AFAIK, the OBD-II requirement involves exclusivly emmissions related data. It's not about allowing vehicle owners to fix their own vehicles or any other purpose.
I'm new to working on the sofware (was doing hardware for the last year) and currently only fiddling around with ISO 9141-2 communication, so your post got me thinking. Had to do a little research. I wasn't able to find the text of the law, but I did find an online post about what codes are covered by OBD II, here.
IIRC, the whole OBD II thing was about keeping dealerships from having a monopoly on scancodes. Each manufacturer has their own specific data (which is usually called "enhanced" data), but they have to make even that available to scan tool makers for fair competition. And you have to be able to get at it through an OBDII port somehow.
We have 2 database guys who do nothing but translate this data into a useable form. Some manufacturers make it easy...and some don't. But they all comply with the law, and the manufacturer-specific stuff winds up in there eventually, as well as the generic OBDII stuff defined in J1978 aka ISO 15031-4, AFAIK.
Well, currently I'm working on an ISO 9141-2 protocol. Some packet types have a simple checksum. Some don't. It's not up to your ethernet standards, that's for sure.
I know there are laws in place to keep automobile manufacturers from doing the same thing (since I make auto scantools for a living). That's one of the main reasons why the industry moved towards OBDII - to be compliant with the disclosure law.
Maybe the rules apply to aircraft as well, and there's already a legal fix?
I won't be able to ask anyone at work about which laws are in place until Monday, but this article has me curious about the legality of encrypting this kind of data for non-automobiles. If I find anything out, I'll post it here.
...write a book. Oh! Wait! Those don't make as much money.
Is is just me, or is everyone really sick of Lucas' blatant bald-faced lying? We'll go see your damn movies George - but you don't have to bullshit us every time you open your mouth near a reporter.
And for the record GL, nobody, but nobody believes you intended them to be a trilogy. Or a trilogy of trilogies. No matter how many times you say it. If they were - the stories would be more coherent. Unless of course you intended the main love scene of the first (fourth?) movie to be a passionate kiss between a brother and sister. You freak.
Well...there goes my karma for the day. But it felt good.
Loved Eye. My favorite bit was ILRT: In Lieu of Red Tape. You'll know what I mean. Anyways...
There's another source of info about how bad Dune was. I looked around my house and couldn't find the book to cite, but...
My wife is finishing up an English major. One of the classes she took was on classic sci-fi. A book from her class was stories about the mangling of classic sci-fi into movies. There was a chapter about Dune.
A lot of strange things almost wound up in the script. It does let you know that the movie could have been (hard to imagine but true)...worse.
One version of the script had Paul and Jessica in an incestuous relationship. No kidding. And Salvador Dali almost wound up playing Shaddam IV.
I'll ask my wife what the book was so I can cite it properly just in case anyone wants to know exactly what the hell goes wrong when Hollywood tries to make a book into a movie. It's a facinating read.
Any good sci-fi helps the other works in the story, not subtracts from them.
For example, I read the Hobbit as a kid and liked it. Then found out about LOTR. Read those and loved them. Found out there was essentially a prequel, The Silmarillion. Read that and loved it.
None of these books subtract from the experience of any other. Why? Because each book adds to the experience of the other. When Aragorn is singing about Luthien, it's a beautiful moment. After you read the Silmarillion, you know what he's singing about and why - and it adds to the moment.
But the new Trek shows don't do this.
They take off on their own and (to me anyways, this is all opinion, YMMV, etc) don't add to the story.
A good example is Khan. Seriously great villain. But now when I look at Khan, I have to picture that ship full of whiny kids pining for Brent Spiner. Doesn't add to it.
And most of the new stuff feels that way to me. Seems like right after DS9 decided it was a war show, the whole magical exploration thing that I liked so much was lost, and it never really came back.
Poor practice to respond to one's own post, but there are a few more details further into the article.
Spitzer's civil suit accuses Intermix of violating state General Business Law provisions against false advertising and deceptive business practices. He also accuses them of trespass under New York common law.
