The brakes ARE enough to stop the car even floored. It just takes longer if the e-throttle isn't programmed to back off like every other manufacturers apparently does it. Check the news rack, one of the sports car magazines just tested this and every car in the test to include a Mustang Cobra stopped.
Most cars run all the same software anyway? Wow, you really don't know much about this do you? 40 parameters is also incorrect. When you take into account variable cams, emissions, variable steering ratios, e-throttle, anti-lock brakes, traction management, and a whole host of other toys in cars these days you'll begin to understand just how much is going on. Chrysler ECU's I've looked into haven't exactly been leading the charge on technology either! With the introduction of OBD-II and the CAN-BUS the whole car has computers in it and they can all be programmed if you have the right tools. 2K might be the code found in a window regulator these days lol.
Of course it won't stall. Does every other car out there with an E-throttle stall under these circumstances? Nope! Hint: Toyota was just about the only manufacturer NOT doing this and their cars took longer to stop with the gas pedal floored as a result. This is a smart fix, it won't stall the car.
The software change will cut throttle when the brakes are applied while gas is also applied. Most every other automaker (possibly all actually) already does this. Even when not done these cars can be brought to a halt judging from the tests I've seen documented. If nothing this update will bring the car's behavior in line with that of other manufacturer's with regards to throttle activity under hard braking...
This is a pretty simple change. The car has an E-throttle and this change simply makes it react the way the the E-throttle in almost every other manufacturer's car does. The change cuts throttle if the brake and throttle are both pressed for more than a short period of time thus allowing the car to slow more quickly.
One of the sports car magazines I receive noted that Toyota was the odd one out in the practice of NOT cutting throttle under extended braking. It showed too in their testing where they took a number of cars up to speed, stomped on the gas and brake, and measured the stopping distance. Even high HP cars like the Ford Cobra stopped in a reasonable amount of distance with the Toyota cars showing a noticeably lengthier stopping distance. Oddly - ALL cars were able to stop so these cars going for miles and miles unstoppable seems awful strange. Yes, they did test cars that have been reported to run away from Toyota...
IMO - it's a worthwhile update that will help stop your car in the event of a runaway situation...
I do not think the kid knew the desktop was being watched. However when the guy took control of the desktop to snap a picture the kid knew about it with enough advanced notice to duck out of the way of the camera and the guy said something along the lines of "they always do that". Obviously the faculty and students play cat and mouse with the silly desktop, frankly it's kind of sad they spend so much time policing the kids like that. Also it's obvious that they attempt to take pictures often enough that the kids spot it and know to react. Other parts of the clip showed them typing comments to the kids to get back to work or somesuch - I'm sure with some research by an Apple freak someone could tell us what app was being run on the desktop to exercise control and provide comms.
All of that aside - yeah I think it's kind of creepy. It's also possible, if the software phones home, that this level of control could be used in the home situation as well. Frankly I don't like it but it's for those sorts of reasons I decline access to a corp laptop - I have plenty of my own and don't need the headaches. I wouldn't be surprised if the kids are finding ways to disable this big brother and still get on the school network - wouldn't that be humorous?:-)
Digital Nation and NO they did NOT show the staff turning on the web cam. The vid is linked here a few times so I won't do it again but maybe go WATCH it again?
He's remotely watching the DESKTOP not the kids. The kids are running a program named Photobooth in order to use the camera as a mirror and it is THAT on the desktop that the teacher sees not a direct feed from the web cam. As it happens this school is ALSO using OSX based computers and it's possible that something similar was done or that the child took a pic at home and it was found on the desktop later by a snooping teacher. Watch that video carefully and you will see the teacher take control of the desktop to try and snap a picture, the child realize what's up and duck away, and the guy tell the reporter that that's what they usually do when he attempts to catch them by taking a picture to yank their chain.....
It's not as bad as it could be if that Digital Nation video is accurate but it's not great either IMO. The Superintendent of that school system has issued a statement saying that they can take pics but normally just due to a theft situation and that only the IT group sees the pics....
Ah, I stand corrected on one point - this IS an OSX based computer so it sounds much like the ones used in NYC! Here's the DigitalNation video http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/ At about 4:39 or so the administrator shows how he takes over the desktop and attempts to snap a picture in order to get the kids to behave and stop using the cam as a mirror.... It is possible that the kid in THIS story was posing for pictures at home privately and the teacher somehow got a look or perhaps the teacher saw the pic on the computer when he was back at school? Lots of possibilities but so far NO clear story yet IMO. I'm not quite ready to go nuts but something certainly smells here if they retain this capability when the kids are off-campus...
