The FBI has known what was on that phone for a LONG LONG time, because they've always had the ability to break into the phone. They realized that they're not going to get the court precedent they wanted, so now it's time to humiliate apple by paying Celebrite to play along like they are the ones that hacked the phone. This gives the FBI three things: 1) The ability to claim that their tech isn't that great, thus keeping their enemies in the dark. 2) Being able to save face and NOT set the precedent in the opposing direction (because they can drop the case which results in no precedent being set) 3) They can throw some egg on Apple's face saying that "an Israeli company" had the ability to break into the phone. (Notice that it's not a foreign government that has this capability), playing on the xenophobia of stupid Americans.
This has always been and always will be a political fight, not a technical one.
Actually, I think you might be on to something... at least in the distant future... as more and more people eschew ownership, I could see a company eventually just saying "lets build a fleet of purpose built transports that we own and control, and provide ride sharing." However, I think it requires first the mass adoption of ride sharing, which is why I say "distant future."
Thanks for the backup. This is exactly what I was saying, and it's amazing that nobody in this entire thread gets it but you... You can either lead the change or follow it, but the change is happening... guaranteed!
The thing is, maintaining a car that was driven by algorithm to be easy on the hardware is going to be much easier than maintaining a car that was driven by an emotional, fallible, sleepy, hungry, angry human. Also, fuel won't be that big of a deal since I predict most self driving cars will be electric. Finally, parking a car in a safe out-of-the-way place is a lot easier when your parking garage only needs 5' tall ceilings, cars can be placed 3" apart and you don't need to leave right of way space (assuming your parking garage has a FIFO layout, you can park them wall to wall door to door. Plus, the highways themselves could potentially provide the "parking" space if you simply mean getting it out of the way of a hurricane... the car doesn't technically have to stop to be parked... it just needs to be out of the way. Hell, with a big enough fleet, you could get half your cars out of the the city by making rides 1/2 price for anyone wanting to leave. Send half your cars 200 miles inland to a safer city (with a paying passenger of course) and once it arrives in the new city, it can work the city for a couple of days while infrastructure gets put back together, then it can head back home with the returning surge of people who also want to come back. Self driving cars FTW.
I'm thinking it's about 50/50 that Uber will survive... however, the ride hailing idea is NEVER going to die. The desire for ride hailing companies to not pay employees, and instead invest in self driving tech is also not going anywhere. I think you put too much faith in "laws" which are in fact more like racketeering. The taxi laws are not in place to protect the taxi companies, they are in place to protect the customers and the general public. Once self driving tech is considered safer than human drivers (the bar is pretty low people...) then you will see the industry kick every last driver to the curb.
News flash for auto makers: If you refuse to deal with Uber et al, they'll just end run you and build their own car, powered by Google's self driving software. Do you really want that? Companies that see the writing on the wall early enough can lead the industry in it's new direction. Those who refuse to compete at that level will die... like Kodak.
Don't forget about the most popular radio receiver in the car... the actual AM/FM head unit. FM broadcasts have a sub-channel for providing the name of the song, the name of the artist, etc. which is displayed on the infotainment system. One does wonder how secure that system is too. These systems are admittedly harder to compromise than say, the insurance industry's OBDII dongles, or the cellular data systems, but they are all there and all present a little opportunity to hack in. The funny thing is, just like it's internet based counterparts, just because one manufacturer or standard has "secured" the communication channel, doesn't mean that some future software update coded by a careless maintainer won't accidentally re-introduce the vulnerability. These systems are ALWAYS going to be at risk, just like any other connected device. There's always a way to get in.
I wouldn't be so sure about this... high line TPMS sensors can be commanded to report using a LF transmitter. This triggers the sensor to broadcast it's status, thereby allowing the capture of the sensor's serial number. Even low line sensors transmit every 5 to 10 minutes. With a little patience, one can copy and replay the TMPS sensor data... modify it to show low tire pressure and high temp, etc. and cause the console to show a tire flat condition. Admittedly a lame hack, but easy way to vex a particular driver. Now, admittedly I don't know if there is hack in the wild that lets you penetrate the TPMS, but since it has an antenna, and it has a connection to the car's CAN bus, it's possible, and it's likely that the gates are wide open somewhere, given the auto industry's aptitude for securing their products.
