Slashdot Mirror


Your Brain Waves Are a Password: How Your Next Car Will Check You're Not a Thief

cartechboy writes "And you thought stealing cars was hard today? You're facing locks, kill switches, LoJacks, OnStar, and more. But there's worse on the way: Engineers at Japan's Tottori University have developed a prototype theft-prevention system that uses brain waves to identify drivers. That's right: The system samples your brain waves, stores them--and actually shuts down the car if the driver's EEG signals don't match what's on file. It also busts drunk and sleepy drivers, because their brain waves differ from those when you're fully awake and totally sober. One non-Tron downside: If you want to drive, you have to wear a scary-looking set of sensors on your skull so the car can constantly reads your brainwaves."

169 comments

  1. About face! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "One non-Tron downside: If you want to drive, you have to wear a scary-looking set of sensors on your skull so the car can constantly reads your brainwaves."

    In other words - none of this will ever actually see the light of day.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:About face! by binarylarry · · Score: 2

      Don't worry, the SQUID mesh will be cleverly disguised as a stylish iHat.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advice to developers: Contact NSA. They'll be happy to provide unlimited funding for this.

    3. Re:About face! by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Advice to developers: Contact NSA. They'll be happy to provide unlimited funding for this.

      Null program, there, AC.

      Like the NSA hasn't had their own at-a-distance bi-directional systems for years, in fac&2@Y&UIjoi)(*vhMPYyNM^thequickbrownfoxjumpsoverthelazydog@t4%*(5GUJ[Hj9}8.Ruy45YCv

      #NO CARRIER

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "One non-Tron downside: If you want to drive, you have to wear a scary-looking set of sensors on your skull so the car can constantly reads your brainwaves."

      In other words - none of this will ever actually see the light of day.

      One well-known way to make cars safer, is to make everyone inside wear a helmet.

      If the driver's wearing a helmet, then they could put the sensors there.

      On the other hand, nobody outside motorsport wants to wear one. Good idea, won't ever come to fruition.

      On the other other hand, we used to feel the same way about seat belts...

    5. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which may be a good thing. What if you are sick and need to drive yourself to the doctor. Car won't start. "I'm sorry Dave, I cannot let you operate the vehicle at this time." The lawsuits will make the accelerator cable mess look like peanuts.

    6. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "One non-Tron downside: If you want to drive, you have to wear a scary-looking set of sensors on your skull so the car can constantly reads your brainwaves."

      The bigger downside: anything that changes your brainwaves, like alcohol, stress, exhaustion, anger, or even intense conversation, may prevent your car from recognizing you. Now, shutting off your car whenever a little road rage creeps in is not going to endear this technology to anyone.

    7. Re:About face! by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      I bet Apple are kicking themselves because they didn't think of it 1st because foild hats suit Iphone users :D

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    8. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This will next be the way we detect "Terrorists" and if you sleep in your self driving car and have a nightmare you will be arrested....
      On a more serious side, the issue here will also be discovered to fail if the brain has an event that alters its function such as eschemia, intoxication, changes such as strokes cause etc. So you come home from the hospital and your whole system will not recognize you.... You are a new person according to the system. The whole idea sufferes from the failure to understand that biometrics are passwords that never change and in fact they do. Passwords that never change are worthless and assuming they never change is going to cause real problems. Passwords that never change can be counterfieted easily.

    9. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One well-known way to make cars safer, is to make everyone inside wear a helmet.

      If the driver's wearing a helmet, then they could put the sensors there.

      On the other hand, nobody outside motorsport wants to wear one. Good idea, won't ever come to fruition.

      My experiences with helmets while driving:
      - the horns on my viking helmet kept getting stuck in the top of the car.
      - my football helmet blocked my peripheral vision enough for me to have actually needed the helmet (plus it was hard to drink my Big Gulp).
      - the camera on top of my reality show helmet got caught in the visor (though I did get some rather nice avant-garde footage).
      - my motorcycle helmet scared my passengers (note to self: don't buy anymore used Super Dave gear even if the scratches & scars on it look 'cool').
      - spartans should be thankful they never had to drive a car.

      As you can see things don't always turn out like you planned. YMMV.

    10. Re:About face! by syntheticmemory · · Score: 1

      Oh, the telemarketers are probably salivating.....

    11. Re:About face! by Hillgiant · · Score: 2

      #NO CARRIER

      Ah. Remember way back when? When internet connections turned off.

      Now if you will excuse me, I need to check on my 1984 torrent.

      --
      -
    12. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hypothetically, can't we eventually create more sensitive equipment that can read brainwaves from a distance?

    13. Re:About face! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      . It also busts drunk and sleepy drivers

      God, if they were to implement this....98% of the cars in New Orleans would never start again?!?!?!

      :O

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:About face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that as if it's a bad thing...

    15. Re:About face! by drcheap · · Score: 1

      That's okay, they'll just buy up the company that came up with this technology and we'll see it as the next replacement for the finger scanner somewhere around the iPhone 7S timeframe.

  2. False negatives? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What if I'm hugely stressed out because a tsunami or forest fire is coming or my critically injured child needs rushing to hospital or some such? If that changes my brain waves enough to prevent me driving, it would be unfortunate.

    (To be fair, TFA says they're looking initially to use it on buses and armoured cars. I wonder if "masked man is pointing gun at my head and ordering me to drive" sufficiently alters the brain waves.)

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    1. Re:False negatives? by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      What if I'm schizophrenic?

      What if I'm schizophrenic?

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    2. Re:False negatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know I am.

      Me too.

    3. Re:False negatives? by hedwards · · Score: 4, Informative

      Then you'd probably know that schizophrenia is not what they used to call Multiple Personality Disorder.

    4. Re:False negatives? by plover · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, the tinfoil in your hat will short it out.

      And yours, too.

      --
      John
    5. Re:False negatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awww you're no fun.

    6. Re:False negatives? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      What if I'm schizophrenic?

      Just let the person sitting next to you who is not there drive.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    7. Re:False negatives? by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

      I knew that!
      ...no I didn't...
      Yes I did!
      No. I Did Not.
      did
      didn't
      did
      didn't

      --
      -
    8. Re:False negatives? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      I bet they never tested it on injured or or emotionally stressed drivers. Not to mention that even if they get the driver identification piece exactly right, it will still make it hard to sell your car, hard to lend it to a friend or relative, unserviceable and useless in an emergency. And if you drive it to the bar and you want your designated driver to drive it home because you're wasted? It drastically reduces the utility of the car, plus make a completely fucking the user interface. Great idea guys!

