Chinese Spying Devices Installed On Hong Kong Cars

It's China... by Stormwatch · 2011-06-13 18:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

Nothing they do surprises me anymore.

--
Circumcision is child abuse.

Re:It's China... by countertrolling · 2011-06-13 18:19 · Score: 2

Yeah really, pretty clumsy effort.. In the 'west' we do it right, we build the device into the car.. inside your rear view mirror is a hidden camera and mic

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Re:It's China... by Mistlefoot · 2011-06-13 18:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

Isn't this legal for the government to do in the US as well? Not much they do surprises me either though....
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:53 · Score: 0

The key difference between China and the US is that in the US they have to explain to the people why it is good for them, but in China they use censorship. You can make almost anything sound like it is good for the people's best interest, so there isn't much difference right now.

I think the key game changer in both countries is information. The hope is that a more intelligent voter in the US *might* not just elect liars. And in China's case, more information *might* be able to see through the censorship.

Clearly the US has a superior government, because a democracy is always preferred to a dictatorship for the average citizen. A democracy needs to be controlled by the citizens though, and not the citizens controlled by the government's propaganda.

Where it might get real tricky is soon the US will probably continue to fiddle with the Internet and shut down more websites(for whatever reason they want to give you) and lets hope they don't trample the first amendment too much in the process. It is easy to imagine a well designed political website becoming big that compares a candidate's campaign promise with his voting record that might... just might make voters more educated. I mean imagine if it gave you information on incumbents and campaign promises of new candidates, you could just vote for the guy based on their record or promises of things you want. But imagine if this website got shutdown as the US trampled the first amendment.

The future is at war. Will China become more like the US or will the US become more like China?
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:57 · Score: 0

Probably is, I remember reading about warrantless gps trackers in cars on slashdot before.
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 19:17 · Score: 0

Sure, not much the Chinese government does along the lines of monitoring is surprising.
On the other hand, the only source I have seen cited for this is a newspaper that is primarily a Falun Gong propaganda organ. I would not take this at all seriously until/unless more solid data appears.
Re:It's China... by tick-tock-atona · 2011-06-13 19:20 · Score: 1

A democracy needs to be controlled by the citizens though, and not the citizens controlled by the government's propaganda.
The US government is controlled by the citizens. Or were you referring to the proles?

The proles constitute 85% of the population. They receive little education, work at jobs in which tough physical labour is the norm, live in poverty, and usually die by the age of sixty.

...proles are not expected to understand that they are being exploited by the Party as a source of cheap labour and are unable or unwilling to organize resistance. Their functions are simple: work and breed. They care little about anything but home and family, neighbour quarrels, films and football, beer and lottery tickets. They are not required to express support for the Party, except for a mild form of patriotism. The Party creates meaningless songs, novels, even pornography for the proles. Proles do not wear a uniform, can use cosmetics and have a relatively free internal market economy. Proles also have free sex lives, uninterrupted by the Party, and divorce is permitted. Despite the personal freedoms enjoyed by the Proles, the Thought Police moves among them, spreading false rumours and marking down and eliminating any individuals deemed capable of causing trouble.
Re:It's China... by AHuxley · 2011-06-13 19:28 · Score: 1

In the US they use your phone or in nav system.
http://www.zdnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/150467
With the new GPS rules and very friendly telcos, expect ever more data to be available to the FBI with less oversight.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/13fbi.html ie. expect to be of interest after 'five meetings of a group" and enjoy terms like "preliminary investigation", “proactively” ect.
Or just fix a device to your car as a nice and legal "tracking beacon" that lasts for months.
China did good with the use of the case via the resonant cavity idea and having lots of legal electronics that phone home by default.
No need to hope the suspects bring their own always on Apple/Google/MS toys.
Catching 100% was just silly. Learn from the US gun walking efforts http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20040189-503544.html - track that shipment.
Then use passive 'bad luck" at the end or COINTELPRO to weaken the group as they hunt for an informer.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 20:01 · Score: 0

Isn't this legal for the government to do in the US as well? Not much they do surprises me either though....
Since Obama has sold the US to China, they can do whatever they want to US citizens. Expect them to start to embedding these into your butt at your next mandatory ObamaCare inspection.
Re:It's China... by Nethead · 2011-06-13 21:27 · Score: 0

If Obama sold the US to China, it was to pay off Bush and Cheney's credit card.
(Crap, that is so blatantly partisan.)
Fuck, they are all part of the military industrial complex supported by funds of the Zion bankers that failed (but were saved) and controlled by the Illuminated Ones so that a One World Government would arise (even though a two world government would still allow them to play the "divide the masses" game) and grant a socialist hegemony upon all the world so that citizens/slaves (Except for the Scientology Movie Stars, which are blessed by superpowers and riches because they have good genes and can parrot lines.) would gladly live in quiet (but, let us pretend, happy) desperation while still keeping a decent modicum of basic infrastructure maintained.
I mean, what the fuck is being rich for unless there are poor to piss on.

--
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 23:04 · Score: 2, Informative

You need to follow the source!
The original is from Apple Daily, the second highest circulation (300,000 in a city of 7 million) newspaper in Hong Kong. It is not particularly pro-Falun Gong. It has strongly pro-democracy (HK doesn't have much of that), pro-free market, pro working class, with the usual Hong Kong mix of high minded analysis, original poetry and literature, lurid celebrity coverage, and serialized softcore porn!
The original article seems well researched. The guy who took it apart is an associate professor in electronic engineering in a local university (City University of Hong Kong). He said that there is a sensitive microphone (which seems unnecessary for its stated function) and a transmitter powerful enough to monitor major urban areas in Hong Kong from across the border.
They went for a second opinion from a PI who said that the transmission range would be a lot lower that the estimated 20 km in built up areas. However, there is no particular reason why China would confine its monitoring to the Chinese mainland outside of Hong Kong. Even apart from the fact that they have taken over the UK/US built monitoring facilities in Hong Kong covering the entire South China sea, Hong Kong is full of Chinese owned companies who could be directed to operate monitoring stations in what is, after all, sovereign Chinese territory.
The main cause for alarm in the original article is whether this might compromise commercial secrets in negotiations between private Hong Kong businessmen, and Chinese companies with semi-official connection.
Re:It's China... by CrimsonAvenger · 2011-06-14 00:43 · Score: 1, Troll

If Obama sold the US to China, it was to pay off Bush and Cheney's credit card.
You are perhaps unaware then that since Obama became President we have run up more debut in three years than Bush managed in eight?

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Re:It's China... by currently_awake · 2011-06-14 01:21 · Score: 1

In the USA they put transponders in your tires, and sensors in the roads to track you. You must be new here if you've not heard about that (conspiracy theory).
Re:It's China... by Luckyo · 2011-06-14 01:26 · Score: 1

When you get a financial disaster as it's happening, you're going to have to hang on and let it happen to the end before you can start fixing it.
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 05:19 · Score: 0

Actually, every country does this with cell phones. While I was in the military, stationed in Germany, the Germans were using cell phones to eavesdrop on US soldiers, hoping to gain information. If you are not the first to learn about what your friends and enemies are doing...you're the idiot that failed to do your job. I don't begrudge them for trying; they are performing the same espionage efforts all countries should be doing. Would you rather that we (the US) are oblivious and don't try to protect our citizens? Trust me, they don't care to listen about what you ate last night, what movie you saw, or even who gagged you with that rubber ball last night and showed you a good time... We want to know if you are a threat to other people. We do protect our citizens, just like most countries. I would never claim that all countries have the best intrest of all people, but I can honestly say that we (the US) and many of our allies do try.
Re:It's China... by spauldo · 2011-06-14 12:47 · Score: 1

You are perhaps unaware then that since Obama became President we have run up more debut in three years than Bush managed in eight?
You are perhaps unaware that the debt was borrowed for the stimulus packages which were trying to fix the recession that started during the Bush years? It also paid for the two wars and the unfunded Medicare part D, both straight from Bush's desk.
And before you complain about Obama's evil stimulus package, remember Bush passed one himself before he left office. Even the Republicans know you need stimulus to fix the economy - compare Hoover's policies to FDR's for an example of why. Oh, wait, they don't want you to remember that they passed a stimulus package, because they're so busy condemning Obama for passing them, because it unbalanced the budget further. Oh, and don't mention that Bush had a balanced budget handed to him in 2001.
You know what the problem is? Congress under Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and ol' W took the brakes off the economy, and it made a lot of people rich, and boosted the U.S. economy. The problem is that we went right off a cliff, and there were no brakes anymore. The banks will always act in their short term interest, which is why we have regulation. Taking the regulation away is like smoking crack - real nice high for a bit, then a horrible crash.
Obama's far from perfect, but you can't blame him for the recession, and he's done what he's done in regards to the stimulus and unemployment packages because he hasn't had much choice. It always takes time to recover from recession, and unemployment is always one of the last things to recover. And every time it happens, politicians play the blame game, and schmucks like you fall for it.

--
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Re:It's China... by Nethead · 2011-06-14 13:53 · Score: 1

You missed that joke by a mile. Where the hell is my clue stick?

--
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Re:It's China... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 22:13 · Score: 0

It's no different that the US. They can put GPS transponders on your car without a warrant. Really not so different. Only the illusion of freedom in one case.

How do you not see such a device... by lscotte · 2011-06-13 18:06 · Score: 1, Informative

When, according to the article, it "is taped onto the vehicle’s front window".

