Hoping the closet you converted has an exterior facing wall where you can install a dedicated window AC unit. You'd be surprised how much heat can come out of even one rackmount server unit..
Anyone else think this is more believable as a denial of service attack, or as a pretext for taking down a troublesome server they couldn't legally seize by any other means, than as an actual threat?
Unless the person sending them was stupid enough to think that a remailer would protect them from ever being caught, and didn't care that it was going to mean taking down the whole service for everyone else using it..
I vote for "not" — conspiracy theories about mandatory (or just secret) surveillance equipment in consumer electronics is just too persistent, even when the technical capabilities turn out to be a hoax; when the equipment is actually all in place and the user is protected only by a corporate honor policy, it's hard to be sanguine.
Considering that "viewscreens" that allowed The Party to watch people in their homes were an integral part of the story of Nineteen Eighty-Four, it's arguable that people who are familiar with that story are probably inclined to at least think briefly about the possibility. (In the book, the "viewscreens" couldn't be turned off, although it's fair to say that most pieces of modern tech aren't exactly ever "off" unless you completely disconnect all sources of power, so this may be 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.)
Then again, in this age of the almighty corporation, how much is a simple corporate assertion of goodwill really worth?
The sensor that triggers the airbag is in the very front of the car where it starts decelerating at the start of the impact, before the crush zone in the front begins to decelerate the rest of the car. It's supposed to be timed so that the airbag is maximally deployed right at peak deceleration during a frontal impact.
It's very likely the deer happened to hit the spot right in front of the airbag sensor and caused it to think a collision was underway, causing the bag(s) to deploy when they shouldn't have. I suspect yours isn't the first case where they've done that. Which is one reason I wasn't thrilled when they became mandatory, especially in cheap cars where the deployment isn't all that well thought out..
If you're starting to drift in a skid, hand position is going to matter less than how fast you can turn the wheel against the rotation to catch it before you overrotate and go off the road sideways. Some positions might be a bit better than others, but it really depends on what the wheel angle is when your tires decide to let go.:p
8 and 4 is pretty much mandatory in F1 cars because that's the only position that puts your fingers in the right place to hit the clutch and shift paddles properly. On those, there's also usually no wheel between 10 and 2.
I usually use left hand at about 8 or 9 with elbow on the windowsill, my right at about 5 with elbow on the armrest, or my knee at about 7 if I'm on a long stretch of empty highway. (For the narrow range of steering required at highway speeds, you'd be surprised how much control you have with just a knee.) Manual transmission, usually one hand on wheel at 9-ish and the other on the shift lever. Usually don't need much more torque on the wheel than that.
But I've got about 500k+ miles under my belt, so i'm a little more casual than some other drivers..
is manufactured. It's that some religious extremists in this country can't deal with the fact that the reality that hard science is discovering and exploring doesn't exactly match their creation myth of choice, and keep stirring the s*** because they're still trying to stuff that genie back in the bottle long after it's way too late.
There's only a "controversy" because they keep insisting it's "controversial" as a pretext to keep their foot in the door. And the fact is, creationism is not science, at best it's Bible-flavored pseudoscience that's already decided its conclusions and merely cherry-picks data to support those conclusions.. which is actually the opposite of science..
On the contrary. The time to provoke over-reaction (a crack-down as you call it) is now, when information still travels relatively unimpeded. Generally speaking, time is not on your side.
True on first approximation, but that leads to the question of who goes first and takes one for the team, so to speak? And thus it becomes a Nash equilibrium, because people act as self-interested individuals, and few if any are willing to be in that first wave because very few people are willing to commit that much even to demonstrably noble ideals.. and making that strategy work requires enough people to be willing to move toward such a provocation that it's impossible to dismiss it as a few rogue troublemakers taunting our brave boys in blue. To paraphrase an earlier commenter in the thread, we're not mad enough for that strategy to work yet, because the anger hasn't reached critical mass yet, because too many people here still believe that legal==moral==ethical and fail to grasp the true insanity of militarized police acting extralegally as counterrevolutionaries. This country just has too many ways of either keeping things out of the news or drowning them in the noise of reality TV and celebrity gossip and NASCAR and football.
That's the thing. Would we know? No one who knows about the kinds of detentions that are authorized now (as of the NDAA taking effect yesterday) is allowed to tell anyone.
