There is a kill switch. If you watch the video you'll see that the Charlie and Chris told the driver that he could turn off the car and turn it back on in order to reset everything.
A simple radio kill switch will stop any future instructions from coming in but it won't do anything to get rid of any persistent effects that the hackers have set. How are you then going to turn down the radio? How are you going to tell the brakes to stop bleeding? How will legitimate remote technicians help you to regain control of your cars systems? Turning the car off and then on completely reboots the system to load from firmware. The only way persistent effects will last through that is if manufacturers haven't guarded against remote firmware changes.
It's mildly dangerous but it's far better than rolling the dice by just turning off the radio. Having a way for people to recover from an ongoing attack is necessary but, OEMs need to do a better job of isolating critical systems from this kind of attack to begin with.
With your hand in the handshake position, you won't be able to move the mouse with your fingers, and won't get the same fine-grained control as you would with fingers.
Too bad these vertical mice don't have a resolution adjustment. I've had the 3m ergonomic stick mouse for over a year (my wife has tennis and golf elbow) and I haven't been able to get used to it because I invariably overshoot just about everything. A quick resolution selector like on some of the gaming mice and perhaps a thumb scroll wheel would make it more friendly.
desensitize v. tr. desensitized, desensitizing, desensitizes.
To render insensitive or less sensitive.
Immunology. To make (an individual) nonreactive or insensitive to an antigen.
To make emotionally insensitive or unresponsive, as by long exposure or repeated shocks: "The successive assassinations and attempts, not just on Presidential figures but on Martin Luther King Jr. and others, have desensitized us" (Anthony Lewis).
To make (a photographic film or substance) less sensitive to light.
If you read sense 3 in the above definition it appears that the issue being argued here is whether or not repeated exposure to fictional violence causes people to be less emotionally adverse to commiting real violence themselves. I agree that it does. And as much as I like violent movies and games I think that our society doesn't treat them the way it should. I don't think that the answer is to remove the violence from our games and other media. I think that if our society were to have a more conscious treatment of it we could develop a more healthy and lasting understanding of violence.
I don't know anyone who has been affected enough by violence in the media to be driven to violence themselves. But perhaps I lead a sheltered life. I do, however, know quite a few people who are exposed to violence in the media everyday and aren't driven to commiting violence. I think that this shows that it isn't the exposure itself that is a problem. I have no proof of it but I think that the difference between the many who don't commit these violent acts and the few that do is the tools they use to understand and deal with their lives. I would even argue that it is through the use of these tools that people develop their own "desensitization" that keeps them from being violent. The people who do commit violence are by this same token too sensitive to their lives.
You mention swearing in your post above. And I believe that this is one area that shows how desensitization is a useful part of our existence. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." "I'm rubber you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." When we teach our children these phrases we are asking them to be less sensitive to other peoples words. Is this desensitization a bad thing? I don't think it is. We ask our children to be less sensitive to the words of others because we know we cannot stop the world from being mean or rude to them. It would be futile to try to keep our children from being exposed to this kind of "violence". Instead we try to teach them how to protect themselves. In fact I think that this is one of the earliest conscious "coping tools" that we learn. Those of us who learn this realize that peoples words don't have to affect us. Some of us learn it so well that words like f--k, s--t, b---h, meanie, c--t, p---y, f----t, d--e, and dummyhead don't affect us anymore. We can then use these words in our everyday life when they suit us. Is this a bad thing? Is this a good thing? If you let other peoples' words affect you aren't you more sensitive? When I was growing up just hearing the word nigger was enough to make me hurt someone. It used to make me so angry. Now I hear it all the time. I don't hurt people anymore when I hear it. I think that's because I'm less sensitive to it. I can't say it without flinching, but I see kids all aroung me who have no problem with it. Is this desensitization bad? I don't think it is. I'm happy knowing that people won't be able to use that word to control others like they did when I was growing up.
Negative desensitization through repeated exposure is in my opinion a result of experience that isn't tempered by our consciousness. While desensitization has a negative connotation we generally think of experience as a positive thing. Think of all of the medical students all over the world opening up cadavers. Some would say that the main reason for this is to learn anatomy, but I would argue that one can learn anatomy better from some of the texts and exploded diagrams than from actually cutting into another human being. So what does human dissection give our future doctors that the texts can't? It gives them experience. It is important that our surgeons aren't squeamish when it's necessary to amputate a leg, or repair someones heart. Many people who save lives everyday once vomited on their classmates. They are able to continuously perform their duties because they are no longer held back by their sensitivities. Why then don't we hear of hundreds of doctors developing a taste for morbid violence and necrophilia? I think it has to do with the context in which this experience is earned.