--
This post is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Re:How do you not see such a device... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:12 · Score: 4, Informative

How does seeing help....
When it is disguised as a border pass transponder, which you'd pretty much expect to have "taped onto the vehicle’s front window"?
Re:How do you not see such a device... by countertrolling · 2011-06-13 18:13 · Score: 1

The government tells you not to see, so you don't. Nothing unusual about it..

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Dahamma · 2011-06-13 18:15 · Score: 2

So is my Fastrack. Maybe I'm naive, but I never seriously considered it was being used to spy on me... (though now that I think of it, it's probably more likely than not ;)
Re:How do you not see such a device... by rubycodez · 2011-06-13 18:19 · Score: 2

do you live in a state with electronic tolling? how do you not see the the device you are required to have fastened to your windshield if you wish to use automatic toll paying? this is similar thing, a "border card" required for vehicles dual licensed in mainland / hong kong
Re:How do you not see such a device... by wvmarle · 2011-06-13 19:08 · Score: 1

You're from Hong Kong?
Me too but not a driver, let alone cross-border. I had never heard of these devices.
Could you share with us the daily use of these devices? That is, the stated purpose?
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 19:46 · Score: 1

The government tells you not to see, so you don't. Nothing unusual about it..
What's fnord in Mandarin?
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Dahamma · 2011-06-13 20:16 · Score: 1

FasTrack is an automated toll collection system used in the California Bay Area. Other US states have similar devices for tollways, etc. It basically just charges an account via RFID so you don't have to stop to pay tolls when driving.
My point was that putting a device on your windshield doesn't necessarily mean you are being spied on... but I guess if the Chinese govt did it, I might be a bit more more suspicious...
Re:How do you not see such a device... by wvmarle · 2011-06-13 20:36 · Score: 2

The thing with those devices is that of course they automatically log when-ever you pass a toll gate. So there is a record of the movements of that device (and in effect an individual vehicle). I wouldn't be surprised if law enforcement uses it to track smugglers (they typically cross the border multiple times a day).
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 22:57 · Score: 0

Tracking a toll tag is an inherent requirement of its use as a toll tag. Otherwise they wouldn't know how to bill you, would they?
On the other hand, voice surveillance is not in any way related to a sensible mode of operation for a toll tag. So this really isn't very comparable.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-13 23:48 · Score: 2

You don't have to track prepaid tags that simply transmit tokens until they run out of tokens -- you just keep track which tokens you have heard and only accept new ones. Tokens then may be randomly loaded when payment is made, without any need for association with any particular person or vehicle.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Combatso · 2011-06-14 01:01 · Score: 1

our ETR here in ontario. (eletronic toll route) snaps a photo of the license plate, and bills you.. If you want to track vehicles crossing the border, you dont need any electronics in the car.. you just need a database of tag #'s. I know when I cross the border they already know how long I was out of the country,.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by kevinNCSU · 2011-06-14 01:35 · Score: 1

That puts way too much trust in the client. Both the person's intentions, and the machine's durability. There's a reason why your debit card doesn't just have money tokens literally on the card.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-14 01:44 · Score: 1

How so? The system only recognizes tokens that it issued and signed (so client can't produce its own tokens), and the token can be used only once (so copying tokens does not allow multiple toll passes).

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by abhisri · 2011-06-14 02:01 · Score: 1

Perhaps we should start "seeing" all those made-in-China electronics as well. All that stuff inside your PC, those webcams, those sound cards... all those things that can connect to the internet one way or another, just waiting for that "switch-on" signal... oh wait. Cannot "see" them :p
Okay I am making this up. But considering that China is actually conducting cyber-warefare against USA, setting itself as the new rival/enemy, what is the guarantee it cannot happen/hasn't happened?
Re:How do you not see such a device... by kevinNCSU · 2011-06-14 02:31 · Score: 1

No matter how it's protected it's a new attack vector, and one that if compromised, means you can't trust any money in the system. One break and all that money is suspect...JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, anytime I write or click anything Slashdot's awesome scripting pushes me up to the top of the page so I cant see whatwtf I'm typing anymore. This is too frusterating to deal with, I give up.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-14 05:05 · Score: 1

The whole point is, there is nothing to compromise. At worst, someone can steal someone else's tokens. If system is run by complete and total morons (such as yourself or Sony admins), the key may be compromised, so some asshole's fake tokens will work until the end of the month when the key will be changed.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:How do you not see such a device... by Dahamma · 2011-06-14 05:25 · Score: 1

But that's a totally reasonable usage - even in the Chinese case, it would be fine if they just tracked when you entered/left the mainland from HK.
The point to the spying is that it also tracked and eavesdropped on you everywhere ELSE you went. I'd be a bit surprised if Fastrack, etc did that :)

On the consequences of tampering with those device by sethstorm · 2011-06-13 18:08 · Score: 1

In China, I'd think that you'd be getting off very lightly if you were charged with tampering those.

--
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.

Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Opportunist · 2011-06-13 18:11 · Score: 1

We took Japan as the big role model for society when it was still market leader 'til their bubble burst, now China is the new role model. Soon we'll see something similar here, of course only to find your car easier if it gets stolen or something like that. And how conveniently easy it is to implement, stick the bug into the license plate! You have to have one to operate your vehicle, it's government issued and it's illegal to tamper with it already. Beauty!

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by tmach · 2011-06-13 18:31 · Score: 5, Informative

Actually, the current suggestion is to put a device on your car to track the mileage so they can tax you based on how much you drive.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/18/news/economy/gas_tax_drivers/?section=money_latest
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by mrchaotica · 2011-06-13 19:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

...so they can tax you based on how much you drive.
Which is blatant BS (on their part, not yours), since if they only cared how much you drive (rather than where and when), then all they'd have to do is check the fucking odometer!

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by master5o1 · 2011-06-13 19:22 · Score: 2

Or tax at the fuel stating.

--
signature is pants
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 19:28 · Score: 1

We took Japan as the big role model for society when it was still market leader 'til their bubble burst, now China is the new role model. Soon we'll see something similar here, of course only to find your car easier if it gets stolen or something like that. And how conveniently easy it is to implement, stick the bug into the license plate! You have to have one to operate your vehicle, it's government issued and it's illegal to tamper with it already. Beauty!
Until some arsehole steals your license plates. Oh, wait....
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by the+grace+of+R'hllor · 2011-06-13 19:52 · Score: 1

I'd agree with that, certainly a few years ago. But taxing fuel more won't get you very far as a government when cars go electric.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by master5o1 · 2011-06-13 19:56 · Score: 2

Then get the stonecutters to put a stop to that technology.

--
signature is pants
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by simmonsjeffreya · 2011-06-13 19:56 · Score: 0

Don't know how I never heard of this. They tax the car purchase, require you to pay to register it, pay for plates, and pay taxes on gas. Why the hell should I then be double taxed, I already paid for the tax on the car AND the gas.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Hazel+Bergeron · 2011-06-13 20:46 · Score: 1

Why is the movement of money taxed repeatedly in a way which puts the greatest pressure on the poorest? Why does the majority of government money or money in areas of natural monopoly go back to private contractors and licencees, when government could do most of the work in-house?
Because rich, powerful people everywhere - whatever label they're wearing - want your money and don't want any more competitors. This means siphoning off from your wallet at every stage so no campaign or party donor, no ex school buddy and no family member is left behind.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by teh+kurisu · 2011-06-13 21:05 · Score: 2

That depends on whether they want to use variable road pricing, which was an idea mooted in the UK a few years back. The idea being that you get charged more for driving on roads that are more congested. Or something like that.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 21:18 · Score: 0

that, and there is so many of them poors.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Hazel+Bergeron · 2011-06-13 22:49 · Score: 1

to exploit.
The problem is not too much government or too much corporation. It's too much human.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by TaoPhoenix · 2011-06-13 23:19 · Score: 2

Hey gamers, help me out with your combo skills!
When .gov quits pretending to actually be for citizens, they'll just pull up the covers with the nice Corps they're in bed with. Let's pair the last two semi-consecutive stories in a row.
"Location aware apps from Adobe. Spying from Government."
Why are we now falling for the spin? Are we that desperate for Minority Report style ads?

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by AlecC · 2011-06-13 23:39 · Score: 1

They could make variable rate road charging revenue neutral. Simply take off fuel taxes the total take from the road-use charge. It doesn't have to be purely incremental. In fact, if I were to bring it in, I would require that it were revenue neutral for the first, say, two years to allow its effects to be seen. Then return it to the general pool of taxes that government can vary according to need.

--
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by tehcyder · 2011-06-14 00:38 · Score: 1

...so they can tax you based on how much you drive.
Which is blatant BS (on their part, not yours), since if they only cared how much you drive (rather than where and when), then all they'd have to do is check the fucking odometer!
Yes, because it would be much more efficient for the government to pay people to go around writing down people's mileages from their odometers, after first identifying the owner, getting them to open up the car, writing each one down and collating them each day...

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by tehcyder · 2011-06-14 00:41 · Score: 1

Don't know how I never heard of this. They tax the car purchase, require you to pay to register it, pay for plates, and pay taxes on gas. Why the hell should I then be double taxed, I already paid for the tax on the car AND the gas.
No, I think the idea is that you pay tax on mileage instead of directly on gas: as someone has noted above, with electric cars you can't really tax the fuel at source.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:59 · Score: 0

Then get the stonecutters to put a stop to that technology.
Well, they're busy keeping the Martians under wraps. I mean, they can't do everything!
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by TheLink · 2011-06-14 01:05 · Score: 1

IMO the problem is not quantity. It's quality.
--
- Too many replies beneath your current threshold
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by zach_the_lizard · 2011-06-14 01:06 · Score: 1

GPS tracking would also be an efficient source of violating our privacy. I expect also for the devices to track speed and speed limits, eventually allowing them to ticket you automatically (which would suck massively).