It's always a possibility, and it's always cause for concern. The agencies involved have given us (citizens) some simple assertions of goodwill saying they won't, but there's little or no actual accountability keeping them from doing so -- in the actual law, there's absolutely nothing stopping them from using any of the powers they've been given to round up protesters under the pretext of antiterrorism. And it's very likely that it could go on for quite some time without any news of it reaching the public. So, to answer your question, no, I can't give examples, but I wouldn't expect to be able to. We just don't know, and we can't know, for sure. Ordinarily, I'd agree with you, but as things stand now, there are reasons we wouldn't be able to cite examples..
In the meantime, you are thinking up ways to cover your ass when you next go "protest" in a "free speech zone" with an "Anonymous" mask on your face and a lawyer on speed-dial.
More often than not, people who protest here are worried about official tactics and strategies designed to neutralize protests in the first place. Getting arrested or even possibly shot can be an acceptable risk if you can get your message across in the process, which with many of the tactics in use here today is questionable at best. And as of yesterday, it's possible for certain three letter entities to grab us right off the street before we even get to where a protest is happening.
And trust me, there are plenty of people in this country who understand the profound injustice of herding anyone with any objections into "free speech zones" far from anywhere they could be effective at all. That's required some creative adjustments in protest tactics, and for the most part, the majority here are still so blinded by the mythology of the USA as a place where "it can't happen here" and there are still so few of us who see the reality that pushing too hard just gives the powers that be an excuse to crack down and shut us up by force. That will change, I'm sure, but the numbers just aren't there yet.. it's a hearts and minds game at present. Different country, different situation, different rules, different strategies.
American outrage has been downgraded to camping in public places or really really aggressive drum circles.
Because here in the USA, if you do much more than that without really covering your ass, you become a "terrorist" and a guest of the government down in Gitmo. Dissenting speech is only "free" in theory here.. for all practical purposes, it might as well be illegal for all that you get to exercise it.
And never underestimate the teaching power of a public (and clearly nonviolent) drum circle in certain places at certain times..;)
The simple reason that police are not arrested for destruction of evidence is that the police enforce the law. And the police cover for each other when they break the law. Therefore the police are above the law.
Worth noting the difference between de facto and de jure here. The police are not above the law in a purely de jure sense as there is theoretically some degree of accountability. Practically speaking, in most cases, they are above the law to some extent in a de facto sense, because it's extremely difficult for ordinary citizens to make complaints against them stick in court.
(Although in most states, the state police do have oversight responsibility over local PD's, and the FBI has oversight responsibility over state and local police. Which is one of many reasons local PD's aren't fond of state police or the Feds. And one reason you do want to be able to find contact info for your state police and FBI in the phone book.)
“This is done for national security, for whatever reason they can’t make an exception, period,”
They flew from Denver to Dallas without a problem, then were stopped in Dallas. If they can't make an exception, why were they allowed to get on the first plane?
The first plane wasn't leaving the country.
Which comes back to my ongoing objection to airline security implementation in general -- there's no guarantee you won't get stuck in an airport far away from home with no way to get to your destination or back home, because someone halfway to your destination decided to throw a fit over some minor technicality. And in situations where that does happen, there's also no guarantee you won't become a "suspected terrorist" if, in the heat of the moment, you object to any part of the process a little too loudly. It's little consolation that that's rare if you're the 1 in 10,000+ whose luck just ran out.
The problem is that airline officials or anyone else in charge of letting you get on a plane is apparently *allowed* to make a judgment call like this at any airport along your route. If I'm going to be stopped for some stupid random thing like this (and it is a stupid random thing), I'm going to be a lot less pissed off if it means I can't get on the flight at my home airport, and have a way home, than if it means I've gotten halfway across the country 500-1000 miles from home and then all of a sudden can't fly anywhere and I have no surface transportation home or shipping for my checked baggage. One reason I don't fly when i can avoid it is unpredictability of what will be flagged in security at any given airport, plus the ease with which it's possible for a social outlier like me to become a "suspicious person" and subject to all of the treatment that triggers.