Ok, that's better but could still use a little clarification. Trespass? Is that the closest approximation NY law has to hacking into someone's computer? Usually it's some sort of wiretapping law that gets called into play.
Still would like to know why he's not prosecuting instead of arresting. We're always howling about how vague the DCMA and laws like it are...how vague they are and how they can nail anyone because they're so broad.
So...can't we use these rotten open-ended anti hacking ??AA laws to nail some actual criminals, rather than teenagers with big MP3 collections?
It'd be a great way to at least use these lousy laws to our advantage a bit before they go away. And they will too, once it gets demonstrated that they can be used to bust businessmen as well as teenagers.
On two occasions I have been asked by members of Parliament, "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
Why shouldn't a spreadsheet cause the exact same problems as entering the wrong number into a ledger? What is it about having a computer involved that somehow makes entering a wrong number more insidious?
Bad data propogates throughout any set of calculations, making the ones that come after....wrong. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
..so let them know that OpenOffice is free. If your school system is like most others, it'll be a seriously compelling argument. Money talks, and it talks louder if you're poor.
Take Microsoft's "Software Assurance" quote, and show them exactly what that money could be better spent on. Break it down in terms of "this unnecessary licensing expense could buy X amount of new textbooks, X amount of new football equipment, X amount of materials for the science club..."
And of course - use OpenOffice to make your presentation in as a final sales point. =)
"This paper starts from the proposition that software patents are, practically speaking, hidden away in the recesses of the patent office and practically impossible to find.
I don't see the problem. They're clearly marked in the basement, right by the sign that says "Beware of the Leopard."
What's from keeping Adobe from sending off a simple letter and asking if they can include support? I'm sure that any digital camera maker would be overjoyed if Photoshop had native support. I can't imagine anyone saying no.
(...and before I get flamed, yes - I know that you shouldn't have to send a letter or even worry about getting in a lawsuit for doing something as obvious and simple as supporting a camera's file format. It is another good example of how busted the DCMA is.)
The answer then is obvious - sue the insurance company! After all, they're in the insurance business. Of all people, they should know that it's important to have coverage. Right?
This is America, man! If anyone could make money of off an asteroid strike, it's us!;^)
If it truly was a collection agency that contacted her, it's a simple matter for her to send a letter right back to them demanding verification of the debt.
That's a very good point and worth repeating. It'd be a total circus watching the debt agency trying to prove the debt, and next to impossible. Especially if the lady can prove a reasonable doubt, and that shouldn't be too hard to do.
I'm going to respond to you AC because you've illustrated my point the best.
This is not about what you download.
This is about your ISP divulging personal info about you and about what you do online.
The lady in question did not sue the RIAA, nor dispute the charge. Her two teenage kids probably did do exactly what they are accused of. Nowhere in the article does she say she is going to contest that.
What she has a problem with (and she should) is her ISP giving her personal and private info to a non-legal body. Despite the noise they make, the RIAA is nothing more than a business consortium. they are not, repeat, not the cops.
To put it another way, what if Pepsico or Johnson & Johnson demanded her info? Still okay with that?
So rather than whine about the erosion of our rights and the ability of modern business to crush the individual - here we have an opportunity to set a precedent. So let's do exactly that. While we still can.
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK, the OBD-II requirement involves exclusivly emmissions related data. It's not about allowing vehicle owners to fix their own vehicles or any other purpose.
I'm new to working on the sofware (was doing hardware for the last year) and currently only fiddling around with ISO 9141-2 communication, so your post got me thinking. Had to do a little research. I wasn't able to find the text of the law, but I did find an online post about what codes are covered by OBD II, here.
IIRC, the whole OBD II thing was about keeping dealerships from having a monopoly on scancodes. Each manufacturer has their own specific data (which is usually called "enhanced" data), but they have to make even that available to scan tool makers for fair competition. And you have to be able to get at it through an OBDII port somehow.
We have 2 database guys who do nothing but translate this data into a useable form. Some manufacturers make it easy...and some don't. But they all comply with the law, and the manufacturer-specific stuff winds up in there eventually, as well as the generic OBDII stuff defined in J1978 aka ISO 15031-4, AFAIK.