You really should read up on American history... start with Watergate. The reality is that fully encrypted communication channels are the lesser of two evils here... and fully encrypted communication is no different than "taking a walk in the woods" 200 years ago. The underlying idea is that thought is not a crime, speech is not a crime, and full access to my device only gives you my thought and speech. This has nothing to do with guns, you are mistaken about that. Gun control is about individual protection... encryption is about national protection.
Simple probability my good man. Knowing nothing else about the GP, nearly half the state lives in New York City... so if I had to pick one city to lampoon, my best shot at getting GP's city, it would be to guess New York City.
By the way... why do YOU assume that it was necessary for my comment to be related to GPs actual city? Do you not think that his life will be impacted if New York City were to flood? Stop being so pedantic and try to relax a little.:)
You'll think that when New York streets look more like Venice. It's nice for sure, but the biggest effect is not going to be "nice weather"... people always think weather is nice when it's average. The real issue will be bigger more violent storms, and rising ocean flooding of coastal areas where humans like to build. The rich will rise with the tide and the poor will drown.
Although millions of instances of ads may be served, the number of distinct ads is much less, so I don't think the burden is as great as you are suggesting.
Just wait... someone will figure out how to embed a sound or video sequence that will compromise a smart TV, and the TV company won't have the technical chops to look for it and reject it... I guarantee it will happen, and probably within the next 10 years.
A newspaper would NEVER print (physically print) an ad that they hadn't reviewed first... NEVER, so why when you go to a news web site do you see ads which have not been reviewed? I know for a fact that they don't bother! Example: a local flight school had an airplane crash last year... the story the local news ran had a sidebar advert for that very same flight school. Two people died in that crash, and nobody thought: Hmmm... is this appropriate? If you can't be bothered to look at your ads, then I can't be bothered to look at them either. Add blockers won't work against self-hosted ads, so the solution is already present and obvious. Stop trying to make laws to protect your laziness! It's really not that hard to ask your editors to "flag" certain subjects as off limits for ads, and if you control the ad platform, problem solved!
When you look at other industries outside of news, the problem is the same. We've achieved the ability to track people, and therefore provide contextual advertising based on other websites I visit, but there is never any awareness about the website I'm currently visiting. Kinda like a rape counseling site with a dating app ad in the sidebar. The funny thing is, it's probably not bringing the advertiser the value they want either.
I'm thinking they forgot to check the box that said "Avoid areas that are dangerous to Israeli soldiers"... because I'm pretty sure the area was safe for most Palestinians.
This is not an attack, I'm genuinely interested here:
What do you figure is the break-even point between the car + solar + storage + maintenance vs. ICE car + gas + maintenance? Which component do you think will give out first, and when do you think it will give out? I'm interested because I actually have some solar guys coming to the house Saturday to discuss some panels, and I'm curious how you figured the value of the deal. For me it would start by offsetting grid power, but I would love to be able to get into an EV (but a coal powered EV doesn't really appeal to me).
Well, I think it's pretty obvious... Taxi companies are going to retrofit all of their 90's crown vics to be autonomous!!!!
Reality check: By the time autonomous driving is good enough for the road, the vast majority of cars (autonomous or otherwise) will be electric. So the "milage" argument would have been a smarter way to go than the "oh my god pollution" argument. Just sayin...
... is that _only_ 5-6 people tried to access it... basically you created a honey pot that teased out the script kiddies, while the professionals saw it and thought "no way this is legit."
Slashdot Mirror
Let me offer you an alternative interpretation:
The FBI has known what was on that phone for a LONG LONG time, because they've always had the ability to break into the phone. They realized that they're not going to get the court precedent they wanted, so now it's time to humiliate apple by paying Celebrite to play along like they are the ones that hacked the phone. This gives the FBI three things:
1) The ability to claim that their tech isn't that great, thus keeping their enemies in the dark.