The theft angle is exactly what the Superintendent is claiming they had software for and that only the IT group could see it. However if it was possible to remotely view the desktop and the student had an app up taking pics of himself then they might have seen something they didn't like. If the staff could remotely control the desktop they could also have downloaded and installed software that allowed remote viewing - policy be damned.
So far I'm not quite ready to string up the staff for doing this wholesale but it is possible that one of them did a bit of hackery to enable functionality that the IT group hadn't intended. Oh and while you guys didn't have the time to watch all those feeds other schools apparently DO, there's a video linked in the BoingBoing comments that interviews teachers at a NYC school and apparently the teachers are assigned time to go through and monitor the kid's desktops and ping them if they aren't doing stuff they're supposed to be doing. This allowed them to see via the webcam when the kids ran programs that activated it and the teacher demonstrated taking control and snapping pics too - posisbly the case in this story but honestly there's not enough detail provided in the story or in the lawsuit PDF to know exactly WTF happened - yet....
They claim that the capability was designed to find lost or stolen laptops ONLY so if it was used in this manner is was apparently done so improperly. The Superintendent seems to claim that only the IT group can activate this or see the images so it remains to be seen as to what happened here but I have some thoughts....
From watching a video from another school district that I found in the comments on BoinBoing some schools sometimes see the students because the students run apps on their desktop that display video from their own WEB cam. Photobooth was the app mentioned in that story and the desktop appeared to be OSX so not likely the same software here but possible a similar program.
Lastly, if they have the capability to remotely control, as this other school did, then they could also be launching apps or installing apps that are allowing this kind of peeping - not cool IMO.
Gee, two HIGH profile developers are locked out of their accounts - with the SAME error message Apple send when they suspect someone has been trying to break into an account. Golly, you don't think maybe someone has been trying to brute their account passwords do you? Wake me when it's more than two and some unknown guy who has no reason to be targeted gets the error and Apple tells him to blow off when he calls them. So far all I've read on this seems to indicate that someone tried to get into their account - have they even asked Apple to reactivate their accounts?
The police point out that this wasn't just a few snowballs and that this occurred in the middle of a snow storm! These guys were throwing SHOVEL fulls of snow onto windshields and when the officers attempted to exit their vehicle they received shovel fulls of snow as well!
These weren't 10 year old children but 21 year old college students who ought to have had a little more common sense! I'm not sure a felony charge is warranted unless they're being charged with criminal stupidity but they sure ought to be charged with something. Not the brightest bulbs on the porch....
Just exactly how fast was a snow PLOW likely to be going in inclement weather? For that matter an undercover police car was likely not moving too fast either considering the weather here on the East Coast brought us FEET of snow that totally overwhelmed snow removal services. a week later I'm still driving on some streets that have 6inch thick ice sheets on them. I don't think you need worry that these were vehicles traveling 60MPH being pelted by objects which wold indeed be deadly serious!
That said - not a smart thing to do to a city vehicle since they tend to have no sense of humor. If you read the article they were throwing shovels of snow and not simply a few snowballs. It's not clear to me exactly what these punks were thinking but I don't think the cops grabbing them was completely unjustified. Throwing a shovel full of snow onto the windshield of a plow or car isn't exactly a bright thing to do!
Apparently the policy is heavier folks buy two tickets and if the plane isn't full they refund the second ticket. In this case he HAD bought two tickets - so he knows he's heavy - but asked to fly on an earlier flight stand-by. Sure enough there was ONE seat left and he sat in it but it was decided after teh fact that he was too big. the safety factor comes into play in that if you're squished up against someone who's big and you need to exit quickly it can be a problem - it wasn't that he was simply too carrying much weight.
Having been forced to "share thighs" with someone who overflowed their seat on another airline I actually find their policy enlightened! However he seems to be making a real fuss out of it despite his having so much as admitted that he's heavy in the first place by virtue of having bought TWO tickets!
You started off okay then WOW you took a hard right on the expressway offramp and into the bushes. TPM is designed to detect changes to specific protected operating system files so that the owner knows that they haven't been tampered with. SuperDRM spy reports?:-O That's some might fine tinfoil you have there...
Pike's Peak has gravel, packed dirt, some asphalt, the works! The change in altitude plays HELL with the engine output even on turbocharged cars so there are many many variables at work. Oh, there's not great guardrails either I understand....