--
SSC
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by zach_the_lizard · 2011-06-14 01:13 · Score: 1

I doubt it would be instead of gas taxes but in addition to them. Legislatures have to repeal these taxes, and I have a feeling those states hungry for revenue (e.g California) wouldn't pass up on such a wonderful opportunity for double taxation.

--
SSC
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by jesseck · 2011-06-14 01:15 · Score: 1

That's where they think they can get us- many people don't realize that the price of gasoline already includes taxes. Of course, they claim it's because some of us (like me) drive a 12 MPG SUV, and others a 40 MPG compact, making the fuel taxes unfair. Personally, though, I don't care- I bought the SUV for a reason.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by operagost · 2011-06-14 02:12 · Score: 2

In most states in the US, there is a safety inspection once a year when the odometer reading can be taken with absolutely no inconvenience to the owner.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by FatdogHaiku · 2011-06-14 02:20 · Score: 1

Bruce Willis agrees with you...

--
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by TWX · 2011-06-14 02:28 · Score: 1

Every time an inspection at a government facility is conducted for emissions or safety (as many places require) the odometer reading is noted. When a vehicle is registered the odometer reading is noted.
It wouldn't be all that hard to start conducting equipment or emissions inspections in the few places that currently lack them, and while doing so, check the odometer.
Mind you, I don't think it's right, and I'm much more in favor of fuel taxes, but it's certainly not hard to do it.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by kilfarsnar · 2011-06-14 02:49 · Score: 2

I hope you're not serious. Your car must be inspected once a year. Make odometer reading part of the inspection process.

--
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by datapharmer · 2011-06-14 02:58 · Score: 1

yep, and if it is that they want to allot it based on particular road usage just get anonymous cellular tower use data and allot it proportionally. The privacy issue is somewhat moot now though, as they can already track you without something specifically installed in your car between cellular gps and high speed cameras (which they are already using instead of toll booths in south florida: http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/02/20/cash-less-tolls-have-begun-on-the-florida-turnpike/

--
Get a web developer
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Opportunist · 2011-06-14 03:55 · Score: 1

You mean, like, people would switch from cars that drive on fossil fuel to electric cars to evade the tax on gas?
No, we can't let that happen!

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by mrchaotica · 2011-06-14 03:57 · Score: 2

If variable road pricing is incompatible with the Bill of Rights, well then they don't get to do the fucking variable road pricing!

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Opportunist · 2011-06-14 03:58 · Score: 1

I don't know about your country, but in mine you have to take your car for inspection every year. Think it would be too much a hassle for the mechanic to check the odometer while he's at it, and cash in the tax as well? The whole deal could be kept in a database where the garage has to enter your current amount, get a statement what to cash in from you and have to transfer it with the rest of the tax they have to pay anyway, being a business.
It would actually be more efficient than inventing a new system that requires a lot of checkpoints to build and people to staff it.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by mrchaotica · 2011-06-14 04:03 · Score: 1

Holy strawman argument, Batman!
Don't you realize that all they'd really need to do is look at the odometer once a year when you renew the registration? Hell, if the jurisdiction requires emissions testing or an inspection, then the info is already there on the report!

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Nadaka · 2011-06-14 04:09 · Score: 1

Road wear is relative to the weight of the vehicle, so your 12 MPG SUV causes more damage per mile than the 40 MPG compact. That makes the gas taxes used for road maintenance more fair (at least in that respect).
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Nadaka · 2011-06-14 04:10 · Score: 1

If they want to do mileage based taxation, just do an odometer check when you get your tag renewed.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 05:18 · Score: 1

Road wear scales by axle weight... to the fourth power.
The 12 MPG SUV at 1.5 times the weight of the of the 40 MPG compact is doing a little over 5x the road damage per mile, but paying only 3.3x the tax.
(That's being very generous on weight. If the SUV weighs twice as much as the compact, it's doing 16x the road damage).
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by JBMcB · 2011-06-14 05:20 · Score: 1

Yes, because it would be much more efficient for the government to pay people to go around writing down people's mileages from their odometers, after first identifying the owner, getting them to open up the car, writing each one down and collating them each day...
Or how about a transmitter that ONLY TRANSMITTED YOUR ODOMETER READING, instead of every place you've driven?
Or, if you want to do variable road pricing, have it figure out how much you owe based on where you've driven and just transmit that?

--
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by slapout · 2011-06-14 05:47 · Score: 1

They can just do what they already do -- tax electricity.

--
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by slapout · 2011-06-14 05:48 · Score: 1

But if you need to haul a lot of people/things an SUV is just one vehicle on the road whereas you would need more than one of the compact cars.

--
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 08:24 · Score: 0

We don't have yearly car inspections in my state, and I suspect a lot of other states are similar.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by spauldo · 2011-06-14 12:10 · Score: 1

Yeah, but if you crossed state lines, then your state would be collecting tax for miles driven in another state.
You might think that states wouldn't care about that sort of thing, thinking that it would even out, but IFTA does just that for commercial vehicles - my company has to keep track of where I drive and submit that paperwork to Oklahoma along with a nice fat check, and Oklahoma pays the other states what is owed them.
Before IFTA, you had to buy fuel permits from every state you operated in, keep track of all your mileage, and pay tax to each state (or get a refund from states where you bought more fuel than you used). That just wouldn't work for non-commercial vehicles, but hey, if they're using a tracking device to monitor everywhere you car goes, that might be the new reality.

--
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by mrchaotica · 2011-06-14 12:44 · Score: 1

You might think that states wouldn't care about that sort of thing
On the contrary, I know full well that states (as well as municipalities) would be up in arms about it. My response to those concerns?
"Tough shit; the People's Rights come first!"
Besides, my solution would be to measure aggregate road usage and dole out the funds to each jurisdiction accordingly. They don't need to know who is driving on each chunk of road; they only need to know how many.

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by tragedy · 2011-06-14 14:57 · Score: 1

Of course, neither of those vehicles you mention are doing any damage at all relative to a truck. The fact is that 99% of road damage caused by vehicles is caused by trucks.
Re:Hey, we're learning from the market leaders! by wwphx · 2011-06-14 18:09 · Score: 1

It depends on the state and sometimes the age of the vehicle. Arizona has emissions inspections, during which your mileage is logged. I then moved to New Mexico which only has emission testing in Albuquerque and Santa Fe. Arizona also exempts new cars for a few years.
Personally, I wish NM would test state-wide. It would increase employment and add local economic stimulus if local mechanics were certified to conduct tests. I see too many of what I call "coal burners" pumping out horrible emissions and they have no incentive, carrot or stick, to get their car fixed. No, most of NM doesn't have air pollution problems, but I don't think that should be carte blanche to pollute indiscriminately.

--
When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.

The article is kind of pathetic by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · 2011-06-13 18:24 · Score: 5, Interesting

Those who RTFA can read this:

Apple Daily says they took the device to a university professor and a private investigator, both of whom attested to the espionage potential of the units.

or this:

An Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at City University of Hong Kong, Zheng Liming, took apart one of the devices and confirmed that it can listen in on conversations

and see a photo in which a hole in the plastic shell is marked "cavity for receiving sound" (a microphone would have been more convincing), two quartz crystals (the likes of which can be found in almost every modern electronic devices) marked "generate carrier frequency for radio transmission" and a nondescript chip that "turns voice signals into digital information".

You know what? I think I'll take a photo of my cellphone's innards, photoshop conveniently spy-sounding labels into the photo, bring my cellphone to a university professor who will testify that my device has a microphone, a crystal, an antenna and a processor that definitely has the potential to turn it into spying device then write an article about it.

Some journalism...

--
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash

Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:34 · Score: 0

Some journalism...
It might be helpful to add that, while the factual integrity of the article's probably better than a mainland China paper under tight control of the government, the Epoch Time is one of the most consistently anti-PRC media outlets. As a result, just as we do for Fox News or MSNBC, take everything with at least a grain of salt.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by mustPushCart · 2011-06-13 19:14 · Score: 1

Um, except that it wasn't your cellphone. It was a device that is installed for 'inspection and "quarantine"' reasons (secondary quotes because quarantine doesn't make sense in almost any context) by a government agency and does not seem to have any business even being there let alone containing voice to digital and a radio transmission circuits.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by wvmarle · 2011-06-13 19:16 · Score: 2

It is taped to the windshield. It does not seem to have any (external) power supply. How could such a device be able to transmit a serious quantity of data, over a distance of 20 km, with mountains in between? Hong Kong may be small but it's hilly, with peaks of almost 1000m tall. From most parts of this 20km radius there is no line of sight to Shenzhen - all mountains in the way, except for the north-western part of Hong Kong which is mostly protected wetland. Such transmission if at all possible takes a significant amount of power, a battery that fit in there would run out in hours or less. On these points alone I'd call this story total nonsense.
They have been installed since 1997 - that means most are in place for some four years now. The only way to keep it working is if it's a passive device, using external radio sources as their power source, as is typical for devices used for automatic toll payment and similar purposes.
And by the way, Apple Daily is a tabloid.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by francium+de+neobie · 2011-06-13 19:58 · Score: 1

You need to watch and understand the video of the report to understand its severity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFsHhu7sJ0

The devices are supposed to be for identification purpose only - an RFID device can very well do that. So the fact that it needs a battery is already fishy - why use a more expensive device that needs more maintenance instead of cheap, readily available devices that need almost no maintenance?