2) Being able to save face and NOT set the precedent in the opposing direction (because they can drop the case which results in no precedent being set)
3) They can throw some egg on Apple's face saying that "an Israeli company" had the ability to break into the phone. (Notice that it's not a foreign government that has this capability), playing on the xenophobia of stupid Americans.
This has always been and always will be a political fight, not a technical one.
Actually, I think you might be on to something... at least in the distant future... as more and more people eschew ownership, I could see a company eventually just saying "lets build a fleet of purpose built transports that we own and control, and provide ride sharing." However, I think it requires first the mass adoption of ride sharing, which is why I say "distant future."
Thanks for the backup. This is exactly what I was saying, and it's amazing that nobody in this entire thread gets it but you... You can either lead the change or follow it, but the change is happening... guaranteed!
Wish I could give you mod points.
The thing is, maintaining a car that was driven by algorithm to be easy on the hardware is going to be much easier than maintaining a car that was driven by an emotional, fallible, sleepy, hungry, angry human. Also, fuel won't be that big of a deal since I predict most self driving cars will be electric. Finally, parking a car in a safe out-of-the-way place is a lot easier when your parking garage only needs 5' tall ceilings, cars can be placed 3" apart and you don't need to leave right of way space (assuming your parking garage has a FIFO layout, you can park them wall to wall door to door. Plus, the highways themselves could potentially provide the "parking" space if you simply mean getting it out of the way of a hurricane... the car doesn't technically have to stop to be parked... it just needs to be out of the way. Hell, with a big enough fleet, you could get half your cars out of the the city by making rides 1/2 price for anyone wanting to leave. Send half your cars 200 miles inland to a safer city (with a paying passenger of course) and once it arrives in the new city, it can work the city for a couple of days while infrastructure gets put back together, then it can head back home with the returning surge of people who also want to come back. Self driving cars FTW.
I'm thinking it's about 50/50 that Uber will survive... however, the ride hailing idea is NEVER going to die. The desire for ride hailing companies to not pay employees, and instead invest in self driving tech is also not going anywhere. I think you put too much faith in "laws" which are in fact more like racketeering. The taxi laws are not in place to protect the taxi companies, they are in place to protect the customers and the general public. Once self driving tech is considered safer than human drivers (the bar is pretty low people...) then you will see the industry kick every last driver to the curb.
News flash for auto makers: If you refuse to deal with Uber et al, they'll just end run you and build their own car, powered by Google's self driving software. Do you really want that? Companies that see the writing on the wall early enough can lead the industry in it's new direction. Those who refuse to compete at that level will die... like Kodak.
Don't forget about the most popular radio receiver in the car... the actual AM/FM head unit. FM broadcasts have a sub-channel for providing the name of the song, the name of the artist, etc. which is displayed on the infotainment system. One does wonder how secure that system is too. These systems are admittedly harder to compromise than say, the insurance industry's OBDII dongles, or the cellular data systems, but they are all there and all present a little opportunity to hack in. The funny thing is, just like it's internet based counterparts, just because one manufacturer or standard has "secured" the communication channel, doesn't mean that some future software update coded by a careless maintainer won't accidentally re-introduce the vulnerability. These systems are ALWAYS going to be at risk, just like any other connected device. There's always a way to get in.
<slow clap>news for nerds, AC's sexual fetishes that matter</slow clap>
I wouldn't be so sure about this... high line TPMS sensors can be commanded to report using a LF transmitter. This triggers the sensor to broadcast it's status, thereby allowing the capture of the sensor's serial number. Even low line sensors transmit every 5 to 10 minutes. With a little patience, one can copy and replay the TMPS sensor data... modify it to show low tire pressure and high temp, etc. and cause the console to show a tire flat condition. Admittedly a lame hack, but easy way to vex a particular driver. Now, admittedly I don't know if there is hack in the wild that lets you penetrate the TPMS, but since it has an antenna, and it has a connection to the car's CAN bus, it's possible, and it's likely that the gates are wide open somewhere, given the auto industry's aptitude for securing their products.