Actually READ the linked article on On-Star before trying to summarize it please! On-Star doesn't "beam" a signal down from a satellite - it uses CELL PHONE technology. The only satellite involved in that scenario is the ones in the sky enabling the GPS. Unlike in some crap movies GPS is actually ONE-WAY and you're not beaming your location or anything else back UP. They're simply querying the GPS to find out the current location of the vehicle via cell phone - nothing else. CSI TV technology this ain't.
Also - if you READ the article the signal sent to the On-Star simply tells it to not START the next time the thief tries to use it. It does NOT cripple the computer, it does not degrade the performance, it simply tells the computer not to restart. "Block the ignition on the next restart" is that NOT clear enough? REstart as in the NEXT time someone turns the key for a start. So if it's running this article doesn't say squat about turning it off remotely.
On-Star has plenty of things going for it that I don't like and wouldn't want in my car - to include at one point the ability for law enforcement to remotely eavesdrop on you - so you really don't have to make up crazy things and lose credibility.
Why would there be no steering or "control"? Hint: turn off your ignition on the highway at 60mph but do not allow it to lock the column. Surprise - car drives fine and decelerates slowly - the brakes still work too....
You realize it's skinable right? And you are one of the very few minority that cannot understand the interface it seems. Should it have been with crayons perhaps? Can you give an example of something with a good interface or do you hate them all? Try Boxee and see if you aren't even more willing to poke your eyes out....
And the previous install of Linux was run in a limited Hypervisor anyway that didn't give you proper access to the underlying hardware anyway. Want video acceleration? Nope sorry, you can't have it. They apparently only ever did this to keep people like the parent happy and not to actually give folks any real serious Linux functionality.:-( There's a reason why programs like XBMC don't run on the PS3 and it's nto the CPU...
ATOM ION anything, AppleTV with the Broadcom HD decoder card, Intel Mini with Broadcom card ($20 BTW), NVIDIA's VDPA rocks! I use an ASROCK 330 - ZERO complaints, it just works!
Slashdot Mirror
The brakes ARE enough to stop the car even floored. It just takes longer if the e-throttle isn't programmed to back off like every other manufacturers apparently does it. Check the news rack, one of the sports car magazines just tested this and every car in the test to include a Mustang Cobra stopped.
Most cars run all the same software anyway? Wow, you really don't know much about this do you? 40 parameters is also incorrect. When you take into account variable cams, emissions, variable steering ratios, e-throttle, anti-lock brakes, traction management, and a whole host of other toys in cars these days you'll begin to understand just how much is going on. Chrysler ECU's I've looked into haven't exactly been leading the charge on technology either! With the introduction of OBD-II and the CAN-BUS the whole car has computers in it and they can all be programmed if you have the right tools. 2K might be the code found in a window regulator these days lol.
Of course it won't stall. Does every other car out there with an E-throttle stall under these circumstances? Nope! Hint: Toyota was just about the only manufacturer NOT doing this and their cars took longer to stop with the gas pedal floored as a result. This is a smart fix, it won't stall the car.
The software change will cut throttle when the brakes are applied while gas is also applied. Most every other automaker (possibly all actually) already does this. Even when not done these cars can be brought to a halt judging from the tests I've seen documented. If nothing this update will bring the car's behavior in line with that of other manufacturer's with regards to throttle activity under hard braking...
This is a pretty simple change. The car has an E-throttle and this change simply makes it react the way the the E-throttle in almost every other manufacturer's car does. The change cuts throttle if the brake and throttle are both pressed for more than a short period of time thus allowing the car to slow more quickly.
One of the sports car magazines I receive noted that Toyota was the odd one out in the practice of NOT cutting throttle under extended braking. It showed too in their testing where they took a number of cars up to speed, stomped on the gas and brake, and measured the stopping distance. Even high HP cars like the Ford Cobra stopped in a reasonable amount of distance with the Toyota cars showing a noticeably lengthier stopping distance. Oddly - ALL cars were able to stop so these cars going for miles and miles unstoppable seems awful strange. Yes, they did test cars that have been reported to run away from Toyota...
IMO - it's a worthwhile update that will help stop your car in the event of a runaway situation...