Well, currently I'm working on an ISO 9141-2 protocol. Some packet types have a simple checksum. Some don't. It's not up to your ethernet standards, that's for sure.
That's why this keeps happening.
If I do this, and get caught...so what? What's the penalty? Exactly who is going to prosecute?
What if this CEO came right out and said "Yup, copied the whole damn thing from Sourceforge. What are you going to do about it?" What happens next?
PS: Not trolling, genuinely curious. All the focus seems to be on "Is the GPL enforcable", not "Who shall enforce it". And IMHO, both are important.
I know there are laws in place to keep automobile manufacturers from doing the same thing (since I make auto scantools for a living). That's one of the main reasons why the industry moved towards OBDII - to be compliant with the disclosure law.
Maybe the rules apply to aircraft as well, and there's already a legal fix?
I won't be able to ask anyone at work about which laws are in place until Monday, but this article has me curious about the legality of encrypting this kind of data for non-automobiles. If I find anything out, I'll post it here.
Wtsn, plz cm here, I wnt u.
...write a book. Oh! Wait! Those don't make as much money.
Is is just me, or is everyone really sick of Lucas' blatant bald-faced lying? We'll go see your damn movies George - but you don't have to bullshit us every time you open your mouth near a reporter.
And for the record GL, nobody, but nobody believes you intended them to be a trilogy. Or a trilogy of trilogies. No matter how many times you say it. If they were - the stories would be more coherent. Unless of course you intended the main love scene of the first (fourth?) movie to be a passionate kiss between a brother and sister. You freak.
Well...there goes my karma for the day. But it felt good.
Because you're going to help us, Mr. Anderson. Whether you like it... or not.
Loved Eye. My favorite bit was ILRT: In Lieu of Red Tape. You'll know what I mean. Anyways...
There's another source of info about how bad Dune was. I looked around my house and couldn't find the book to cite, but...
My wife is finishing up an English major. One of the classes she took was on classic sci-fi. A book from her class was stories about the mangling of classic sci-fi into movies. There was a chapter about Dune.
A lot of strange things almost wound up in the script. It does let you know that the movie could have been (hard to imagine but true)...worse.
One version of the script had Paul and Jessica in an incestuous relationship. No kidding. And Salvador Dali almost wound up playing Shaddam IV.
I'll ask my wife what the book was so I can cite it properly just in case anyone wants to know exactly what the hell goes wrong when Hollywood tries to make a book into a movie. It's a facinating read.
I am your father...
While it is doubtful that anyone would want a brain transplant from a human-sheep chimera
It would explain how the Patriot Act and the DCMA got passed.
Ba dump bump! Thanks, I'll be here all week. Be sure to tip your waitresses.
Any good sci-fi helps the other works in the story, not subtracts from them.
For example, I read the Hobbit as a kid and liked it. Then found out about LOTR. Read those and loved them. Found out there was essentially a prequel, The Silmarillion. Read that and loved it.
None of these books subtract from the experience of any other. Why? Because each book adds to the experience of the other. When Aragorn is singing about Luthien, it's a beautiful moment. After you read the Silmarillion, you know what he's singing about and why - and it adds to the moment.
But the new Trek shows don't do this.
They take off on their own and (to me anyways, this is all opinion, YMMV, etc) don't add to the story.
A good example is Khan. Seriously great villain. But now when I look at Khan, I have to picture that ship full of whiny kids pining for Brent Spiner. Doesn't add to it.
And most of the new stuff feels that way to me. Seems like right after DS9 decided it was a war show, the whole magical exploration thing that I liked so much was lost, and it never really came back.
Poor practice to respond to one's own post, but there are a few more details further into the article.
Spitzer's civil suit accuses Intermix of violating state General Business Law provisions against false advertising and deceptive business practices. He also accuses them of trespass under New York common law.
Ok, that's better but could still use a little clarification. Trespass? Is that the closest approximation NY law has to hacking into someone's computer? Usually it's some sort of wiretapping law that gets called into play.