Now, that may be hard to avoid for international flights where the airport of departure from the country isn't my home airport, but if an airline official is going to pull a dickish move like this, the least he/she can do is refund my international ticket and comp me a *domestic* flight back home, plus waivers on any extra fees to route my checked baggage home as well. Not sure if they were offered that as well as the option to stay in a hotel while the passport snafu is straightened out, but I do wonder..
The next generation will use integrated devices, unaware they were using a browser, and with little or no need for even a choice.
And little or no understanding of how it works or how to use it as anything other than yet another few-to-many information channel they can listen to or watch, but can't talk back to in any real sense. And you're right that that's the direction it's going, but some of us aren't thrilled about that..
.. VHS was such poor quality that the fact that it won out over Beta always amazed me. Chroma channel of such poor bandwidth that the best you could say of VHS color is that you'd maybe get a blob of more or less the right color around that black and white object in the luma channel. Longitudinal audio tracks that did a record wipe effect any time a kink in the tape went over the audio head (granted, the RF audio on later stereo VHS was somewhat better). I thought about trying to edit on it once, but decided I didn't want to bother without any way to implement a timecode track. Even the 2 hour mode was crummy enough to not be anywhere close to broadcast quality, and that was in the analog vestigial-sideband 480i SD NTSC-M days of composite video.
And cleaning tape heads, and aligning transports, and dreading the day the pinch roller got a bit too sticky and unwound your only copy of your favorite movie into a rat's nest inside the VCR. (And yes, I've extracted a few such tape nests from family members' VCR's. Entirely too many of them learned that I knew how to fix the things.)
Beta was better. 3/4" U-Matic showed me what good was when it came to videotape formats. I was happy to leave VHS behind when I was able to record on Digital-8 format in broadcast quality, and once I got a camera that would record on an SD card in 720p I never looked back. I have heard that VHS tape makes reasonably good magnetic card stripes, though..
Doubtless there will be volumous FUD in relation to this technology, however I don't see there being a problem here.
Whether it's FUD or not depends completely on the balance of the risk/benefit analysis in terms of deploying it in this society. Given that the overall attitude of the known players both in government and corporate management is that technology of this kind is for their benefit and not ours (however much the corporate management may claim otherwise!), it's kind of a nice fantasy to believe that something that invasive will only ever be used to make the customer experience better. It probably will, but only for well behaved "normal" customers who don't trip any misbehavior profiles. Some of us have no desire to be well behaved or "normal".
And it's also kind of a nice fantasy to believe that law enforcement or corrupt political administartions would never abuse something like this to single out inconveniently opinionated people for covert action. IMHO, at least.
The U2 is still flying for much the same reason that the B-52 is still flying: both platforms work, and there's been no reason to improve either of them. (The B-52 is planned to stay in inventory until 2050, and there may well be 100 year old planes still in service at that point.)
"Autonomous" [..] is neither a superset nor subset of "remote control".
True enough. But the car will need to be aware of local traffic laws including speed limits and yield to/stop for emergency vehicles and official traffic stops, which means there is communication of some sort going into the car to make it aware of those things. It will also at a minimum have some GPS-like feature to make it aware of where it is, both for navigation and to index that reference of local laws;
Suppose someone figures out how to interfere with those things and inject their own malicious communication, first rerouting the car to a location where it's relatively easy to assault the people in it without too many witnesses, then when it arrives, telling it the speed limit is 5 mph so it slows to a crawl and can't outrun them, then faking a police pull-over signal to stop and immobilize it right where they want it. The designers may very well have added a speed-limit lock that remains active even if the driver manages to override the system and try to drive away, so the best the driver is able to do is crawl along at 5 mph while the carjackers smash in the windows at their leisure.
That's still an "autonomous" car, but by framing its parameters with malicious data, it's quite definitely being remotely controlled..
What if it has a "go find a remote parking site and come back and pick me up at (insert time here)" feature?
(Yes, I know that part of that answer is "every valet parking company in the country sues the manufacturer", but you know someone's going to think of it. I did, years ago.)
To have a free market, however, you need some level of regulation.
And the problem with that is that you have to have that level of regulation everywhere, otherwise regulation is simply an excuse to move the production to places that aren't regulated. And when that stays out of balance for too long, you find that enough of your expertise has been exported to those places that even if they do become regulated in the future, you have to start over and build up your pool of skilled labor from the ground up to become a viable player in the market again. And we are far behind the curve on that score, now.