    9. Re:False negatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally. I can't wait to buy one of these!

      What if I'm schizophrenic?

    10. Re:False negatives? by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      I was wondering something similar... What can cause changes in an individual brain waves that are either benign or reasonably common place?

    11. Re:False negatives? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Simpler than that, how the hell does your mechanic test-drive or even move your car within his shop?

      And if he's got an override gadget... soon enough so will the bad guys. (Define 'bad guys' however you wish.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  3. Good idea by Scoldog · · Score: 2

    I'd be happy if the technology could be used just to detect brain waves from the driver and prevents the car starting if it doesn't detect anything.

    Some of the maniac's I see driving around here are beyond comprehension.

    --
    This space for rent
    1. Re:Good idea by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Actually, that's a really good point. Having a car that could detect when a person had fallen asleep and automatically hit the brakes could save lives.

      Unfortunately, I think we'll have self driving cars before we can have a car that can detect if it's being driven by an idiot.

    2. Re:Good idea by Scoldog · · Score: 2

      Either way, the future of driving will be safer and better. Hopefully before too long we will see the widespread adoption of either driverless cars or, to a lesser degree, this technology coupled with stuff like automatic braking and obstacle avoidance and other technology already on the market.

      Personally, I want the driverless cars. A bad driver is a bad driver no matter how much automation they have at their disposal. In fact, I would say that more automation makes a driver worse if the driver is still the one at the top of the chain controlling it. People who have literally no idea how big their car is, because they rely on automatic cruise control with distance sensors, and automatic parking assist.

      Best take drivers out of the picture all together.

      --
      This space for rent
    3. Re:Good idea by Garridan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, so let's look at that robot car plan. They work great where lanes are well marked and road conditions are nice. Where I live, the main highway has been under construction for the last 3 years, and the entrances, exits, and lanes aren't in the same place two weeks in a row. And it rains a lot. And it snows in the winter. How's your robot car gonna handle that? What I hear a lot of people say is "well, humans can take over in adverse conditions." Really? Humans that learned to drive once, but almost never do, who will be watching porn or playing some inane addictive game when the car says "excuse me gentle madam, but there seems to be a patch of ice 20 meters ahead, can you take the wheel for a moment?" Yeah, that'll go great. Total n00b of a driver is suddenly panicked behind the wheel.

    4. Re:Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I yearn for a day when the government can drive me where I need to go, and will provide me with a hover chair so that I might not fall down at any time, and feeds me only the exact mix of nutritional food and supplements that will keep me nutritionally complete as recommended by the Food Authority. Oh what a future is yet to come!

      Edit: especially poignant, my captcha for this was "habeas"

    5. Re:Good idea by hedwards · · Score: 2

      You don't think that can be solved? There may need to be a revision to the MUTCD to accommodate that, but it's not that tough. Just put traffic cones out to indicate the lanes as is. And I'm sure there's a way of updating the maps about where the exits have moved.

      In most cases though, the only reason for a human to take over is if the AI has conked out and the car is still moving. Chances are good that these cars will be programmed in such a way that unless they're deactivated, they'll just come to a stop and the rest of traffic will route around the disabled vehicle.

      Also, if you live some place where main street has been under construction like that for years, chances are that you're in a small town. The simple fix to that would be for the city engineers to plan things with driverless cars in mind.

    6. Re:Good idea by sFurbo · · Score: 2

      The robot is not limited to using the visible spectrum, so rain and snow will be less of a visibility problem for it than it is for humans.
      Once the robot have been taught how to handle itself in snow, it will always remember it, in contrast to humans that takes some time remembering how to compensate for skidding if they are not used to it.
      Humans generally suck at updating their model of the world if they don't believe it is necessary. Robots will thus be better equipped to handle changes in entrances, exits and lanes.

      All in all, it seems you have listed another set of conditions where people should in no way be responsible for handling a car if a robot is available to do it in stead.

    7. Re:Good idea by Garridan · · Score: 1

      Simply put, no. I do not believe that robots will be as adaptable as humans in my lifetime. I find it an acceptable risk to be killed by a human in traffic. I find it less acceptable to be killed by a robot. If a human's error kills, there's a process of grief, penance, and liability. If a robot kills... who is responsible? It's a bug in some code somewhere. Your statement about me being in a small town is odd. I said "entrances and exits" of a highway -- small towns generally don't have those... my little town of 5 million has quite a few. Sometimes, major highway revisions just take forever. I used to drive quite a lot, and I recall Boise and Salt Lake City both having massive highway revisions for a number of years, too.

    8. Re:Good idea by celle · · Score: 1

      "my little town of 5 million"

            That's not a town, that's a country. My small town of about 100 is more like it. The main streets are somewhat paved and the rest are gravel. I doubt self-driving cars would have much of a chance here with the lack of clear marking on the road to reference.

    9. Re:Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that's a really good point. Having a car that could detect when a person had fallen asleep and automatically hit the brakes could save lives.

      While automatic sleep detection surely would eb a good things, hitting the brakes will most likely be the wrong thing to do. When you fall into microsleep on the highway and the car hits the breaks in response, what will most probably happen is that the car behind you rear-ends you.

    10. Re:Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it an acceptable risk to be killed by a human in traffic. I find it less acceptable to be killed by a robot.

      Agreed. A robot car that is no more 'skilled' than a human is a complete failure. For the average driver, the accident rate is 1 per 18 years, and the fatality rate is about 1.3 per 100 million miles. If robot cars achieve a fatality rate of 1 per 10,000 million miles, would a single robot-car death still be less acceptable than the 100 human-car deaths? You'd rather have your whole neighborhood wiped out by drunk drivers than lose a single friend to a robot?

      Or is your argument simply that driving is a hard problem and can't possibly be solved by any combination of software, sensor and road modification? That no one would ever implement a driverless car capable of recognizing road conditions beyond its capacity and alerting the human driver to take over. That it's impossible to modify roads and construction hazard signage to alert a sensor-laden, network connected vehicle to changes in road conditions.