I do not think the kid knew the desktop was being watched. However when the guy took control of the desktop to snap a picture the kid knew about it with enough advanced notice to duck out of the way of the camera and the guy said something along the lines of "they always do that". Obviously the faculty and students play cat and mouse with the silly desktop, frankly it's kind of sad they spend so much time policing the kids like that. Also it's obvious that they attempt to take pictures often enough that the kids spot it and know to react. Other parts of the clip showed them typing comments to the kids to get back to work or somesuch - I'm sure with some research by an Apple freak someone could tell us what app was being run on the desktop to exercise control and provide comms.
All of that aside - yeah I think it's kind of creepy. It's also possible, if the software phones home, that this level of control could be used in the home situation as well. Frankly I don't like it but it's for those sorts of reasons I decline access to a corp laptop - I have plenty of my own and don't need the headaches. I wouldn't be surprised if the kids are finding ways to disable this big brother and still get on the school network - wouldn't that be humorous? :-)
YES I like caps - adds emphasis! :-P
Digital Nation and NO they did NOT show the staff turning on the web cam. The vid is linked here a few times so I won't do it again but maybe go WATCH it again?
He's remotely watching the DESKTOP not the kids. The kids are running a program named Photobooth in order to use the camera as a mirror and it is THAT on the desktop that the teacher sees not a direct feed from the web cam. As it happens this school is ALSO using OSX based computers and it's possible that something similar was done or that the child took a pic at home and it was found on the desktop later by a snooping teacher. Watch that video carefully and you will see the teacher take control of the desktop to try and snap a picture, the child realize what's up and duck away, and the guy tell the reporter that that's what they usually do when he attempts to catch them by taking a picture to yank their chain.....
It's not as bad as it could be if that Digital Nation video is accurate but it's not great either IMO. The Superintendent of that school system has issued a statement saying that they can take pics but normally just due to a theft situation and that only the IT group sees the pics....
Ah, I stand corrected on one point - this IS an OSX based computer so it sounds much like the ones used in NYC! Here's the DigitalNation video http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/ At about 4:39 or so the administrator shows how he takes over the desktop and attempts to snap a picture in order to get the kids to behave and stop using the cam as a mirror.... It is possible that the kid in THIS story was posing for pictures at home privately and the teacher somehow got a look or perhaps the teacher saw the pic on the computer when he was back at school? Lots of possibilities but so far NO clear story yet IMO. I'm not quite ready to go nuts but something certainly smells here if they retain this capability when the kids are off-campus...
http://www.lmsd.org/sections/news/default.php?m=0&t=today&p=lmsd_anno&id=1137
Look harder? ;-)
The theft angle is exactly what the Superintendent is claiming they had software for and that only the IT group could see it. However if it was possible to remotely view the desktop and the student had an app up taking pics of himself then they might have seen something they didn't like. If the staff could remotely control the desktop they could also have downloaded and installed software that allowed remote viewing - policy be damned.
So far I'm not quite ready to string up the staff for doing this wholesale but it is possible that one of them did a bit of hackery to enable functionality that the IT group hadn't intended. Oh and while you guys didn't have the time to watch all those feeds other schools apparently DO, there's a video linked in the BoingBoing comments that interviews teachers at a NYC school and apparently the teachers are assigned time to go through and monitor the kid's desktops and ping them if they aren't doing stuff they're supposed to be doing. This allowed them to see via the webcam when the kids ran programs that activated it and the teacher demonstrated taking control and snapping pics too - posisbly the case in this story but honestly there's not enough detail provided in the story or in the lawsuit PDF to know exactly WTF happened - yet....
http://www.lmsd.org/sections/news/default.php?m=0&t=today&p=lmsd_anno&id=1137
They claim that the capability was designed to find lost or stolen laptops ONLY so if it was used in this manner is was apparently done so improperly. The Superintendent seems to claim that only the IT group can activate this or see the images so it remains to be seen as to what happened here but I have some thoughts....
From watching a video from another school district that I found in the comments on BoinBoing some schools sometimes see the students because the students run apps on their desktop that display video from their own WEB cam. Photobooth was the app mentioned in that story and the desktop appeared to be OSX so not likely the same software here but possible a similar program.
Lastly, if they have the capability to remotely control, as this other school did, then they could also be launching apps or installing apps that are allowing this kind of peeping - not cool IMO.
Gee, two HIGH profile developers are locked out of their accounts - with the SAME error message Apple send when they suspect someone has been trying to break into an account. Golly, you don't think maybe someone has been trying to brute their account passwords do you? Wake me when it's more than two and some unknown guy who has no reason to be targeted gets the error and Apple tells him to blow off when he calls them. So far all I've read on this seems to indicate that someone tried to get into their account - have they even asked Apple to reactivate their accounts?