Bear in mind that the USA was sort of a backwater in terms of technology, until the mobilization of WWII, and we came out of that wartime buildup with a huge windfall of technology spinoffs from that. We've been coasting on the momentum from WWII and Apollo since the 1960's, and the places we've been outsourcing our labor to have learned how to play the game to their advantage. That can be fixed, in time, but we can't count on the private sector to do anything but play the numbers and pocket the profits. This is a public-sector policy problem, pure and simple.
Slashdot Mirror
Hoping the closet you converted has an exterior facing wall where you can install a dedicated window AC unit. You'd be surprised how much heat can come out of even one rackmount server unit..
..and the FBI seizes the server they used?
Anyone else think this is more believable as a denial of service attack, or as a pretext for taking down a troublesome server they couldn't legally seize by any other means, than as an actual threat?
Unless the person sending them was stupid enough to think that a remailer would protect them from ever being caught, and didn't care that it was going to mean taking down the whole service for everyone else using it..
I vote for "not" — conspiracy theories about mandatory (or just secret) surveillance equipment in consumer electronics is just too persistent, even when the technical capabilities turn out to be a hoax; when the equipment is actually all in place and the user is protected only by a corporate honor policy, it's hard to be sanguine.
Considering that "viewscreens" that allowed The Party to watch people in their homes were an integral part of the story of Nineteen Eighty-Four, it's arguable that people who are familiar with that story are probably inclined to at least think briefly about the possibility. (In the book, the "viewscreens" couldn't be turned off, although it's fair to say that most pieces of modern tech aren't exactly ever "off" unless you completely disconnect all sources of power, so this may be 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.)
Then again, in this age of the almighty corporation, how much is a simple corporate assertion of goodwill really worth?
In an effort to find the needle, we're burning down the haystack.
I might add that burning down a haystack to find a needle in it not only destroys the hay, but makes the needle useless..
The sensor that triggers the airbag is in the very front of the car where it starts decelerating at the start of the impact, before the crush zone in the front begins to decelerate the rest of the car. It's supposed to be timed so that the airbag is maximally deployed right at peak deceleration during a frontal impact.
It's very likely the deer happened to hit the spot right in front of the airbag sensor and caused it to think a collision was underway, causing the bag(s) to deploy when they shouldn't have. I suspect yours isn't the first case where they've done that. Which is one reason I wasn't thrilled when they became mandatory, especially in cheap cars where the deployment isn't all that well thought out..
If you're starting to drift in a skid, hand position is going to matter less than how fast you can turn the wheel against the rotation to catch it before you overrotate and go off the road sideways. Some positions might be a bit better than others, but it really depends on what the wheel angle is when your tires decide to let go. :p
8 and 4 is pretty much mandatory in F1 cars because that's the only position that puts your fingers in the right place to hit the clutch and shift paddles properly. On those, there's also usually no wheel between 10 and 2.
I usually use left hand at about 8 or 9 with elbow on the windowsill, my right at about 5 with elbow on the armrest, or my knee at about 7 if I'm on a long stretch of empty highway. (For the narrow range of steering required at highway speeds, you'd be surprised how much control you have with just a knee.) Manual transmission, usually one hand on wheel at 9-ish and the other on the shift lever. Usually don't need much more torque on the wheel than that.
But I've got about 500k+ miles under my belt, so i'm a little more casual than some other drivers..
is manufactured. It's that some religious extremists in this country can't deal with the fact that the reality that hard science is discovering and exploring doesn't exactly match their creation myth of choice, and keep stirring the s*** because they're still trying to stuff that genie back in the bottle long after it's way too late.
There's only a "controversy" because they keep insisting it's "controversial" as a pretext to keep their foot in the door. And the fact is, creationism is not science, at best it's Bible-flavored pseudoscience that's already decided its conclusions and merely cherry-picks data to support those conclusions .. which is actually the opposite of science ..
On the contrary. The time to provoke over-reaction (a crack-down as you call it) is now, when information still travels relatively unimpeded. Generally speaking, time is not on your side.