    11. Re:Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of the maniac's I see driving around here are beyond comprehension.

      Some of the undeucated people at slashdot are beyond my comprehension. Shouldn't a nerd know fourth grade English??

    12. Re:Good idea by tftp · · Score: 1

      Where I live, the main highway has been under construction for the last 3 years, and the entrances, exits, and lanes aren't in the same place two weeks in a row. And it rains a lot. And it snows in the winter. How's your robot car gonna handle that?

      Much better than a human. Often the driver cannot figure out ahead of time what lanes are closed or open because the visibility is poor. But a robot would simply receive a RF signal from the work site, and that signal would contain all the relevant information.

      "excuse me gentle madam, but there seems to be a patch of ice 20 meters ahead, can you take the wheel for a moment?"

      A robot would drive on ice far better than a human. 20 meters is plenty of time to drop the speed. A human would simply stare at the danger all this time.

    13. Re:Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a human's error kills, there's a process of grief, penance, and liability.

      Usually, no. The person who is legally responsible for a collision in many cases is not the person who actually caused the collision. Our traffic laws were designed to make traffic flower smoothly and safely, but they are in many cases not a good indicator of whose actions (or what actions) are at fault when a collision occurs.

      As an example, consider a situation where you are driving down the road, and someone runs a red light or stop sign and cuts across the road in front of you. You have plenty of time to stop or avoid them, but because the legal liability will be theirs you simply slam into them broadside. Now legally, it's their fault for not yielding to you... but the reality of the situation is YOU are the one who caused the actual collision.

      Contrast this scenario to that of a self-driving car. The self-driving car is not going to think about liability, it will simply do what is necessary to avoid an actual collision... regardless of traffic laws, liability concerns, etc. It's not going to get pissed off because another car "cut you off" and subsequently ride a foot off your rear bumper at highway speeds. It's not going to cheat the 4-way stop and drive out of turn, and when someone else does it will wait for its turn and not chase them down screaming and waving the middle finger.

    14. Re:Good idea by hedwards · · Score: 2

      The point is that robots don't tailgate unless they're programmed to do so, they can maintain a safe distance under the visibility conditions and the robot doesn't get tired.

      The bottom line is that by the time these things are permitted on the roads they'll know how to handle all the conditions that human can handle. They might have trouble under some conditions, but most of the traffic crashes aren't the result of conditions, they're the result of human error.

      Personally, I don't find it to be an acceptable risk to be killed by a human driver. Drunk driving, tailgating, speeding, running red lights and such are things that robots wouldn't do, and if humans didn't do them the fatality rates would go way down as well. On top of that robots don't get tired and always follow traffic safety laws that they have programmed in.

    15. Re:Good idea by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      "excuse me gentle madam, but there seems to be a patch of ice 20 meters ahead, can you take the wheel for a moment?"

      Reply: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... Huh? What?
      SMASH

  4. What about people with migraines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Hi Boss, I can't come to work today. I have a migraine. Yeah, my car refuses to start until I'm well again. I might be in this afternoon."

    1. Re:What about people with migraines? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Wonder how well it would work on those of us with cluster headaches/migraines and so on. Those rare days when it's only a headache would make thing implode.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  5. How your car thief will will steal your cars. by flayzernax · · Score: 3, Informative

    By bypassing this system entirely.

    IANACT.

    1. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Actually... you've heard of criminals cutting off a hand (Red Dwarf) or gouging out an eye (Avengers) to thwart biometric security. Now they'll be cutting people's heads off.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by k8to · · Score: 5, Funny

      I believe brain patterns typically alter when the head is separated from the body.

      Your milage may vary.

      --
      -josh
    3. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by Scoldog · · Score: 1

      Maybe the onboard GPS system can direct the driver to the local police station when it detects the brain waves from a decapitated head**. Pretty pointless directing them to the local hospital.

      * I don't have a clue how long the brain can generate brain waves after decapitation. If the system can read them, you'd think it would translate into nothing but "FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK".

      --
      This space for rent
    4. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by Alsee · · Score: 5, Funny

      I believe brain patterns typically alter when the head is separated from the body.

      "Typically" implies you think that's true for more than than 50% of the population.
      I dunno, either you're an optimist or I'm a cynic.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by Bob_Who · · Score: 1

      * I don't have a clue how long the brain can generate brain waves after decapitation. If the system can read them, you'd think it would translate into nothing but "FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK".

      Only if the electrodes can reach the back seat.......like on prom night.

    6. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by GatorSnake · · Score: 1

      Your milage may vary.

      If your head is separated from your body, I don't think your mileage is going to vary very much.

    7. Re:How your car thief will will steal your cars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANACT.

      A likely story....

  6. Also, avoid having a stroke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    especially if you are out in the woods, you would have to walk home. (with your thirteen year old son by your side since you can not imprint a car with an illegal driver)

    Personally I would prefer my car being stolen while I'm not using it than me not being able to use when I really need it. What I do to reduce the risk of theft is buy a cheap car. (well no car is cheap... less expensive)

    1. Re:Also, avoid having a stroke. by plover · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally I would prefer my car being stolen while I'm not using it than me not being able to use when I really need it.

      Winner, winner! That's exactly why I have insurance on my vehicles. I'm paying someone else to accept the risk of theft. And they're gambling that I won't be a victim.

      Sure, I don't want my nice new car stolen, nor even my old truck. I take sensible precautions, such as protecting my keys and always locking the vehicles when I leave them, no matter what. But if despite my best efforts, they are stolen, hey, there's some measure of reimbursement. Will I be happy? No. Will the reimbursement get me the same vehicle? Probably not. But will I be without a vehicle for too long? No, the insurance company is well-paid to get me back into a similar vehicle.

      Might the insurance company decide to offer me a discount should I wear this stupid hat? They offer discounts for LoJack systems and other anti-theft measures, so they might offer one for a brain-scanning helmet. Will they someday require them? Probably not unless people really like and accept them.

      --
      John
  7. Interesting by djupedal · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the studies that show how some people's presence can make machines work properly, while other's makes them malfunction.

    I was a mechanic for years and got tired of joking how I could fix a car just by showing up. In contrast, my X would make things go haywire. Whenever she went out shopping, her friends would always get in another checkout line or make her last since they knew something would go wrong with the register once she got near it.