The professor in question had actually disassembled the device in question, and it was the professor who pointed out the existence of microphone and voice ADC chip on the device - there's totally no need for such things for an identification tag that passes you through customs.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 20:01 · Score: 0

It's got batteries... On a motorized vehicle... That has registry plates indicating it would likely move between hong-kong and china...
I'm sorry if you can't figure out how this would work, but don't go around assuming it's impossible... Rather start with the assumption that you lack intelligence instead.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 20:26 · Score: 2

It is taped to the windshield. It does not seem to have any (external) power supply. How could such a device be able to transmit a serious quantity of data, over a distance of 20 km, with mountains in between? Hong Kong may be small but it's hilly, with peaks of almost 1000m tall. From most parts of this 20km radius there is no line of sight to Shenzhen - all mountains in the way, except for the north-western part of Hong Kong which is mostly protected wetland. Such transmission if at all possible takes a significant amount of power, a battery that fit in there would run out in hours or less. On these points alone I'd call this story total nonsense.
Last time I checked the Chinese had no problems setting up receivers in Hong Kong, well, less than before it became Chinese territory anyway! So I'll have to call nonsense to your nonsense.

They have been installed since 1997 - that means most are in place for some four years now. The only way to keep it working is if it's a passive device, using external radio sources as their power source, as is typical for devices used for automatic toll payment and similar purposes.
Please link to the source of your information? And why would a device the size of a mobile phone have to be passive? It's not like they haven't always been an obvious electronic device.
I was in Hong Kong three years ago and what you are saying was bullshit then. The licenses are good for ten years - but the displayed permits are updated every year. It's possible that these weren't installed in all cars, tricycles (yes), motorcycles, buses, and trucks. There's two main types of cars with a dual license - wealthy people - and not wealthy people. Most foreigners hire drivers - the drivers are not wealthy and the license allows up to three drivers (they tend to run 24/7 back and forth across the border) - they're also the type of vehicles (trucks also) used for smuggling and both instances would be attractive spying targets. As stated earlier I reckon they'd hear the incriminating stuff as the vehicle approaches the checkpoint.
A cavity microphone would make sense for these devices as it would allow cheap noise cancelling - similar setup to mobile phones.
In addition to the dual license a two-way permit is required for every occupant - and they only last from a week to a year (depending on circumstance) - so I wouldn't be surprised if the vehicle licences have similar terms. Oh, and the one time we were asked to leave the vehicle to get our papers checked in the office - they took the permit with us. I'm wondering now if they might of replaced the battery at the same time.
Next time you're in the Guangdong Public Service Bureau applying for your 2-way pass (it's where the vehicle passes come from too) maybe fire up your scanner.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by wvmarle · 2011-06-13 20:56 · Score: 2

Active broadcasting a signal takes a lot of power. A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.
As I said, and what you handily ignored: no visible power source on any of the photos. An external power source is a necessity for this kind of broadcast if it has to last a whole year - broadcasting over any significant distance takes a lot of power. The devices are small, batteries if any are in place necessarily are small too.
Next is the practical problem of receiving the individual signals. You would likely need a different frequency for each one, or active frequency scanning by the device to find a free channel, as otherwise they start interfering with each other. There are a few thousand out there. And how come no-one has ever detected such a signal, if it exists, over the last four years? There are plenty of radio amateurs in this world, scanning all bandwidths allocated or not, to see if there are any interesting signals to be heard.
And about receivers on this side of the border: it's possible. However that's not the claim made in the article, which claims that the receiver is in Shenzhen and that they can listen over a 20-km range into Hong Kong. That's the fact I'm disputing here. I'd be very interested how ANYONE could have a reliable direct radio communication with Shenzhen from the roads in Sha Tin, or worse: Tsuen Wan. The latter has Tai Mo Shan in the way.
Mind you I'm not saying it can not be done, at all. I'm just saying that it absolutely can not be done (for several independent reasons) the way it's presented in the article.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by makomk · 2011-06-13 21:09 · Score: 1

And I didn't see a battery on the photos.
That'll be the three cylinders covered in blue plastic taking up most of the space within the casing. At a guess, anyway.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 22:41 · Score: 4, Informative

Active broadcasting a signal takes a lot of power. A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.
What have you been smoking? There is only one photo in TFA linked article. Look again - see the blue shrink wrapped batteries? Still no? How about now?
The device will not fit in your shirt pocket - it's a little larger than an iPhone (I and other posters have seen these devices). As for your proof - again, what the fuck have you been smoking? A phone and this device have little in common when it comes to power consumption (see if you can work out why). Hint - I can buy devices on the open market that will transmit an audio signal for more 12 months - and they will fit in my pocket. No nuclear power pack involved. Don't go basing you idea of surveillance technology on what the FBI leaves attached to the bottom of Arab students cars - you can bet the Chinese have access to far more sophisticated devices than I can buy.
The rest of your screed is pure castles in the air - try getting off the sofa and visiting the world. China == Hong Kong - lip-service is the only difference between one side of the border and the other. The speculated range of the devices is just that. Speculated. As for signal interception - really, are you fucking serious? Do you hear mobile telephone calls on your transistor? (and that's a GHz crystal in the photo you can't see - just under the battery pack that doesn't exist).
Consider it - every insightful argument you've come up with is wrong - you can't see the obvious, and you can't even count up to two properly. And no, advertisements don't count as pictures. But hey - don't let your ignorance to stop from being an expert in Chinese spying devices, it never stopped you from making laughably clueless statements about the nature of emails or programming.
A dollar gets me ten you've got some weasely denial.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by aeoo · 2011-06-13 23:04 · Score: 1

You know what? I think I'll take a photo of my cellphone's innards, photoshop conveniently spy-sounding labels into the photo, bring my cellphone to a university professor who will testify that my device has a microphone, a crystal, an antenna and a processor that definitely has the potential to turn it into spying device then write an article about it.
Except everything you are saying here is not nearly as absurd and ridiculous as you hope it would be.
The USA is engaged in warrantless spying to such an extent, that it's not even something targeted, but rather, it's a data mining operation of the highest order. And yes, cell phone data is mined, you can be sure of it. So yes, your cell phone is in all likelihood spying on you as we speak. It's spying on you for the benefit of the government and also for the benefit of the corporations.
Read this and think again about your cell phone:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by wvmarle · 2011-06-13 23:19 · Score: 1

Please put of your tinfoil hat and stop ignoring what I'm actually writing.
First of all, I am a Hong Kong permanent resident. And still live there.
Secondly: what is really in that blue shrink wrap? May be batteries indeed. I can't see: it's shrink wrapped.
Now let's look at the numbers that I "can not add up" and you don't even bother to look at. So let's say that blue thing is a battery. My half-year old phone can pack 5.6 Wh in it's battery, it looks like my battery is roughly half the size of that blue package. Let's say this device has twice that power: 10.6 Wh. It's automatically transmitting all conversations for a year, without running out of battery. Say it has to handle 2 hours of conversation a day, that makes 730 hours of active broadcasting a year. The battery has to handle that. This allows for 14.5 mW of allowed power consumption when actively broadcasting - and nothing left for anything else (like standby, or audio encoding). And people that use their vehicle more than two hours a day (e.g. smugglers) have even less power to broadcast their conversations. I don't know much about broadcasting, but I do know that on 14.5 mW you're no way going to get far. Even if you again double the battery size, it's not going to work well. Broadcast simply needs a certain amount of power, and that's a lot of power when you're talking about small battery powered stuff, no matter how you look at it. Audio signals are nothing compared to radio signals when it comes to power needs.
In comparison, mobile phones - also using the GHz range - use 500-1000 mW of transmit power. WiFi is in the same power range - and doing just a couple hundred meters or so, with ideal line of sight. So even if this is a battery and it is a transmitter, you may broadcast over meters. Which incidentally is just what you need for a toll pass to work.
Then who was talking about listening on transistor radios? Not me. I said scanners - you know those devices that can, amongst others, pick up emergency radio bands, aircraft radio, mobile phone signals, etc. Those receivers are available in basically any range you want.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Fzz · 2011-06-13 23:28 · Score: 1

If there are 20,000 of these devices, they wouldn't have the bandwidth for all of them to be transmitting simultaneously. But that would be a stupid design anyway - it's not how you'd build such a device.
What you'd do is include an RFID-style receiver. You'd interrogate this from some roadside equipment (such as you'd find at tollbooths or on the approach to customs, or anywhere interesting things happen). The receiver responds with its ID, and if they want to enable that particular transmitter, they'd send back the enabling code. It would only then switch on and transmit for some limited time period.
In this way they'd be able to manage spectrum effectively, have the batteries last for years, and capture all the interesting and incriminating snippets of information as a car approaches customs.
Technically, all this is quite feasible - in fact it's really very easy with off-the-shelf technology. Whether this is what they actually did I can only speculate, but it's what I'd have built if I was tasked to do this (I wasn't, I should add).
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by kyle5t · 2011-06-13 23:52 · Score: 1

Since both of you seem to be in Hong Kong, how about one of you get hold of one of these and post some better photos. Then we could put this to rest for good.
The photos are so bad it is hard to tell, but I'm leaning toward this story being true. Mainly because of that base-loaded whip antenna. The odd shaped PCB on the left seems to be the actual RFID component (with a battery assist). You can make out what looks like a PCB trace antenna toward the bottom (in sort of a G shape), and, if that's indeed what it is, you have to wonder why this device needs two antennas.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by wisty · 2011-06-14 00:19 · Score: 1

Or, it's just the guts of a cheap mobile phone. It's only installed on the occasional "high risk" targets (frequent border crossers), and immediately swapped as they pass customs. Everyone with a bug gets "inspected", and the "inspected" cars get their bugs serviced or swapped for a non-bugged plate.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:43 · Score: 0