...to ask what the odds were on "government mandated back door", to which he replied "redacted."
Lol! I wish I could mod this up! Well said.
Wrong... you can't sue a government agency into oblivion... only it's people.
You really should read up on American history... start with Watergate. The reality is that fully encrypted communication channels are the lesser of two evils here... and fully encrypted communication is no different than "taking a walk in the woods" 200 years ago. The underlying idea is that thought is not a crime, speech is not a crime, and full access to my device only gives you my thought and speech. This has nothing to do with guns, you are mistaken about that. Gun control is about individual protection... encryption is about national protection.
Simple probability my good man. Knowing nothing else about the GP, nearly half the state lives in New York City... so if I had to pick one city to lampoon, my best shot at getting GP's city, it would be to guess New York City.
By the way... why do YOU assume that it was necessary for my comment to be related to GPs actual city? Do you not think that his life will be impacted if New York City were to flood? Stop being so pedantic and try to relax a little. :)
[Citation needed]
You'll think that when New York streets look more like Venice. It's nice for sure, but the biggest effect is not going to be "nice weather"... people always think weather is nice when it's average. The real issue will be bigger more violent storms, and rising ocean flooding of coastal areas where humans like to build. The rich will rise with the tide and the poor will drown.
Although millions of instances of ads may be served, the number of distinct ads is much less, so I don't think the burden is as great as you are suggesting.
Just wait... someone will figure out how to embed a sound or video sequence that will compromise a smart TV, and the TV company won't have the technical chops to look for it and reject it... I guarantee it will happen, and probably within the next 10 years.
This X1000!
A newspaper would NEVER print (physically print) an ad that they hadn't reviewed first... NEVER, so why when you go to a news web site do you see ads which have not been reviewed? I know for a fact that they don't bother! Example: a local flight school had an airplane crash last year... the story the local news ran had a sidebar advert for that very same flight school. Two people died in that crash, and nobody thought: Hmmm... is this appropriate? If you can't be bothered to look at your ads, then I can't be bothered to look at them either. Add blockers won't work against self-hosted ads, so the solution is already present and obvious. Stop trying to make laws to protect your laziness! It's really not that hard to ask your editors to "flag" certain subjects as off limits for ads, and if you control the ad platform, problem solved!
When you look at other industries outside of news, the problem is the same. We've achieved the ability to track people, and therefore provide contextual advertising based on other websites I visit, but there is never any awareness about the website I'm currently visiting. Kinda like a rape counseling site with a dating app ad in the sidebar. The funny thing is, it's probably not bringing the advertiser the value they want either.
Thank God! Anonymous Coward is the worst member of this site... always stirring up trouble! I'll be glad to see him go!
I'm thinking they forgot to check the box that said "Avoid areas that are dangerous to Israeli soldiers"... because I'm pretty sure the area was safe for most Palestinians.
This is not an attack, I'm genuinely interested here:
What do you figure is the break-even point between the car + solar + storage + maintenance vs. ICE car + gas + maintenance? Which component do you think will give out first, and when do you think it will give out? I'm interested because I actually have some solar guys coming to the house Saturday to discuss some panels, and I'm curious how you figured the value of the deal. For me it would start by offsetting grid power, but I would love to be able to get into an EV (but a coal powered EV doesn't really appeal to me).
Thanks,
Well, I think it's pretty obvious... Taxi companies are going to retrofit all of their 90's crown vics to be autonomous!!!!
Reality check: By the time autonomous driving is good enough for the road, the vast majority of cars (autonomous or otherwise) will be electric. So the "milage" argument would have been a smarter way to go than the "oh my god pollution" argument. Just sayin...
I came here to say exactly this! It was an obvious, but not yet worn out classic! Wish I had mod points for ya.
... is that _only_ 5-6 people tried to access it... basically you created a honey pot that teased out the script kiddies, while the professionals saw it and thought "no way this is legit."