    1. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually have one of those auras and it works both ways. Depending on how I am focusing my thoughts. If I'm really feeling psychotic, or meditating on dark things, I can make chips go so haywire they light everything on the dash. If I then focus on something else neutral or happy, I can then restart the system and turn them off. Happens with reliable degree of accuracy on many different kinds of sensitive electronics. It also runs in the male side ( but not the female side of my family ). Theres a running gag about us being Warlocks.

      A powerful electromagnetic aura is definitely a possibility in my experience.

      I shit you not.

      -the warlock

    2. Re:Interesting by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Reminds me of the studies that show how some people's presence can make machines work properly, while other's makes them malfunction.

      This might stop joy riding, but it won't stop professional car thieves. It goes a little like this... carefully remove the head lamp cover, remove the lamp, stuff a bunch of tin foil in it. Then kick the bumper. *HONKKkk--zrrrrcccch....* Now pull up the short truck, hook the wench up, drag it up the ramp and into the back, hop out, close the door, drive off. With slight modification to the inside, it forms a perfect Faraday cage for the car's electronics... then drive it to the chop shop... also in a nice big metal cage, chop everything up... remove any tracking devices such as OnStar that weren't disabled when you shorted the battery. Total time from capture to parted out: 2 hours. Which is right about the time you finish filling out that nice long form at the police station about how you had your fancy car parked out front for "only a minute" while you ran inside.

      Guys... I don't know how much clearer I can make this; Criminals already just don't fuck with car alarms or ignition interlocks... they just load the car up wholesale into another vehicle. It's only the gang-bangers and joy riders that mess with that.

      This technology will slow down a car thief for exactly... zero seconds. They don't even need to get in the vehicle to steal it. It doesn't happen like in Grand Theft Auto or like those crime dramas that seem to be clogging prime time TV. In the real world, a team of six professional car thieves can move a dozen cars in a night.

      Oh, I know what you're thinking -- you'll just canvas the local junk yards or ebay and find someone selling your car parts. Yeah, no. Your parts are loaded into large crates, and shipped overseas. Your car is sitting in a dozen different shipping containers a few days after it's stolen. No serial numbers on the parts; Those are just discarded. Don't worry though, when they come back into the country 4--6 months from now, it'll be from a salvage title with new VINs and engine serial numbers. Next time you see a hurricane or a major flood somewhere in the world, think of all those delicious salvage titles being sold off for a few bucks each. Their only value is a new set of serial numbers for a stolen car that was nowhere near the disaster area.

      Money laundering is hard, but laundering car parts? Dead simple. It's a multi-billion dollar industry. But if wearing a silly cap with electrodes in it is what it takes for you to feel like car theft is something that only happens to the other guy because you've got the latest car alarm or interlock system, well, okay.

      But the thieves don't care. Chances are, your car will be in a hundred pieces before someone asks... "Hey... what do we do with this stupid-looking cap?" ... and it winds up in a dumpster somewhere a few hours later, having performed its only real function: Making you feel better.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    3. Re:Interesting by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I think it's mostly things that aren't properly shielded and are particularly sensitive to magnetic interference.

      I know I'll get crap about it, but for some reason my nervous system is capable of polarizing metallic wires. Causing them to cross and uncross in response to my thoughts. It's not particularly useful as a trick. Unfortunately, I still can't do telekinesis. Which would be cool.

    4. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you may want to try a few different new threads (not about black magic), but you made a solid post girlyman. Way to state the obvious in no less then 100 words.

    5. Re:Interesting by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      In contrast, my X would make things go haywire. Whenever she went out shopping, her friends would always get in another checkout line or make her last since they knew something would go wrong with the register once she got near it.

      And for the record, this is a classic example of observational selection bias. Get a new car? Suddenly you notice that same car everywhere. Everyone bought the same car you did! Except they totally didn't, it just seems that way. How about one a little closer to home -- ever had that friend that claimed they could turn off street lights? Or that the traffic signals "have it in for you"? More observational selection bias. Humans have this tendancy to see patterns where none exist -- like seeing faces in clouds. There's a good evolutionary reason for this too -- see something move in the bushes and ZOMFG IT'S A BEAR! ... 99 times out of 100, it isn't a bear... but over a few hundred generations... guess what: Those few times it really was a bear has an impact on a person's ability to reproduce. Funny, isn't it; Seeing things that (usually) aren't there has an evolutionary benefit.

      So there you have it. SSSSSSCCCCCIENCE! (cape swish) (flies away)

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Interesting by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      I call bs on this. However, I'd love to be proven wrong.

    7. Re:Interesting by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      My wife can't wear wristwatches. Mechanical or electronic, they stop working after a very short time. The watch repair guy finally gave up, suggested she just ask me what time it was.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    8. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It took years of training to have enough control over it to observe. So its not easy to observe in the wild populations of unwashed plebes. Also I do not want to sacrifice my psuedoanonymity and am to lazy to create and upload a video. Besides the electronic recording device would fry itself during the demonstrations.

      -the warlock

    9. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What are you waiting for? go collect your million dollar!

    10. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have enough data points to declare observational bias on our black magic. Now keep your informed scientific opinion out of our heretical discussions.

      -the warlock

    11. Re:Interesting by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Are you also one of those people still waiting for the SNES cdrom to come out?

    12. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything that involves an aura is bullshit. Science rocks, new agism sucks.

    13. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I grew up in the day and age of the power glove.

      -the warlock

    14. Re:Interesting by J'raxis · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Of course it would. How very convenient.

      So why aren't you out there getting rich and famous with this ability of yours? You could make $1,000,000 if you demonstrated your powers to this guy.

      My guess is you won't make $1,000,000.

    15. Re:Interesting by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      Will write a book about better cellular reception through aura mastery $$.

      -the warlock

    16. Re:Interesting by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      I think you can become rich while proving to the world that it works, assuming that it works.

      Realistically, though, it is probably a case of confirmation bias.

    17. Re:Interesting by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      LOL DAMN! my plan is foiled !!!

    18. Re:Interesting by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Just curious, which warlock are you? - Charlie Sheen or William Shatner?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    19. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cannot wear electrical powered watches. They also just stop.
      I also statically charge very easily, my friends get shocked if they brush past me.
      It is quite annoying sometimes as I frequently discharge on door handles.