So the real problem isn't exposure to violence in the media, but an unbalanced exposure. Many people say that games and media are to blame for this or that the parents are to blame. You know whose fault I think it is? I think it's the fault of anyone out there who passes up an opportunity to help others to build the tools they need to cope with their lives. That includes me, you, the parents, the game designers, pretty much all of us.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a kill switch. If you watch the video you'll see that the Charlie and Chris told the driver that he could turn off the car and turn it back on in order to reset everything.
A simple radio kill switch will stop any future instructions from coming in but it won't do anything to get rid of any persistent effects that the hackers have set. How are you then going to turn down the radio? How are you going to tell the brakes to stop bleeding? How will legitimate remote technicians help you to regain control of your cars systems? Turning the car off and then on completely reboots the system to load from firmware. The only way persistent effects will last through that is if manufacturers haven't guarded against remote firmware changes.
It's mildly dangerous but it's far better than rolling the dice by just turning off the radio. Having a way for people to recover from an ongoing attack is necessary but, OEMs need to do a better job of isolating critical systems from this kind of attack to begin with.
whoosh!
Too bad these vertical mice don't have a resolution adjustment. I've had the 3m ergonomic stick mouse for over a year (my wife has tennis and golf elbow) and I haven't been able to get used to it because I invariably overshoot just about everything. A quick resolution selector like on some of the gaming mice and perhaps a thumb scroll wheel would make it more friendly.
If you read sense 3 in the above definition it appears that the issue being argued here is whether or not repeated exposure to fictional violence causes people to be less emotionally adverse to commiting real violence themselves. I agree that it does. And as much as I like violent movies and games I think that our society doesn't treat them the way it should. I don't think that the answer is to remove the violence from our games and other media. I think that if our society were to have a more conscious treatment of it we could develop a more healthy and lasting understanding of violence.
I don't know anyone who has been affected enough by violence in the media to be driven to violence themselves. But perhaps I lead a sheltered life. I do, however, know quite a few people who are exposed to violence in the media everyday and aren't driven to commiting violence. I think that this shows that it isn't the exposure itself that is a problem. I have no proof of it but I think that the difference between the many who don't commit these violent acts and the few that do is the tools they use to understand and deal with their lives. I would even argue that it is through the use of these tools that people develop their own "desensitization" that keeps them from being violent. The people who do commit violence are by this same token too sensitive to their lives.
You mention swearing in your post above. And I believe that this is one area that shows how desensitization is a useful part of our existence. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." "I'm rubber you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." When we teach our children these phrases we are asking them to be less sensitive to other peoples words. Is this desensitization a bad thing? I don't think it is. We ask our children to be less sensitive to the words of others because we know we cannot stop the world from being mean or rude to them. It would be futile to try to keep our children from being exposed to this kind of "violence". Instead we try to teach them how to protect themselves. In fact I think that this is one of the earliest conscious "coping tools" that we learn. Those of us who learn this realize that peoples words don't have to affect us. Some of us learn it so well that words like f--k, s--t, b---h, meanie, c--t, p---y, f----t, d--e, and dummyhead don't affect us anymore. We can then use these words in our everyday life when they suit us. Is this a bad thing? Is this a good thing? If you let other peoples' words affect you aren't you more sensitive? When I was growing up just hearing the word nigger was enough to make me hurt someone. It used to make me so angry. Now I hear it all the time. I don't hurt people anymore when I hear it. I think that's because I'm less sensitive to it. I can't say it without flinching, but I see kids all aroung me who have no problem with it. Is this desensitization bad? I don't think it is. I'm happy knowing that people won't be able to use that word to control others like they did when I was growing up.
Negative desensitization through repeated exposure is in my opinion a result of experience that isn't tempered by our consciousness. While desensitization has a negative connotation we generally think of experience as a positive thing. Think of all of the medical students all over the world opening up cadavers. Some would say that the main reason for this is to learn anatomy, but I would argue that one can learn anatomy better from some of the texts and exploded diagrams than from actually cutting into another human being. So what does human dissection give our future doctors that the texts can't? It gives them experience. It is important that our surgeons aren't squeamish when it's necessary to amputate a leg, or repair someones heart. Many people who save lives everyday once vomited on their classmates. They are able to continuously perform their duties because they are no longer held back by their sensitivities. Why then don't we hear of hundreds of doctors developing a taste for morbid violence and necrophilia? I think it has to do with the context in which this experience is earned.
So the real problem isn't exposure to violence in the media, but an unbalanced exposure. Many people say that games and media are to blame for this or that the parents are to blame. You know whose fault I think it is? I think it's the fault of anyone out there who passes up an opportunity to help others to build the tools they need to cope with their lives. That includes me, you, the parents, the game designers, pretty much all of us.
- Ben Burnett