Um, except that it wasn't your cellphone. It was a device that is installed for 'inspection and "quarantine"' reasons (secondary quotes because quarantine doesn't make sense in almost any context) by a government agency and does not seem to have any business even being there let alone containing voice to digital and a radio transmission circuits.
Most people sit inside their cars, not strapped to the bumper where the microphone is. Exactly what use is an audio recording filled with the sound of engine revving, tires on pavement, and people swearing and honking their horns?
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:44 · Score: 0

Consider the sources:
Epoch times, the folks who translated these articles, are the publishing arm of the Fai Lung Gung. Their journalism is at best, suspect.
Apple Daily is and has always been an anti China rag. It's a pretty entertaining rag, but no one takes it seriously.
As per the smuggler quote, a) it's an anonymous quote. b) The investigative abilities of the Hong Kong and Chinese police are immense. Pre 1997, it use to be rumored that the Chief of Police in Hong Kong would have a very large time table of leads pertaining to smuggling operations to and fro the border. Because of limitations of resources, he'd have to pick which folks to go after. Most of this information seems to come from under cover agents and good ol' police work. Now that Hong Kong and Quangzhou police all play for the same team, folks are a phone call away. c) They've been working together to stop smuggling for years, at least as a means to curtail triad operations. The uncanny busts might just be the results of competence.
This article is at best, fishy to me for the following reason:
It is weird for a smuggler to come out and say that it is a bug. It is weird for anyone to come out and talk to the press, especially someone who is part of organized crime. If they figured out that it is a bug, then why tell folks about it. Why give other smugglers the fruits of their work and human rights activists for that matter something to cry about? So the Chinese government will stop using the device because of public outcry? It's not like China and Hong Kong lack for reverse engineers. The smart way to play the game would be to figure out what it broadcasts on, when it does and to either not talk about anything important when it does, or just simply have the discipline to not talk in the car. Or turn on very loud music for that matter. Why give it away that you have figured it out? For that matter, there are simply thousands of cars to listen in on that cross the border, each way, every day. The only way they know which to listen in on is police work. And for that matter, they don't even have to listen in to flag it to be searched. Why then the extra step?
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by wvmarle · 2011-06-14 01:03 · Score: 1

They're really hard to come by (first of all you need to own a car - most people here don't, secondly you have to get a cross-border permit - just a small fraction of car owners have such a permit), and then I've no idea on the implications of "losing" the device. So I'm afraid it won't be that easy - and this will also explain to you why it took four years before someone comes with a theory like this. Not many people will destroy a device that's so hard to come by.
If true, this could set off a shitstorm you can't imagine. That is a major risk for Beijing - too big a risk I'd wager for them to take. They lost their first Chief Executive ("governor") of Hong Kong to public pressure: an estimated 700,000 people - 10% of the total population of Hong Kong - took to the streets in a single protest against him. That shook them badly. The current CE is not faring better - avoiding mass protests, but popularity is even lower. He's still there only because Beijing can't afford to have him resign early too, that'd be two out of two, and would make them look really bad when it comes to appointing CEs, and would very much support the call for greater democracy, especially for the CE election.
So besides the technical aspects, this is simply yet another reason why I'm skeptical about it. But if true... now that would be fun.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by black+soap · 2011-06-14 01:09 · Score: 1

What if we assume they are being used over a much shorter range, i.e. within a km or so of the checkpoint, or maybe less?
How hard would it be for the Chinese government to set up a series of receivers along a few major roads, and have these devices cranked town to transmit only, say, 500 meters? Suddenly the power requirements are much less, and it looks like that could still get pretty good coverage for almost any conversation that would take place on or near a highway.
If it was only for quarantine/customs data, it would have been build much smaller - this is clearly more sophisticated than it needs to be. I wonder if someone has measured the output from it? The antenna built on the inside seems to be an afterthought ("maybe we should hide that")
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-14 01:38 · Score: 1

First of all, I am a Hong Kong permanent resident. And still live there.
And yet you've never seen one of these devices.... and you have only considered a receiver (if there's only one) being on the mainland?

Secondly: what is really in that blue shrink wrap? May be batteries indeed. I can't see: it's shrink wrapped.
So because you can't see it (but everyone else can) it doesn't exist. And the video is fake too is it? Because the guy in the video looks just like the guy he's supposed to be. Is that Western propaganda?

Now let's look at the numbers that I "can not add up" and you don't even bother to look at. So let's say that blue thing is a battery. My half-year old phone can pack 5.6 Wh in it's battery,
I don't doubt you about your phone battery, though you clearly have no grasp as to what consumes power in your phone. Your phone receives a signal. Your phone has a screen. You insist on giving this device a 20km range. And you assume the device is continuously transmitting audio.

Then who was talking about listening on transistor radios? Not me. I said scanners - you know those devices that can, amongst others, pick up emergency radio bands, aircraft radio, mobile phone signals, etc. Those receivers are available in basically any range you want.
Again, you are talking bullshit. Scanners scan - but they don't go "hey it's a hidden Chinese transmitter". Derrrr. It's sitting in the same frequency range as mobile phones in a sea of mobile phone signals, probably using an audio compression codec, and almost certainly encrypted. Unless the signal from these devices is very distinctive and the scanner is programmed to recognise the device's signal it's never going to get noticed.
Your energy consumption figures are crap - no screen, no receiver, and you've picked the longest, and most unlikely range. Even without VOX there's a fucking huge difference between your estimates and the likely actual usage. I'm hoping you aren't getting paid big bucks to design electrical devices.
I reckon that's 4 x AA batteries, but lets give you the benefit of th e doubt and say its 4 x AAA Li batteries - that's almost 5Ahs.
I'd bet there are receivers at the checkpoints and both sides of the border. And please don't hand me that - the Chinese authorities don't operate in Hong Kong crap. Adjust for reality and you have a device that does not need to transmit continuously, nor does it need to transmit 20km - or even run for months at a time (though there's no reason why not). Now what it the device just checks every five minutes for the presence of a signal transmitted at the border crossing? Then it only uses power to record conversation when there is noise - and only transmits audio when triggered - perhaps burst. Nothing hi-tech there - and more than capable of doing that with the stated power supply.
You see two pictures in an article that only has one picture. You can't see batteries in a picture of batteries accompanied by an article that says batteries. You can't see batteries in a video that shows and mentions them several times. But you'd like to be taken seriously.
I don't doubt they are batteries shown in the picture I linked or the video. I don't doubt that Chinese authorities would try and sneak a surveillance capability into the device. I do doubt a centralised receiver - most likely the Chinese would do this sort of surveillance the same way other governments do. I find it unlikely, though not impossible that all dual licensed vehicles are bugged. Certainly mobile phones and laptops belonging to Australian business people and government employees have been bugged. What does surprise me it that has taken so long to take a look inside one - another thing that makes me suspect these devices are not put in every vehicle. Could the whole story be a setup? Yes - though I doubt Zheng Liming is in on it.
Consider the (convoluted) story that wa
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by b0bby · 2011-06-14 02:57 · Score: 2

I don't live in Hong Kong, but those blue batteries look just like the battery packs you use in cordless telephones. I bet you'd get a decent life out of them if you were only waking up the device when you were recording or transmitting.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by hey! · 2011-06-14 03:53 · Score: 1

Well, look at the thing. If it isn't meant to transmit, then why the UHF antenna? And it has a hefty looking 3 cell battery. Plain old alkaline cells could deliver 1100 maH apiece. More expensive Li-Fe2 cells would provide up to 3000 maH apiece and have good shelf-life. A three cell battery pack could yield as much as 9000 maH, or 10x the energy of a typical cell phone battery when fully charged. Since a regular 900 maH cell phone battery might yield 3 hours talk time, a 3000 maH alkaline battery pack might deliver nine hours or more, and a 9000 maH Li-Fe2 battery pack might yield *30* hours of transmission.
Since the Chinese aren't stupid, we can assume that the device isn't transmitting all the time. If it were *me* designing this program, it'd work like this: the secret police observe a person of interest being picked up by some car, not necessarily known to be associated with that person. The agent calls in the car's registration to HQ, which transmits the "record" command. The conversation is sent to a recording facility, until the "stop recording" command is sent. The battery, even if it's just an alkaline battery, should be good for several uses. When it is close to being used up, the police discreetly replace the device, a process that takes only a minute or so with practice.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 03:57 · Score: 0

Consider it - every insightful argument you've come up with is wrong - you can't see the obvious, and you can't even count up to two properly
Your response is completely uncalled for. Reread this paragraph of his:

However that's not the claim made in the article, which claims that the receiver is in Shenzhen and that they can listen over a 20-km range into Hong Kong. That's the fact I'm disputing here. I'd be very interested how ANYONE could have a reliable direct radio communication with Shenzhen from the roads in Sha Tin, or worse: Tsuen Wan. The latter has Tai Mo Shan in the way.

I work with RF propagation for a living. The antennas I see in the pictures are very short range. If this is a listening device, it only works near checkpoints. The device is no where near sophisticated enough to do more. My government (USA) also spies on us at border crossings, so I don't find it that shocking.

Really, if you slowed down a bit on your attacks you might realize you are both correct.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by hey! · 2011-06-14 04:25 · Score: 1

A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.