      I wear a self-winding (automatic) mechanical watch with no problems.
      I try to wear natural fibre clothing as well, this reduces the intensity.
      I need a earthing cable.

    20. Re:Interesting by lxs · · Score: 1

      Anything that involves an aura is bullshit.

      Unless it's a migraine then its just shit.

    21. Re:Interesting by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      The new age explanation is bullshit but let's not confuse their observational claims with their conclusions.

      For example, I saw a bright "aura" around my headmaster when I was in grade 3. That was close to 50yrs ago but I still remember it clearly because it was the first and by far the brightest aura I've seen, hot Aussie summers day, assembly yard was giant concrete oven, the sun was high in the sky with heavy shade forming a backdrop to the podium, I wasn't the only kid to see it and I believed I had seen an aura well into my twenties, I went to university in my late-20's, now I'm convinced it was a "rainbow" effect caused by the evaporating sweat of an "Englishman in the midday sun", combined with just the right viewing angle and backdrop.

      Other examples from my childhood, Meteorologists claimed "ball lightning does not exist" until it was observed melting a hole through a window of the NY meteorological centre. Black holes were a "mathematical curiosity". It was a "physical impossibility" for exo-planets to be observed with a telescope. At the end of the day, "Science rocks" because it has something no other philosophy offers, the balls to admit when it's wrong.

      As for TFA. Most of the comments here simply don't "get it". Japan is renowned for wacky inventions, it's more of an art form than anything else, the (cheap) inventions are intended to be impractical, a kind of "fart cushion" for the Japanese sense of humour. The more impractical the invention, the more the fans it will love it. This one is a fine example, it involves cars, computers, exposed wires, and a silly hat with a jelly coating on the inside. Although it probably won't make as much money as the "baby mop" which offers more value to a western sense of humour.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    22. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Charlie Sheen definitely more sexy.

    23. Re:Interesting by The_Star_Child · · Score: 1

      In contrast, my X would make things go haywire. Whenever she went out shopping, her friends would always get in another checkout line or make her last since they knew something would go wrong with the register once she got near it.

      And for the record, this is a classic example of observational selection bias. Get a new car? Suddenly you notice that same car everywhere. Everyone bought the same car you did! Except they totally didn't, it just seems that way. How about one a little closer to home -- ever had that friend that claimed they could turn off street lights? Or that the traffic signals "have it in for you"? More observational selection bias. Humans have this tendancy to see patterns where none exist -- like seeing faces in clouds. There's a good evolutionary reason for this too -- see something move in the bushes and ZOMFG IT'S A BEAR! ... 99 times out of 100, it isn't a bear... but over a few hundred generations... guess what: Those few times it really was a bear has an impact on a person's ability to reproduce. Funny, isn't it; Seeing things that (usually) aren't there has an evolutionary benefit.

      So there you have it. SSSSSSCCCCCIENCE! (cape swish) (flies away)

      That is a phenomena distinct from observational selection bias. It's called Pareidolia.

    24. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaving wiggle room about being proven wrong shows you are just as stupid as GP.

    25. Re:Interesting by DexterIsADog · · Score: 1

      Ask, and ye shall receive. No, you can't do that. It doesn't happen.

      Me, on the other hand, I can make clouds dissolve just by concentrating on them.

    26. Re:Interesting by hedwards · · Score: 1

      OK, then how do you explain it then? Something causes the wires to cross and it sure as hell isn't shaking hands, I hold the wires as tightly as possible.

      I always love the way skeptics manage to come up with ridiculous explanations for something that's happening. And have no problem with an explanation that's even more convoluted and questionable than the original assertion. Or hand wave it away as coincidence, which is to say have no plausible explanation either way. But, somehow because they're "skeptics" somehow the fact that their explanation is even more ludicrous it's somehow better.

      BTW, the human nervous system has a crap load of juice. The brain itself is capable of going through 75w worth of electricity if every neuron fires at the same time. Granted that never happens, the closest you get is a seizure, but there's still a fair amount of juice in the body at any given time.

    27. Re:Interesting by DexterIsADog · · Score: 1

      Explain it? Explain what? It doesn't happen. Or if you actually do hold wires, and they do cross, you are making that happen by the way you hold them.

      If you could actually do what you describe, you'd win some small amount of fame for demonstrating it in a controlled, monitored environment. But you never have done that, and you never will, because it would destroy something you hold on to that makes you feel special.

      To be serious, I have a special power. I can jump into any disorganized mess of an organization, convince people to participate as I facilitate the improvement of their broken processes, and (poof!) their productivity jumps measurably. It's like making money out of thin air, it's like... (jazz hands) MAGIC!

      You, on the other hand remind me of my older brother who fell for the "pop corn using cell phones" green screen hoax, and insisted we try it.

      After I showed him the evidence about how it was faked, he *still* didn't want to let go of it.

    28. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hook the wench up"

      Well, at least you've got your date for the ride.

    29. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      carefully remove the head lamp cover, remove the lamp, stuff a bunch of tin foil in it. Then kick the bumper. *HONKKkk--zrrrrcccch....*

      Err, no... Have you ever looked at a fuse block in a car? Typically the headlights will have their own fuse, and possibly separate fuses for high and low beams. It's not uncommon for the horn and brake lights to be on the same fuse (the argument I've heard is that you're more likely to notice the horn not working than the brake lights), but there's no way to kill all the lights and the horn with one piece of foil. Also, it's generally not possible to "carefully remove the headlamp cover" without having the hood open anyway.

      So... nice story, but it doesn't quite work that way in real life. That's not to say there aren't ways to quickly disable a car alarm, of course, that's just not one of them.

  8. no, no, no no. by Iamthecheese · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a really bad idea. If I need to rush someone to the hospital it doesn't matter if I have two beers in me or if I just woke up. And I don't want my car telling me I'm too sleepy to drive -- and there would be no real difference between "just waking up" and "sleepy" anyway. Let's treating me like I'm all grown up and can make my own damn decisions about when to drive okay?

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    1. Re:no, no, no no. by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

      Like that matters - the nanny state needs to keep you safe from yourself.

