehicle were to be self-driving.

Give a roomful of code delvelopers the same task to complete and you will receive a variety of different code to arrive at the same solution. Patent infringement isn't an issue here, and car companies not mass producing self-driving cars yet; Google and other developers that would supply that sort of tech are still years away from putting it onto the streets. Companies aren't going to add in extra equipment and foresake profits for the promise of a future add-on that's likely coming when many or most of today's cars are either in junk yards or the hands of the poor as used car purchases.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

Give a roomful of code delvelopers the same task to complete and you will receive a variety of different code to arrive at the same solution. Patent infringement isn't an issue here, and car companies not mass producing self-driving cars yet; Google and other developers that would supply that sort of tech are still years away from putting it onto the streets. Companies aren't going to add in extra equipment and foresake profits for the promise of a future add-on that's likely coming when many or most of today's cars are either in junk yards or the hands of the poor as used car purchases.

I'm well aware of how code development works, given I do it professionally. Self-driving isn't years away, as they're already testing it right now, and they've even reported some accidents ( http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/17/auto...ent/index.html ). The connection of the network to these car features isn't limited to self driving, either. Ford has reported having a variable speed governing system in some of their newer vehicles ( http://www.ford.co.uk/experience-for.../Speed-Limiter ). We've also seen a number of cut-off features in order to prevent drive-offs, and I wouldn't be shocked if governments have coerced car companies to put these in to account for less drive-offs in the enforcement of moving violations.

[The Rube]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

Well who didn't see that one coming a mile away... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-0...fa-10-miles-aw

What I love are all the "distracted driving" campaigns, yet a vehicle's interface gets more and more complicated each year. One reason I love my '99 Wrangler. The only "modern" thing it has is a cd player. No power windows, locks, steering wheel buttons, dashboard screen, etc.

KISS: Keep it simple, stupid.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

The power-everything and steering wheel controls are quite useful. It's the navigation systems, backup cameras, etc. that annoy me.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

I read about that breach from reputable news sources earlier today. It's amazing that these manufacturers are trying to incorporate all of these networking interfaces with their vehicles, but then fail to keep essential systems unrelated to the networked components on a separate, unconnected systems. Allow my phone to connect with the stereo system, but don't tie in the traction control, engine components or any other portion of the vehicle. Pre-define the networked systems and design around that. It should be simple and cost effective, when you think about the potential liabilities if someone's ever injured by hackers attacking an occupied vehicle - epsecially if it's already traveling down the highway.

This seems so obvious that it's painful to watch unfold. Just unbelievable they would tie them together.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

What I love are all the "distracted driving" campaigns, yet a vehicle's interface gets more and more complicated each year. One reason I love my '99 Wrangler. The only "modern" thing it has is a cd player. No power windows, locks, steering wheel buttons, dashboard screen, etc.

KISS: Keep it simple, stupid.

Yeah, no ****!

I like the fact that I have steering wheel controls so I don't have to take the hands off the wheel, but this move away from buttons on the dash console and towards expensive and complicated touch screen controls is a bad, bad trend.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Nice Planet IX: Oh that's just GREAT...

The power-everything and steering wheel controls are quite useful. It's the navigation systems, backup cameras, etc. that annoy me.

No kidding. Not to mention, I am a firm believer that GPS devices have made the average driver dumber. We have a 10'9 bridge along one of our state roads in this area. Do you know how many times some idiot trucker or bus driver is staring at his GPS and slamming into that bridge, despite the numerous signage stating a clear alternate route?