The blue plastic wrapped thing is the battery pack. It contains three cells the size of a AA. A single alkaline AA has more energy than most fully charged cell phone batteries, and of course has a multi-year shelf-life. A three alkaline cell could provide (by your calculations) as much as 40 hours of talk time and several years stand-by. There are battery technologies that would out perform this by an additional factor of three, but given given the number of these things produced I think the cheaper technology is a reasonable compromise. Most conversations recorded would be less than an hour or two.
As for the receiver, I don't see why it would be so hard for the secret police to set up a receiver network or even *use* an existing one, but there doesn't even have to be such a network. Since the transmitter would be activated by agents keeping the subject under surveillance, the receiver could even be mounted on the agent's car.
None of which proves what this thing actually does of course, but it has a number of bits that you'd expect in a bug and no alternative explanation for their presence yet. If you could record just ten hours of conversation from *any* car in the territory at *any* time, that'd be a pretty sweet system for the secret police. And it's physically plausible that a bug that looks like this could record much more before having to be swapped out.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:The article is kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 05:46 · Score: 0

Who said you need to broadcast the sound as it is being produced, and not in one "chirp" per day or per week with all the sound data compressed into it? That chirp could be quite loud. My digital SLR takes around 1000 plus flash pictures, when you put four AA Lithium batteries in it. One chirp per day is very low tech and feasible. Then again, if I was to design one, I'd have the device listen for a signal from the base station on when it can chirp its data... that could potentially save more power and last me into years of service.
As far as governments spying on citizens, the experiences from behind the iron curtain say that authoritarian governments can go pretty far in eavesdropping on the proletariat. Just because they didn't tell you they're spying on you doesn't mean they aren't... with these governments tin foil hats are very much in order.

maybe, maybe not. by mark_elf · 2011-06-13 18:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

We have a couple of experts saying it certainly could be a bug. But nobody said they found the freq it was transmitting on and got feedback from it. Kinda flimsy evidence so far.

Re:maybe, maybe not. by geekmux · 2011-06-14 00:49 · Score: 1

We have a couple of experts saying it certainly could be a bug. But nobody said they found the freq it was transmitting on and got feedback from it. Kinda flimsy evidence so far.
I agree, probably need more evidence, but if I were to suspect any country (or Government) in the world of doing this, it would be China, based on everything else they've done to monitor, censor, and control.
Re:maybe, maybe not. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 03:48 · Score: 0

Maybe they're doing it the old-school non-transmitter way. They have to change the batteries out at some point anyway, why not just plug a wire in and download the data then?

Is this really that much different... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:45 · Score: 0

...than the FBI using GPS tracking devices without a warrant?

(remember this is the same organization that brought us COINTELPRO)

Apply Daily by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 18:56 · Score: 0

Apple Daily isn't a serious newspaper here. It's kind of like CNN, except it jokes about small things.

Technology seems interesting by OeLeWaPpErKe · 2011-06-13 19:12 · Score: 3, Informative

stick the bug into the license plate!

I do wonder how they work technically. I mean, there can't be much space for a battery in such a licence plate. You can't use RFID like technology at a distance of more than 10-50 meters, which would make actual eavesdropping a challenge even for a government. If it is to have any semblance of being secret obviously you can't use the car's battery or electrical systems.

Very weak radio transmitters still need about a watt for reasonable communications (ie. cell phones). So if you wish to use something like this for, say a year (they're valid for a year), you'd need a tiny, tiny 31 MJ (that's megajoule) battery, or 3 KWh, but it can't be much larger than a watch battery.

So how the hell do you keep that thing powered ?

For that matter, which radio do you use ? Cell network ? It would require a hell of a lot of people in the loop.

Re:Technology seems interesting by nzac · 2011-06-13 19:39 · Score: 2

Read the article, the battery is 3 AA(A)s in plastic.
You don't need a anything close to that to have them on standby. They could activate them when they scan them crossing the border for a period of time with a known bit sequence of arbitrary length.
The article writer/PI is pretty bad though at least one of the crystals is the clock for the microchip no (need for two carriers). To me is looks like the black one is providing a clock to a high power transistor for the carrier the blue is just too close to the chip to be anything else.
Re:Technology seems interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 19:43 · Score: 1

stick the bug into the license plate!
I do wonder how they work technically. I mean, there can't be much space for a battery in such a licence plate. You can't use RFID like technology at a distance of more than 10-50 meters, which would make actual eavesdropping a challenge even for a government. If it is to have any semblance of being secret obviously you can't use the car's battery or electrical systems.
Very weak radio transmitters still need about a watt for reasonable communications (ie. cell phones). So if you wish to use something like this for, say a year (they're valid for a year), you'd need a tiny, tiny 31 MJ (that's megajoule) battery, or 3 KWh, but it can't be much larger than a watch battery.
So how the hell do you keep that thing powered ?
For that matter, which radio do you use ? Cell network ? It would require a hell of a lot of people in the loop.
Perhaps they are very low power transmitters and there is a network of receivers... perhaps the bugs have data storage which they dump when in range of a receiver. Who knows maybe its a mesh or p2p system. But enough clueless speculation - from actual article, their is more than one type of device. One type is about the size of a PDA (so no need to speculate about nano batteries and friggin lasers) with a range of around 20km. Don't forget the penisula is not that big. The ones in the article are fitted to the front window inside the car - not on the bumper catching carbon-based bugs. It also sounds like they were being used to detect smugglers - so maybe they only had to transmit the conversation in the vehicle as it approached the checkpoint.
[simulated translation]OK - border guard coming up be absolutely calm - these Chinese are too stupid to know we are smuggling vast amounts of...
And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?
Re:Technology seems interesting by nzac · 2011-06-13 20:22 · Score: 1

Looking at the pic again:
The technology is something a 4 year engineer student (like me) would put together though whole pcb, looks to be single or double layer.
The big white component (don’t recognise it) is about the only thing that might not be close to 10 year old tech off the shelf.
If anyone can recognise it, is the black chip is it an ASIC/CPLD or a SAM/ARM chip?
The only thing high tech about the enlarged section is possibly the code on the chip.
Since there is no speaker shown and the rest of the hardware is actually needed for wireless ID i don't see any real evidence basis for this apart from some badly translated smuggler i just can't believe he would have said anything close to that.
Re:Technology seems interesting by rohan972 · 2011-06-13 20:51 · Score: 1

And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?
Religious texts and other restricted or forbidden items or material, drugs. Whatever is illegal and has demand and sometimes it isn't about profit.

--
http://marriedmansexlife.com/
Re:Technology seems interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 21:05 · Score: 0

First of all, these things don't need to transmit continuously. A burst every 15 minutes would probably still give far too much detail. Secondly, 1W is enough for several kilometers range. You can have a dense mesh of receivers for transmitters with that kind of range even if you are not the government. One AA battery is good for about 1Wh under rough environmental conditions. That's 36000 1W bursts of 1/10 seconds each, or about one year of one burst every 15 minutes. Low power devices like these could also easily be powered from vibration. I'd worry more about radio interference.
Re:Technology seems interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 22:56 · Score: 3, Informative

And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?
Religious texts and other restricted or forbidden items or material, drugs.
That's the problem - pot's kind of hard to get hold of down south, but up north it's not hard to find. Methamphetamines are everywhere Cocaine I wouldn't know about - but I'd be surprised if it wasn't available - there's certainly plenty of heroin moving around. Firearms are dirt cheap. China makes most of the things that are illegal in the West. And there's no money in Bibles - they're not even restricted anymore - it's only fruitcake Americans that bang on about raising money to ship Bibles to China - there's a hell of a lot more Bibles in China than there are people who want to read them. Trust me - after you've spent a couple of days in the industrial and commercial boom-towns you begin to realise that if there's a demand it'll be satisfied in just a couple of days, well maybe not satisfactory, and probably toxic. Whiskey is cheaper in China than Hong Kong. As for western tech - it's all made there in the first place. I agree there's got to be a market for smuggling something into China (apart from smuggling workers without passes back). On the other hand a shitload of stuff gets smuggled into Hong Kong.
Re:Technology seems interesting by rednip · 2011-06-14 00:04 · Score: 1

Yea, there's an idea for eavesdropping, place a bug in a spot with a lot of general noise when operating and where few people have conversations. If they required that you put it on your dashboard and announce yourself first, then I'd start to wonder such things. If this is the best that Red China can come up with, well then, no wonder communism is on the wane.
All the 'spying' that they need is done just by being active and identifiable at specific points, like ezpass. Perhaps the thing was just built by a committee, or someone who wanted to sell extra parts, or had a large engineering margin. People get so worked up about the silliest of menudo, while the real suppression becomes 'old news' and accepted. Oddly all this does is make them far less capable of spying than the City of London (when if comes to cars, but I'm sure that they keep great records on people).