      Now just wrap yourself up in nerf foam, and lay back and watch reality TV.

      There's a good prole.

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    2. Re:no, no, no no. by gagol · · Score: 1

      Better call an ambulance and get the help to you... safer and quicker.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    3. Re:no, no, no no. by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Now just wrap yourself up in nerf foam, and lay back and watch reality TV.

      ...as you bleed out, because you aren't allowed to drive to urgent care...

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    4. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead you want to hit that small girl playing in the parking lot, because you were too drunk, sleepy and panicky to see her?
      People do their life's worst mistakes in a panicky state.
      Having nightmares may indeed be a way for the brain to cope in such situations, and learning not to let panic override sound decisions.

    5. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right. No more "NYPD, I need to borough your fucking car!" :(

    6. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a really bad idea. If I need to rush someone to the hospital it doesn't matter if I have two beers in me or if I just woke up. And I don't want my car telling me I'm too sleepy to drive -- and there would be no real difference between "just waking up" and "sleepy" anyway.

      Let's treating me like I'm all grown up and can make my own damn decisions about when to drive okay?

      Currently we do let you make your own decisions, human. And you still end up killing thousands of people every fucking year with your drinking and driving.

      Please understand this technology isn't meant for those with an IQ above room temperature. It's meant for that special portion of society who can't seem to use sound judgement and common sense when behind the wheel. Unfortunately with alcohol deeply rooted into society, this technology could be utilized to save lives. I could see this being used as mandatory tech on DUI offenders to avoid repeat offenses.

      FYI, not to target you drunk or sleepy drivers, but realize this technology sounds the death knell for getting oral while driving. I know no man who's mind doesn't turn to mush for at least a few minutes after finishing one of those. Pulled over on the highway for sure with that EEG reading. Now watch that be the new metric for bragging rights between women. "My boyfriend couldn't start his car for 18 minutes after I got done with him!"

    7. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you have an accident rushing to the hospital that's not good, not only can you kill yourself but even injure/kill other people too! Call an ambulance. Even if the person you want to rush to dies, it's better for society from an economic point of view to accept its death than to risk several more plus additional damages.

      That's why. Your life has a price, and it's not very valuable really.

      PD: Also seen many people trying to help victims of car crashes to only injure them more because they couldn't wait for the frigging ambulance.

    8. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, just call the ambulance ... oh wait, your phone doesn't recognize you either ...

    9. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll add special algorithms which can detect the typical thinking patterns of policemen and allow them to use the car unconditionally.

    10. Re:no, no, no no. by mbone · · Score: 1

      Better call an ambulance and get the help to you... safer and quicker.

      Maybe. In the USA, first off, ambulances are not free, and, second, they may not be close. If someone out in the country lives an hour from the nearest ambulance, they might not want to wait and they would certainly dispute the "quicker" part.

      Ambulances also have a substantially higher rate of accidents and fatalities than the average driver, so they might dispute the "safer" part as well.

    11. Re:no, no, no no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So instead of the time to drive to the hospital, it's the time to drive from the hospital to your house and back. Not quicker.

    12. Re:no, no, no no. by gagol · · Score: 1

      you cannot give care in your car while driving. medics make sure to stabalize a patient before/while transporting the patient, ie its not a taxi.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
  9. What could possibly go wrong? by mbone · · Score: 1

    Let's see. My wife goes into labor at 4:00 AM*, and sleepy and excited I get into the car to drive her to the hospital... only to have the car refuse to start, as my brain waves don't match its stored template. Oh, yeah, that will go over well.

    * That was, in fact, when my wife went into labor.

    1. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Let's see. My wife goes into labor at 4:00 AM*, and sleepy and excited I get into the car to drive her to the hospital... only to have the car refuse to start, as my brain waves don't match its stored template. Oh, yeah, that will go over well.

      * That was, in fact, when my wife went into labor.

      Yep, same here. I think they do it on purpose.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see. My wife goes into labor at 4:00 AM*, and sleepy and excited I get into the car to drive her to the hospital... only to have the car refuse to start, as my brain waves don't match its stored template. Oh, yeah, that will go over well.

      * That was, in fact, when my wife went into labor.

      And *this right here, is in fact when you made the rather large assumption that you, racing around the house at 4AM for at least 2 minutes gathering clothes, bags, keys, shoes, getting her in the car, with your heart beating at 140 by the time you run around the car and open your door, that somehow your brain waves would match that of the truck driver sitting damn near comatose in his Ass-Number 4000 air-chair, heart rate at 70, getting ready to fall asleep at the wheel at 4AM.

      No, no, you're right. It's a close call...I mean, I'm sure you do this for a living...

    3. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      Isn't the question if he matches his calm, collected, normal self, not some random truck driver?

  10. Nope! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Won't be buying that. No fucking way.

  11. Super computer in your car? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    You lift the car into a EM shielded truck and drive to a EM shielded site.
    Enter the stolen car and get your computer working on the theft-prevention system over a few hours, days...
    Your car turns up tracker free in another part of the world with a compatible new entry system.
    Trusted bodyguard/driver are now the new theft-prevention system.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  12. Teenagers? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

    Is there enough change in the brain waves of teenagers to detect their growth as being a different person? What about certain disorders that might not effect one's ability to drive or just aging in general? Also, why would it matter if you are drunk of sleepy if your car drives itself?

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Teenagers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about meditation newbies!? I've been practicing meditation for the past month, thus purposely changing my brain waves for the better!

    2. Re:Teenagers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just teenagers. Ever hear about something called a stroke? Even though the person might be perfectly able to drive a car, I'll bet their brain waves are significantly altered if thet have a stroke.

      For the young people out there. Strokes don't happen to old people only, young people can have them too. Often they are caused by some sort of an accident.

  13. Bah. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    Just a trick by the NSA to collect mind-reading data.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Bah. by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      This way they know who to probe. This will save us billions of dollars and save millions of sphincters from being unnecessarily stretched.

    2. Re:Bah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Christ, they mental probe you through your brown eye, instead of third eye O_O

  14. Busts sleepy drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if I get sleepy while driving will my car automatically shut off in the middle of the freeway?

  15. Do I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wear it over or under my tin foil hat?

    1. Re:Do I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Up your bum.

  16. I'm going to need 7 extra keys... by hedgemage · · Score: 1

    One for each of my multiple personalities.