Still would like to know why he's not prosecuting instead of arresting. We're always howling about how vague the DCMA and laws like it are...how vague they are and how they can nail anyone because they're so broad.
So...can't we use these rotten open-ended anti hacking ??AA laws to nail some actual criminals, rather than teenagers with big MP3 collections?
It'd be a great way to at least use these lousy laws to our advantage a bit before they go away. And they will too, once it gets demonstrated that they can be used to bust businessmen as well as teenagers.
First off, I'm as happy as everyone else someone is finally going after these scumbags.
But at the risk of casting a dark cloud over the whole affair, Mr. Spitzer is sueing Intermix, not arresting them.
So...anyone know exactly what they're exactly being sued for? "Secretly installing software" is a little vague for a legal charge.
Another question. Why sue? He's the Attorney General. Why not prosecute instead?
So can anyone with some legal insight shed a little light here, so we know how happy to be?
...because they've disabled port 110.
Ba dump bump! Thanks, I'll be here all week.
...and when they switch to Firefox/Thunderbird, they stop bugging me to fix their spyware problems.
On two occasions I have been asked by members of Parliament, "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
Why shouldn't a spreadsheet cause the exact same problems as entering the wrong number into a ledger? What is it about having a computer involved that somehow makes entering a wrong number more insidious?
Bad data propogates throughout any set of calculations, making the ones that come after....wrong. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
..so let them know that OpenOffice is free. If your school system is like most others, it'll be a seriously compelling argument. Money talks, and it talks louder if you're poor.
Take Microsoft's "Software Assurance" quote, and show them exactly what that money could be better spent on. Break it down in terms of "this unnecessary licensing expense could buy X amount of new textbooks, X amount of new football equipment, X amount of materials for the science club..."
And of course - use OpenOffice to make your presentation in as a final sales point. =)
Ever try reading a book as a passenger in a car? What happens to you?
Now, imagine a computer screen and a gently rocking boat, and a programmer's work week. You'd need an IV drip bottle of Dramamine to survive this gig.
"This paper starts from the proposition that software patents are, practically speaking, hidden away in the recesses of the patent office and practically impossible to find.
I don't see the problem. They're clearly marked in the basement, right by the sign that says "Beware of the Leopard."
What's from keeping Adobe from sending off a simple letter and asking if they can include support? I'm sure that any digital camera maker would be overjoyed if Photoshop had native support. I can't imagine anyone saying no.
(...and before I get flamed, yes - I know that you shouldn't have to send a letter or even worry about getting in a lawsuit for doing something as obvious and simple as supporting a camera's file format. It is another good example of how busted the DCMA is.)
Because according to Microsoft, that's all the PC you're using to read this is good for - because it won't run Longhorn.
The answer then is obvious - sue the insurance company! After all, they're in the insurance business. Of all people, they should know that it's important to have coverage. Right?
This is America, man! If anyone could make money of off an asteroid strike, it's us! ;^)
So be sure to purchase lots of stock in insurance companies today! Either way - you're a winner.
If it truly was a collection agency that contacted her, it's a simple matter for her to send a letter right back to them demanding verification of the debt.
That's a very good point and worth repeating. It'd be a total circus watching the debt agency trying to prove the debt, and next to impossible. Especially if the lady can prove a reasonable doubt, and that shouldn't be too hard to do.
I'm going to respond to you AC because you've illustrated my point the best.
This is not about what you download.
This is about your ISP divulging personal info about you and about what you do online.
The lady in question did not sue the RIAA, nor dispute the charge. Her two teenage kids probably did do exactly what they are accused of. Nowhere in the article does she say she is going to contest that.
What she has a problem with (and she should) is her ISP giving her personal and private info to a non-legal body. Despite the noise they make, the RIAA is nothing more than a business consortium. they are not, repeat, not the cops.
To put it another way, what if Pepsico or Johnson & Johnson demanded her info? Still okay with that?
So rather than whine about the erosion of our rights and the ability of modern business to crush the individual - here we have an opportunity to set a precedent. So let's do exactly that. While we still can.