The police point out that this wasn't just a few snowballs and that this occurred in the middle of a snow storm! These guys were throwing SHOVEL fulls of snow onto windshields and when the officers attempted to exit their vehicle they received shovel fulls of snow as well!
These weren't 10 year old children but 21 year old college students who ought to have had a little more common sense! I'm not sure a felony charge is warranted unless they're being charged with criminal stupidity but they sure ought to be charged with something. Not the brightest bulbs on the porch....
Just exactly how fast was a snow PLOW likely to be going in inclement weather? For that matter an undercover police car was likely not moving too fast either considering the weather here on the East Coast brought us FEET of snow that totally overwhelmed snow removal services. a week later I'm still driving on some streets that have 6inch thick ice sheets on them. I don't think you need worry that these were vehicles traveling 60MPH being pelted by objects which wold indeed be deadly serious!
That said - not a smart thing to do to a city vehicle since they tend to have no sense of humor. If you read the article they were throwing shovels of snow and not simply a few snowballs. It's not clear to me exactly what these punks were thinking but I don't think the cops grabbing them was completely unjustified. Throwing a shovel full of snow onto the windshield of a plow or car isn't exactly a bright thing to do!
Apparently the policy is heavier folks buy two tickets and if the plane isn't full they refund the second ticket. In this case he HAD bought two tickets - so he knows he's heavy - but asked to fly on an earlier flight stand-by. Sure enough there was ONE seat left and he sat in it but it was decided after teh fact that he was too big. the safety factor comes into play in that if you're squished up against someone who's big and you need to exit quickly it can be a problem - it wasn't that he was simply too carrying much weight.
Having been forced to "share thighs" with someone who overflowed their seat on another airline I actually find their policy enlightened! However he seems to be making a real fuss out of it despite his having so much as admitted that he's heavy in the first place by virtue of having bought TWO tickets!
You started off okay then WOW you took a hard right on the expressway offramp and into the bushes. TPM is designed to detect changes to specific protected operating system files so that the owner knows that they haven't been tampered with. SuperDRM spy reports? :-O That's some might fine tinfoil you have there...
Pike's Peak has gravel, packed dirt, some asphalt, the works! The change in altitude plays HELL with the engine output even on turbocharged cars so there are many many variables at work. Oh, there's not great guardrails either I understand....
What's good for the goose.....
Actually READ the linked article on On-Star before trying to summarize it please! On-Star doesn't "beam" a signal down from a satellite - it uses CELL PHONE technology. The only satellite involved in that scenario is the ones in the sky enabling the GPS. Unlike in some crap movies GPS is actually ONE-WAY and you're not beaming your location or anything else back UP. They're simply querying the GPS to find out the current location of the vehicle via cell phone - nothing else. CSI TV technology this ain't.
Also - if you READ the article the signal sent to the On-Star simply tells it to not START the next time the thief tries to use it. It does NOT cripple the computer, it does not degrade the performance, it simply tells the computer not to restart. "Block the ignition on the next restart" is that NOT clear enough? REstart as in the NEXT time someone turns the key for a start. So if it's running this article doesn't say squat about turning it off remotely.
On-Star has plenty of things going for it that I don't like and wouldn't want in my car - to include at one point the ability for law enforcement to remotely eavesdrop on you - so you really don't have to make up crazy things and lose credibility.
Why would there be no steering or "control"? Hint: turn off your ignition on the highway at 60mph but do not allow it to lock the column. Surprise - car drives fine and decelerates slowly - the brakes still work too....
You realize it's skinable right? And you are one of the very few minority that cannot understand the interface it seems. Should it have been with crayons perhaps? Can you give an example of something with a good interface or do you hate them all? Try Boxee and see if you aren't even more willing to poke your eyes out....
And the previous install of Linux was run in a limited Hypervisor anyway that didn't give you proper access to the underlying hardware anyway. Want video acceleration? Nope sorry, you can't have it. They apparently only ever did this to keep people like the parent happy and not to actually give folks any real serious Linux functionality. :-( There's a reason why programs like XBMC don't run on the PS3 and it's nto the CPU...
XBMC, there done! Or rather doing it - all setup for me already..... This exists and has for well over a year!
ATOM ION anything, AppleTV with the Broadcom HD decoder card, Intel Mini with Broadcom card ($20 BTW), NVIDIA's VDPA rocks! I use an ASROCK 330 - ZERO complaints, it just works!