  17. Stealing brainwaves by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    So now instead of cutting off your finger so they can open the fingerprint locks, which involves physical assault, the thieves can just slap an EEG on your head for a few minutes, splice into the wiring and play the recording back after bypassing the sensors. Or they could take advantage of the ability to record more than one person's brainwaves to make themselves an authorized driver (cars will have to allow this because more than one person drives a given car). Or they could use the bypass built-in for letting someone borrow your car (which again will have to be allowed because people do let friends borrow their car for a quick trip to the store) to "borrow" your car. This won't slow the thieves down much, all it'll do is give car owners a false sense of security and make them more careless.

    Myself, I favor a "make the car undrivable" approach, eg. if the ignition is triggered without a door having been opened with the key or the keyless remote, the ECU disables the fuel pump. The car's still vulnerable to thieves who just load it onto a flatbed tow truck, but nothing can really stop that.

  18. sure it will by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    so I can't lend my keys to a friend. and when I have had too much to drink, even if I'm still within legal limits, I can't let my sober friend drive. and I can't drive my own car whenever my brain waves -- which ain't under my control -- are unusual. So if I'm the wrong kind of sick, or if I'm scared, or if I'm in love. If I'm nervous, or if I just lost my job or if my wife is in labour, or if I just learned that she's pregnant, or if my child is injured, or just about any emergency situation that I internalize emotionally.

    And in the end, like all electronic locking measures, they don't actually control the engine, they only control the power button, or the key. Which means that it can be bypassed.

    1. Re:sure it will by gagol · · Score: 1

      let the friend drive and wear the hat! Or better, dont buy a bus or armored transport truck for your personal vehicle.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
  19. not sleepy / fully awake? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    It also busts drunk and sleepy drivers, because their brain waves differ from those when you're fully awake and totally sober.

    And that equates to how many cups of coffee in the morning?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  20. At last... by govett · · Score: 1

    Brain waves. That will prevent someone from loading your car on a truck and driving it away.

  21. So what you do... by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...is get drunk, and *then* have it create a template of your brain waves. Then you have to be drunk or the car won't start.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  22. MiG-31 by jamesh · · Score: 2

    Think in Russian...

    1. Re:MiG-31 by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      firefox ftw..

  23. And what about women by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why nobody think about women?

  24. Rick Perry by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Error: no signal found

  25. EKG by LMariachi · · Score: 1

    Supposedly an EKG can also be used as a unique biometric identifier. There’s a device under development with a release target of “early 2014” that uses it for authentication, and it’s just a slim bracelet rather than a crown of wires.

    I have no connection with the company and absolutely no idea if the thing can or will work as advertised, I just happened to be reading about it right as this was posted.

  26. They want us as borg drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Riddler: Soon my little "Box" will be on countless TVs around the world. Feeding me, credit card numbers, bank codes, sexual fantasies, and little white lies. Into my head they'll go. Victory is inevitable.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112462/

  27. Rape heaven! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Woman is trailed and makes it to her car, just to find that the door tells her "I'm sorry, Devi, but I'm afraid I can't do that." because she is totally in a panic.

  28. Car-DRM by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 1

    because borrowing your car to other people should be illegal (get your own car, you hippie!)

    1. Re:Car-DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lending your car.
      They borrow it, you lend it.
      Borrowing is the receiving act. Lending is the giving act.

  29. Immature... by ExXter · · Score: 1

    They just think about another idea how to lock and unlock something but they don't think further how this new method can be broken. At the start of this year I saw an anime called 'Psycho', a society in which everyones brainwaves are observed to supress violent behaviour...to put it simple. The solution with which terrorists came up was a helmet that copied the brainwaves of the calmest and most balanced person of the area. That allowed it to run havoc but not get caught by the nearly fully automated police. Now I question, if there is technology that can lock and unlock a car by brainwave detection, how long will it take to create a device with this technology that just copies the brainwaves of the owner of the car and once he/she is gone you come along and drive away with it... Happy Research

  30. unless.. by houbou · · Score: 1

    ... this apparatus is part and parcel of the car and that dismantling actually makes the car useless, people will find ways to get around it.

  31. Road rage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would your brain wave change if you are prone to road rage?

  32. Can't change my password by greggman · · Score: 1

    As pointed out by others the problem with biometric passwords is once it's compromised you're S.O.L. If someone manages to record your brainwave pattern how do you go about getting a new one? If someone gets a copy of your fingerprints how do you get new fingerprints? Etc....

    1. Re:Can't change my password by gnupun · · Score: 1

      A single, unchangeable password system where the password is not hidden is, in essence, weak. There are also privacy concerns: won't the car companies (and NSA and other secret agencies) now have a database of brainwaves of a large segment of the population? This database could be put to other (illegal) uses than just unlocking a car in the future.

  33. Designed For Multiple Drivers? by Dialecticus · · Score: 2

    Many cars are driven by more than one driver, such as a husband and wife, and possibly one or more teenage kids. This means that such a car would need to have the ability to store multiple profiles, so just record one profile while sleepy, one profile while drunk, one profile while fully awake and sober. And perhaps a fourth profile while in a state of blind panic in case you ever have to drive to the emergency room, and maybe one where you've just had too much coffee, etc.

    The real difficulty is going to be when a song you like comes on the radio and the car stalls in the middle of the freeway because your brainwaves have just changed. Recording a profile for each song you like would no doubt tax its memory.

    1. Re:Designed For Multiple Drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I'd like to witness the procedure of recording these profiles for 'blind panic'. Sounds like popcorn-festival for me! *scnr*

    2. Re:Designed For Multiple Drivers? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well the point would be that while sober you wouldn't record a drunk state. of course it would have a master password for recording a new allowed pattern. and guys with dui's would have to not have the master password.. but for those just alco lock might be better.

      you see, there's a saying that's not entirely false that goes like this "nobody would drunk drive if they decided it while sober".

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  34. Link text - submitter/editor please learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would comment on the 'scary-looking set of sensors' but when I click on the link whose text includes 'scary-looking set of sensors' I go to a page where there is no fcking picture of those 'scary-looking set of sensors'. I have to go to the other, informative page instead of someone's reputation/karma enhancer page on mashable which is nigh-on worthless. The useless page is also covered in those 'E0' blocks with destinations of '#' and if you think I'm clicking any of those you can fck off. Was there some special character set I was supposed to be using?