True on first approximation, but that leads to the question of who goes first and takes one for the team, so to speak? And thus it becomes a Nash equilibrium, because people act as self-interested individuals, and few if any are willing to be in that first wave because very few people are willing to commit that much even to demonstrably noble ideals .. and making that strategy work requires enough people to be willing to move toward such a provocation that it's impossible to dismiss it as a few rogue troublemakers taunting our brave boys in blue. To paraphrase an earlier commenter in the thread, we're not mad enough for that strategy to work yet, because the anger hasn't reached critical mass yet, because too many people here still believe that legal==moral==ethical and fail to grasp the true insanity of militarized police acting extralegally as counterrevolutionaries. This country just has too many ways of either keeping things out of the news or drowning them in the noise of reality TV and celebrity gossip and NASCAR and football.
Really? Can you give some examples?
That's the thing. Would we know? No one who knows about the kinds of detentions that are authorized now (as of the NDAA taking effect yesterday) is allowed to tell anyone.
It's always a possibility, and it's always cause for concern. The agencies involved have given us (citizens) some simple assertions of goodwill saying they won't, but there's little or no actual accountability keeping them from doing so -- in the actual law, there's absolutely nothing stopping them from using any of the powers they've been given to round up protesters under the pretext of antiterrorism. And it's very likely that it could go on for quite some time without any news of it reaching the public. So, to answer your question, no, I can't give examples, but I wouldn't expect to be able to. We just don't know, and we can't know, for sure. Ordinarily, I'd agree with you, but as things stand now, there are reasons we wouldn't be able to cite examples..
In the meantime, you are thinking up ways to cover your ass when you next go "protest" in a "free speech zone" with an "Anonymous" mask on your face and a lawyer on speed-dial.
More often than not, people who protest here are worried about official tactics and strategies designed to neutralize protests in the first place. Getting arrested or even possibly shot can be an acceptable risk if you can get your message across in the process, which with many of the tactics in use here today is questionable at best. And as of yesterday, it's possible for certain three letter entities to grab us right off the street before we even get to where a protest is happening.
And trust me, there are plenty of people in this country who understand the profound injustice of herding anyone with any objections into "free speech zones" far from anywhere they could be effective at all. That's required some creative adjustments in protest tactics, and for the most part, the majority here are still so blinded by the mythology of the USA as a place where "it can't happen here" and there are still so few of us who see the reality that pushing too hard just gives the powers that be an excuse to crack down and shut us up by force. That will change, I'm sure, but the numbers just aren't there yet .. it's a hearts and minds game at present. Different country, different situation, different rules, different strategies.
American outrage has been downgraded to camping in public places or really really aggressive drum circles.
Because here in the USA, if you do much more than that without really covering your ass, you become a "terrorist" and a guest of the government down in Gitmo. Dissenting speech is only "free" in theory here .. for all practical purposes, it might as well be illegal for all that you get to exercise it.
And never underestimate the teaching power of a public (and clearly nonviolent) drum circle in certain places at certain times .. ;)
The simple reason that police are not arrested for destruction of evidence is that the police enforce the law. And the police cover for each other when they break the law. Therefore the police are above the law.
Worth noting the difference between de facto and de jure here. The police are not above the law in a purely de jure sense as there is theoretically some degree of accountability. Practically speaking, in most cases, they are above the law to some extent in a de facto sense, because it's extremely difficult for ordinary citizens to make complaints against them stick in court.
(Although in most states, the state police do have oversight responsibility over local PD's, and the FBI has oversight responsibility over state and local police. Which is one of many reasons local PD's aren't fond of state police or the Feds. And one reason you do want to be able to find contact info for your state police and FBI in the phone book.)
“This is done for national security, for whatever reason they can’t make an exception, period,”
They flew from Denver to Dallas without a problem, then were stopped in Dallas. If they can't make an exception, why were they allowed to get on the first plane?
The first plane wasn't leaving the country.
Which comes back to my ongoing objection to airline security implementation in general -- there's no guarantee you won't get stuck in an airport far away from home with no way to get to your destination or back home, because someone halfway to your destination decided to throw a fit over some minor technicality. And in situations where that does happen, there's also no guarantee you won't become a "suspected terrorist" if, in the heat of the moment, you object to any part of the process a little too loudly. It's little consolation that that's rare if you're the 1 in 10,000+ whose luck just ran out.