--
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
Re:Technology seems interesting by black+soap · 2011-06-14 00:58 · Score: 1

Minutiae may be silly, but menudo never is.
Re:Technology seems interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-14 02:23 · Score: 1

Yea, there's an idea for eavesdropping, place a bug in a spot with a lot of general noise when operating and where few people have conversations. If they required that you put it on your dashboard and announce yourself first, then I'd start to wonder such things. If this is the best that Red China can come up with, well then, no wonder communism is on the wane.
All the 'spying' that they need is done just by being active and identifiable at specific points, like ezpass. Perhaps the thing was just built by a committee, or someone who wanted to sell extra parts, or had a large engineering margin. People get so worked up about the silliest of menudo, while the real suppression becomes 'old news' and accepted. Oddly all this does is make them far less capable of spying than the City of London (when if comes to cars, but I'm sure that they keep great records on people).
It seems unlikely it'd be used for mass spying - so much easier to use, say, fucking mobile phones! (sigh). But if you were trying to catch people who think the police listen in to their mobile phones anyway - like smugglers (who are right) - then it's probably a good idea (reasonable return on investment) but I suspect it would be targeted - not blanketed.
Test your sarcastic ideas against reality - when was the last time anyone ever got convicted on the basis of a in car recording device huh? It's trivial technology - or do you have to get out of your car for people to hear you talk?
The device sits inside your car - it mounts up near the rear vision mirror. ezpass tells you which pass goes through the border not what they say - it's also been broken hasn't it?. Audio is probably more practical than the current systems deployed in the US that supposedly determine guilt from gate and other characteristic - or the Russian automated loan application stress meters.
If the recording capability is real - there's still no reason to automatically think it's a Chinese intelligence operation - it could be a police or customs operation, and it might not be Chinese.
As for people not getting busted on the basic of what they say when approaching checkpoints - happens all the time on airplanes and trains.
What doesn't seem to have occurred to people is - it's not like someone opened the device and went - oh look it's electronic, that's suspicious. We've always known they were electronic. What's allegedly been discovered is they have hidden audio recording capability. Be a bit like you opening up your phone and finding a camera in it when it wasn't supposed to have one - you'd probably get a bit suss, but you might not automatically assume every phone had a camera hidden in it.
And it's a crap thread title - the technology isn't that interesting - it's appears to be off the shelf.
Re:Technology seems interesting by fliptout · 2011-06-14 03:39 · Score: 1

Lots of things are very profitable to smuggle in to China. Foreign cigarettes are a big one.

--
A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
Re:Technology seems interesting by mikael · 2011-06-14 03:45 · Score: 1

Even a cheap PAYG mobile phone has bluetooth and voice recording capability (eg. ZTE). Using a laptop bluetooth dongle it is possible to set the phone to record audio to files and stream off the audio files through Bluetooth from a distance of 10+ metres. No mobile phone network is required. The maximum range really depends on the strength and sensitivity of the other party.
Since there is around 64 Mbytes of internal memory, so it really makes me wonder what it is going on inside a device like that.

--
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Re:Technology seems interesting by onepoint · 2011-06-14 04:47 · Score: 1

>>And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?
The one item that has a huge markup is gold. the spread is up to 20%, and small 5 gram bars have the largest mark-up

--
if you see me, smile and say hello.
Re:Technology seems interesting by SuricouRaven · 2011-06-14 05:20 · Score: 1

There is no shortage of bibles. China has a state-operated Christian church. They don't oppress religion for it's own sake - they oppress anything to which people might be more loyal than they are to the state. The government is more than happy for people to openly worship Christ - so long as the priests understand they need to keep out of politics and not criticise government policy.
Re:Technology seems interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-15 23:12 · Score: 1

>>And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?
The one item that has a huge markup is gold. the spread is up to 20%, and small 5 gram bars have the largest mark-up
I hadn't considered that - just presumed it came in by train from the north... I also hadn't thought of messages, and things people want knockoffs made of.
NOTE: small gold beads are a very popular item at a certain Melbourne gold refinery....
Re:Technology seems interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-15 23:14 · Score: 1

Lots of things are very profitable to smuggle in to China. Foreign cigarettes are a big one.
Brought in by the boat/ship load from the south, and the train load from the north. Old tea/opium routes never die!

what's the difference... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 19:12 · Score: 0

between a border passing electronic card and an eavesdropping device...?
I don't see a mic in there. Without one, it might as well be what it is claimed to be.

How does the battery get recharged? I would imagine that to send "voice signals" continuously through a city (and not line-of-sight) upto 20 kms away requires some power.
Can you _actually_ eavesdrop off a mic on the windscreen of a running car?

Those pesky Chinese by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 19:18 · Score: 0

What do these devices do? Transmit voice data 24/7? Where are the receivers? How do they manage their frequencies and their energy consumption? Perhaps they record 24/7 and transmit everything in a few seconds while the car is at a border checkpoint? I want their technology, whatever it is, in my cell phone right now dammit!

the source... by mathfeel · 2011-06-13 19:35 · Score: 5, Informative

I clicked the link and was about to RTFA, then I spotted that it's from "The Epoch Time" referencing an article from "The Apple Daily". I am from HK and those are not two news sources that I trust. The first is a media front for the Fa Lun Gong, which as much as I dislike communism, I have a worse distaste for a money sucking "religious" cult. The latter is a sensationalist tabloid paper. It is famous for its yellow journalism. If you want a report on fact, that's not it.

--
The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't

Re:the source... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:35 · Score: 0

The statement "as much as I dislike communism" made me ignore any other biased thing you had to say.
Re:the source... by slyguy135 · 2011-06-14 01:39 · Score: 1

100% correct, and exactly what I was going to write.
Isn't HK great? ;)
Re:the source... by cavebison · 2011-06-14 21:45 · Score: 1

I am from HK and those are not two news sources that I trust.
I've been reading /. for long enough to know to read a few comments before bothering with TFA at all. Usually the comments are more enlightening.

Do the clock strike 13 on cold April days in China by zbobet2012 · 2011-06-13 19:38 · Score: 0

War is peace. Freedom is slaver. Ignorance is strength.

Just in Hong Kong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 19:41 · Score: 0

I was just in Hong Kong for three days. I noticed at least one or two clearly electronic devices on the dashboard. One was a thing that the driver would "pat down" and that would prsumably start the fare. I can easily imagine a lisenting device being contained in this. Another didn't seem to have a purpose and was just there.

Re:Just in Hong Kong by Demonoid-Penguin · 2011-06-13 20:30 · Score: 1

I was just in Hong Kong for three days. I noticed at least one or two clearly electronic devices on the dashboard. One was a thing that the driver would "pat down" and that would presumably start the fare. I can easily imagine a listening device being contained in this. Another didn't seem to have a purpose and was just there.
Thank you - it was commonly believed when I was there (3 years back) that they were tracking devices - I just never considered they recorded or transmitted conversation.

Re:On the consequences of tampering with those dev by wisty · 2011-06-13 19:50 · Score: 1

In China, it's quite common for people to tamper with their license plates. Taping a CD over them (to blind cameras) is popular. Swapping your plates for forged military / police plates is also done, but a little riskier - some farmer got sentenced to death for "impersonating the military" - driving with military plates to avoid toll booths, but the sentence was overturned and I think the judge got sacked.

Heavy charges are reserved for property crimes, drug related crimes, violent crimes, and anything *remotely* resembling treason. Tamper with the device would probably be ignored. Publishing anything about it ... not so clever. Notice how all the identifiable interviewees are Hong Kongers?

Re:Do the clock strike 13 on cold April days in Ch by zbobet2012 · 2011-06-13 19:57 · Score: 1

Annoyingly enough slashdot doesn't let me put this in as a Chinese phrase:

Attacks the Hong Kong terrorist needs the world by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 20:06 · Score: 0

Dear all:

Help! Murder, Chinese useing Brain Voice Read / Write Machine Spy Hong Kong people, 100% true story, please e-mail the world people and send 1 e-mail Hong Kong government, 1*10*100*1000....., thank my dear Internet friend.

1. installs the small machine in the Hong Kong people car ----- installs is extremely easy, not to have the voice to be troublesome, the victim did not feel.

2. Input/output voice ----- input/output the voice extremely clearly, in the mountain, the sewer, the elevator, input - output voice is extremely clear, does not use the dry battery.

3. Murder Hong Kong people ----- terrorists is the Hong Kong police over 50, murder many Hong Kong people over 3 years.

Enough HK by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 20:33 · Score: 0

Whatever your opinion about the whole thing one thing is certain: Hong Kong needs to either say "we are not china" or stop bitching. I am sick of the whining from HK on a near daily basis "china this" "china that" "bitch bitch bitch" They need to either stand up and say we are not part of China or shut up!

Re:Enough HK by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 23:25 · Score: 0

I believe you are just to stupid to understand the situation with China and Hongkong. They can not say what you are asking them. So shut up, idiot.

Rubbish by kobotronic · 2011-06-13 20:34 · Score: 0

In none of the worthless tabloid reporting on this story has anyone produced evidence that would satisfy any electronics engineer that this would be a listening device. Why is this a slashdot story before any technical angle with meat on it has materialized?

There is no evidence of an audio processing circuit of any kind - no microphone has been discovered and none is evident in the design, which is so similar to smart pass devices used everywhere for road pricing that I will simply assume it is a common type that you could presumably find anywhere in the world. Many of these road pricing devices have battery-powered signal amplifiers both for the receiver and transmitter, which increases signal reach beyond what would be attainable to a passive RFID type tag from the overhead antenna.

There is also powered transaction logic in these types of devices which are often designed to make a sound when your account is charged. In some models such as the ones used in Singapore there is also a smart card reader for account transactions.

If in fact there is an apparently acoustic aperture in the device shell, I'd wager that a beeper is the principal application. Tooling for injection molded shells is expensive, and if there is any way to re-use an existing type then that is preferred - especially for simple utilitarian things such as these.

I remember a similar non-story from several years ago when some idiot took pictures of the power supply of his cable decoder and deduced by idiot logic that a capacitor was a microphone and Comcast was spying on him. This story is exactly as idiotic.

Unsettling by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 20:50 · Score: 1, Insightful

I start to find it quite troubling how many anti chinese articles start to appear on slashdot, is this site not meant to target people that dont fall that easy for such apparent fear mongering and paranoia?
I cannot judge that from US perspective, but from an outside viewpoint its almost looking like a propaganda machine starting. Is the US preparing for another conflict or something ?