    Link text is generally supposed to have some kind of relevance to the destination page. So if you have a link that says 'scary-looking set of sensors' then for fcks sake have a fcking picture of some 'scary-looking set of sensors'.

    Sorry. Slight off-topic rant there, possibly induced by the sight of all that childlike prodding of tablets by people who don't bother to look where they are going (IRL or online, just as bad on both).

    -5, irrelevant crap, venting steam!
    p.s. yes I know I didn't have to leave out the 'u' on some of those words but they are still pronounceable ;)

  35. Dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need me a Magneto helmet.

  36. Then it will check your... by Sla$hPot · · Score: 1

    ... Mood, Stress level, etc. If your hungry and so on.
    And if your hungry it will start carpet bomb you with burger adds.

  37. Great by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

    This article comes right on the heels of a previous one talking about how fingerprints will be used as a biometric to open devices; that article went on to darkly speculate about thieves cutting off victims' fingers to maintain access to stolen goods. Now comes this article, which would suggest thieves either decapitating people and keeping their brains alive in jars, or kidnapping people.

    I just can't wait til some article comes along describing a new technology that allows someone to make an ATM withdrawal by tapping their testicles with a hammer, lightly for $20, harder for more.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  38. keys work fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's wrong with the old standard.. Metal keys?

  39. Um NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The more bullshit they put in cars, the more I think about driving a tractor or dune buggy.

  40. What If by slash.jit · · Score: 1

    What if the driver is a guy and there is a hot chick in the car. He would never be able to reproduce his brain waves the way he recorded !

  41. Anti-theft by JeanCroix · · Score: 1

    My anti-theft device is a rusty 15-year-old vehicle with 190+ miles on it.

    1. Re:Anti-theft by JeanCroix · · Score: 1

      Yeah, heh. I left out a "k" in there.

    2. Re:Anti-theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, heh. I left out a "k" in there.

      Your vehicle is 15,000 years old, or it's 'krusty'?

    3. Re:Anti-theft by JeanCroix · · Score: 1

      Neither, but I think both of those would also be legitimate anti-theft devices.

    4. Re:Anti-theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      15k years old!?

    5. Re:Anti-theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My anti-theft device is a car with a manual transmission.

  42. Easier method: drive a manual by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Jalopnik has accumulated plenty of evidence that driving a stick foils car thieves, simply because they never learned to drive a stick.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:Easier method: drive a manual by PPH · · Score: 1

      Better yet: A knob on the dashboard labeled "Choke". Figure that one out, kids.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Easier method: drive a manual by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      For vehicles equiped with the 'choke' feature, I think just the fact that they have to press the gas pedal down and release the idle cam would be enough. Interestingly what they don't need to do is hold in the clutch....

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  43. drm for your vehicle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey Bob can I borrow your truck this weekend? Sorry Fred, it only allows my brainwaves and I don't want to pay $2000 additional brainwave license.

  44. or EKG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw something similar where the password is your EKG.
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/04/bionym_bracelet_promises_to_replace_passwords_with_ecg_biometrics/

    I guess no one at the company ever had a heart attack.

  45. Because having a seizure while driving... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...wasn't fun enough on its own, now the car shuts down too. Hooray for progress!

  46. drunk driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well thast an interesting take on dropping drunk driving rates

  47. get that fellow out of jail by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    It also busts drunk and sleepy drivers

    I'm betting that poor fellow who's in jail for teaching people how to beat polygraphs can teach us how to beat the "drunk brainwaves" sensor too.

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  48. Neal Stephenson - Jipi and the Paranoid Chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reminds me of this Neal Stephenson story:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jipi_and_the_Paranoid_Chip

    "...produced evolving software inclined to detect paranoid schizophrenics during conversations over the Internet...manufacture of an evolved theft-deterrent alarm-activated car bomb unit"

  49. Carving "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #NO CARRIER

    If he was dying, he wouldn't bother to carve "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh". He'd just say it.

    1. Re:Carving "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #NO CARRIER

      If he was dying, he wouldn't bother to carve "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh". He'd just say it.

      Reading comprehension, much?

      He's not dying, his mind got "rooted". The part about "thequcikbrownfoxjumpsoverthelazydog" and "at-a-distance bi-directional system" should have been clues.

    2. Re:Carving "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHOOOOOOOOOOSH

    3. Re:Carving "Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh" by Apothem · · Score: 1

      Parent post deserves mod points so badly. I wish I had some. Also, I wouldn't want something like this in a car anyway. At that point it's just about reverse engineering the way that type of data is logged. Knowing the companies we have today, there would be some type of global database getting 'hacked' on a daily basis for information.

  50. Just like fingerprint readers on guns by quietwalker · · Score: 1

    It's not that we can't make the technology, it's that because it's not intrinsic to the actual inner workings of the device, it will always be possible to remove it - and it's likely that it'll be easier to do so than to either put it in or protect it from removal. After all, you can have the most complex lock in the world on your ignition, but if the car thief just pops the plastic case on the steering trunk open, they can hotwire it. Why would this be any different? It may very well defer casual theft, but in the long run, it will not deter dedicated thieves or likely be worth the additional trouble it produces for the legitimate user.

    Like they say about computer security - if the attacker has physical access, it simply isn't secure - look at dvd encryption schemes.

    In America, at least, a stick shift would probably be a more effective deterrent vs. car theft.

  51. This makes absolutely no sense to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the summary, it blatantly says: How Your Next Car Will Check You're Not a Thief.

    My questions is: why would they want to build any intelligence into my car to determine whether I've been involved in any illegal filesharing?

    Yeah, that's right, bitches. I said it: thievery. But please don't let that stop you from using the euphemism of your choice.

  52. Borrowing Cars, and Panic Detectors by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Sure, a device like this could easily act as a "panic detector", failing to operate at the times you most need it.

    It also makes it really hard to lend somebody your car.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  53. Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This could make one heck of a Blue Screen of Death.

  54. Classic device by crispin_bollocks · · Score: 1

    I've never worried about theft of my '76 Chevy C-10. It has an anti-theft device called a carburetor.