Re:Unsettling by ledow · 2011-06-13 21:37 · Score: 0

Yeah, now combine:
"China source of hacking attempts on US" (no matter how dubious that is in terms of finding the actual SOURCE of the hack attempt rather than someone else acting through a random proxy)
with:
"Hacking could be an act of war" (no matter how stupid that is, because any half-decent military system with anything "useful" should be COMPLETELY inaccessible from the Internet).
Re:Unsettling by ObsessiveMathsFreak · 2011-06-14 01:43 · Score: 2

Is the US preparing for another conflict or something ?
In effect yes. Societies do not simply up and go to war one morning. It's generally a process that takes some time to build up. The larger the conflict, the longer the build up.
A good example is the Libyan conflict, which took several weeks of drumming before allied forces launched air-strikes, and even still the US was quite reluctant to proceed. The Syrian conflict is currently being drummed up as we speak, but whether there's enthusiasm for air-strikes is another matter. However, I stress that no major action will be taken by the US, UK or any other western power without a build up of public interest in a conflict.
As to who is behind these build ups and ultimately these wars, while there are special interests, ultimately I think these things are emergent phenomena; and I would now be inclined to say that they are beyond a society's conscious control. Which isn't to say that they cannot be halted or indeed advanced prematurely. That is the job of the leaders of states. They are the ones that ultimately decide how these trends evolve and ultimately manifest themselves.
See also: The Second Iraq War and The Cuban Missile Crisis.

--
May the Maths Be with you!
Re:Unsettling by demonbug · 2011-06-14 08:33 · Score: 1

"Hacking could be an act of war" (no matter how stupid that is, because any half-decent military system with anything "useful" should be COMPLETELY inaccessible from the Internet).
So you can only start a war if you attack military targets? As long as I stick to sinking commercial ships and destroying commercial enterprises there is no casus belli?
I think it absolutely obvious that in an age when electronic commerce is a major part of your economy, an attack on that commerce can be considered an act of war. This is stupidly obvious, but it doesn't mean that someone hacking Facebook accounts is going to start a war. Nor does it mean that probing attacks on military networks would automatically cause a war. However, if an identifiable party is attacking your infrastructure, electronic or otherwise, and has actual negative impact or threatens to substantially alter the balance of power in favor of the attacker, that absolutely provides a rationale for war.

So, what did they do? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 21:52 · Score: 0

Install a Facebook-App?

GM Cars Starting 2014 Model Year by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 22:22 · Score: 0

Starting in the 2014 model year, all GM cars will be equipped with a GSM modem that will upload realtime speed, location, and other telemetry data to the Department of Transportation for "statistical analysis" purposes.

I'd be weary of the source, it is the Apple Daily by carsonc · 2011-06-13 22:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'd be weary of the source as it is the Apple Daily. They are known for not being that reliable. I was on the cover a number of years ago, and they photoshopped my hair blond to make me look more white and miss quoted me. I was pissed but then everybody told me that everybody knows that's what they do. C'est la vie. I'll wait till I hear it from a different paper.

"No charge, Sir" by davide+marney · 2011-06-13 22:38 · Score: 1, Interesting

The article notes that the Chinese government has been installing these devices at no charge since 2007. Well, there's your biggest reason to be suspicious. What kind of respectable government would actually buy _you_ something? In the US, drivers have to buy their own RFID transponders just for the privilege of being able to pay tolls electronically. In China, one would expect to not only pay for the transponder, but slip some money under the table at the same time, no?

--
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday

Re:"No charge, Sir" by mrsam · 2011-06-14 00:23 · Score: 3, Informative

In the US, drivers have to buy their own RFID transponders just for the privilege of being able to pay tolls electronically.
Not necessarily. I did not pay for my EZ-Pass transponder. At least in New York and New Jersey, two of the states that use the EZ-Pass transponder that I can vouch from personal experience, the transponder is given to you free if you have the tolls billed automatically to your credit card.
Which is, pretty much, is the only practical approach. If you take the other option of getting a prepaid transponder, they'll charge you for it. But, having to constantly prepay is just not worth the hassle, in my opinion. It's much more convenient to have the agency automatically bill you. With the tolls being as high as they are, you'll be spending all your time adding money to the account. It's just not worth it.
There are some states in the EZ-Pass system that charge for transponders. But you do not have to buy a transponder from your state's agency. New York will give EZ-Pass to any state's resident. If your state's EZ-Pass gives discounts on some in-state tolls, you won't get them from New York though.
Re:"No charge, Sir" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:28 · Score: 0

My RDID tag came free when I preloaded $20 into the account. (Texas).
Re:"No charge, Sir" by black+soap · 2011-06-14 01:11 · Score: 1

Is that the state buying it for you, or a private contractor/operator that runs the toll roads "on behalf of the state?"
Re:"No charge, Sir" by vandamme · 2011-06-19 00:56 · Score: 1

I'm going out and looking mine over for a small hole that could go to a microphone.

Re:Well-researched piece in a mass market tabloid by buntsai · 2011-06-13 23:07 · Score: 1

Epoch times is dodgy but the original is from Apple Daily, the second highest circulation (300,000 in a city of 7 million) newspaper in Hong Kong. It is not particularly pro-Falun Gong. It has strongly pro-democracy (HK doesn't have much of that), pro-free market, pro working class, with the usual Hong Kong mix of high minded analysis, original poetry and literature, lurid celebrity coverage, and serialized softcore porn!

My 50 cents... by Omniskio · 2011-06-13 23:48 · Score: 2

. . . is that, no matter the source, no matter the content, no matter its significance, the Wu Mao Dang will spun it round, round, baby, right round. . . You're being harmonized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party

dont surprise by summerbrands · 2011-06-13 23:49 · Score: 0

no using surprining http://www.summeringbrands.com/

--
best online shop http://www.summeringbrands.com/ summer brand wholesale underwear discount sunglasses

Daughter board is a JZ-871 by kyle5t · 2011-06-14 00:12 · Score: 2

I was lucky to find this with just a little googling. It is a JZ-871 GFSK transceiver module.

http://www.sz-wholesaler.com/p/505/545-2/micro-power-data-rf-module-jz871-171649.html

Re:Daughter board is a JZ-871 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 20:36 · Score: 0

I wonder if the signal which has a limit of 800 meters is re transmitted via lots of hidden access points if this is at all true

OnStar by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 00:17 · Score: 0

OnStar?

Imagine ... by hotfireball · 2011-06-14 00:44 · Score: 1

Imagine they're installed in ANY product they ship. :-)

Re:I'd be weary of the source, it is the Apple Dai by bronney · 2011-06-14 01:07 · Score: 1

Lol. That's like reverse racism. I don't even read the papers anymore here. Apple daily is a fun read when ou go dim sum Sunday yeah? :)

Re:I'd be weary of the source, it is the Apple Dai by slyguy135 · 2011-06-14 01:43 · Score: 1

Haih a!

Re:I'd be weary of the source, it is the Apple Dai by slyguy135 · 2011-06-14 01:46 · Score: 1

More details, please...

Re:Well-researched piece in a mass market tabloid by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 02:06 · Score: 0

I am lost here, are you trying to say Apple Daily is a reliable news source or not? I've never seen "serialized softcore porn" on a proper news paper.

Re:On the consequences of tampering with those dev by cyfer2000 · 2011-06-14 02:38 · Score: 1

The farmer was not sentenced to death, he was sentenced life in jail. The charge was that farmer evaded 3.8 million Yuan (~$600,000) in toll by dressing in fake military uniform and putting fake military license plates on his truck. Apparently pretending to be a military personnel is illegal everywhere I know. And apparently the Chinese highway toll is freaking high.

--
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.

Amateurs by formfeed · 2011-06-14 04:26 · Score: 1

The real pros would install a spying device that can also disable the car and then sell this to the car owner as "extra service".
Maybe even add a button for the owner to press, so he thinks he is in control. A blue button with a star on it would look very nice.

Yeah, so is my FASTRAK device by microbee · 2011-06-14 05:49 · Score: 1

Those living in the bay area know how it CAN be a spying device too.

What to Smuggle Into China by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 06:30 · Score: 0

Years ago I sold quite a few numismatic coins to both Hong Kong, China, and Canada. The recipients invariably declined to purchase insurance and generally requested the cheapest possible shipping. These were coins worth many thousands of dollars, although their value was not at all obvious looking at them. A plain 19th C. Barber dime in a medium high MS64-65, for example, uncirculated grade is reliably priced at many thousands of dollars, and is eminently concealable. The customers must have been pleased with my service since they had money wired to me up front and I never had a complaint or a problem with delivery.

I have no reason to believe any of these transactions were fraudulent in any way. But I suppose if a person were dedicated to accumulating a store of concealable, portable wealth of less obvious inspection value than, say, wholesale diamonds and part of a ready global liquid market, high value numismatics would be the way to go.

Falun Gong - still at it by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 07:09 · Score: 0

Apple is a tabloid and epoch times is falun gong. They absolutely love to lie about anything to bash China.

Prior Art: FBI by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 07:24 · Score: 0

Hey, it looks like the Chinese government caught up with the FBI! I wonder if they designed their own or just copied the existing American model...

Why do they post an image of the inards.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-14 09:07 · Score: 0

but blur out the part numbers.

It turns out that the news is not real... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-15 17:07 · Score: 0

It turns out that the whole news report was based on some irresponsible quotes, biased interpretations of the test results, plus wild guesses. The origin of the news, namely Apple Daily, is known for its opposition (to the Chinese government) and its incredibility.
see: http://weirdochina.blogspot.com/2011/06/chinese-spying-devices-installed-on.html

Slashdot Mirror

Chinese Spying Devices Installed On Hong Kong Cars

171 comments