The problem is that airline officials or anyone else in charge of letting you get on a plane is apparently *allowed* to make a judgment call like this at any airport along your route. If I'm going to be stopped for some stupid random thing like this (and it is a stupid random thing), I'm going to be a lot less pissed off if it means I can't get on the flight at my home airport, and have a way home, than if it means I've gotten halfway across the country 500-1000 miles from home and then all of a sudden can't fly anywhere and I have no surface transportation home or shipping for my checked baggage. One reason I don't fly when i can avoid it is unpredictability of what will be flagged in security at any given airport, plus the ease with which it's possible for a social outlier like me to become a "suspicious person" and subject to all of the treatment that triggers.
Now, that may be hard to avoid for international flights where the airport of departure from the country isn't my home airport, but if an airline official is going to pull a dickish move like this, the least he/she can do is refund my international ticket and comp me a *domestic* flight back home, plus waivers on any extra fees to route my checked baggage home as well. Not sure if they were offered that as well as the option to stay in a hotel while the passport snafu is straightened out, but I do wonder ..
The next generation will use integrated devices, unaware they were using a browser, and with little or no need for even a choice.
And little or no understanding of how it works or how to use it as anything other than yet another few-to-many information channel they can listen to or watch, but can't talk back to in any real sense. And you're right that that's the direction it's going, but some of us aren't thrilled about that..
And overzealous enforcement of those irrational laws does even more ..
.. VHS was such poor quality that the fact that it won out over Beta always amazed me. Chroma channel of such poor bandwidth that the best you could say of VHS color is that you'd maybe get a blob of more or less the right color around that black and white object in the luma channel. Longitudinal audio tracks that did a record wipe effect any time a kink in the tape went over the audio head (granted, the RF audio on later stereo VHS was somewhat better). I thought about trying to edit on it once, but decided I didn't want to bother without any way to implement a timecode track. Even the 2 hour mode was crummy enough to not be anywhere close to broadcast quality, and that was in the analog vestigial-sideband 480i SD NTSC-M days of composite video.
And cleaning tape heads, and aligning transports, and dreading the day the pinch roller got a bit too sticky and unwound your only copy of your favorite movie into a rat's nest inside the VCR. (And yes, I've extracted a few such tape nests from family members' VCR's. Entirely too many of them learned that I knew how to fix the things.)
Beta was better. 3/4" U-Matic showed me what good was when it came to videotape formats. I was happy to leave VHS behind when I was able to record on Digital-8 format in broadcast quality, and once I got a camera that would record on an SD card in 720p I never looked back. I have heard that VHS tape makes reasonably good magnetic card stripes, though ..
Is that another way of saying "love it or leave it"?
Doubtless there will be volumous FUD in relation to this technology, however I don't see there being a problem here.
Whether it's FUD or not depends completely on the balance of the risk/benefit analysis in terms of deploying it in this society. Given that the overall attitude of the known players both in government and corporate management is that technology of this kind is for their benefit and not ours (however much the corporate management may claim otherwise!), it's kind of a nice fantasy to believe that something that invasive will only ever be used to make the customer experience better. It probably will, but only for well behaved "normal" customers who don't trip any misbehavior profiles. Some of us have no desire to be well behaved or "normal".
And it's also kind of a nice fantasy to believe that law enforcement or corrupt political administartions would never abuse something like this to single out inconveniently opinionated people for covert action. IMHO, at least.
.. so we've decided to let you go because we're afraid you might have an accident and sue us or make the company look bad .."
Trust me, the minute these things are hooked up to statistical reporting systems, they'll be used to benefit the company and not the workers.
.. don't fix it. ;)
The U2 is still flying for much the same reason that the B-52 is still flying: both platforms work, and there's been no reason to improve either of them. (The B-52 is planned to stay in inventory until 2050, and there may well be 100 year old planes still in service at that point.)
"Autonomous" [..] is neither a superset nor subset of "remote control".
True enough. But the car will need to be aware of local traffic laws including speed limits and yield to/stop for emergency vehicles and official traffic stops, which means there is communication of some sort going into the car to make it aware of those things. It will also at a minimum have some GPS-like feature to make it aware of where it is, both for navigation and to index that reference of local laws;
Suppose someone figures out how to interfere with those things and inject their own malicious communication, first rerouting the car to a location where it's relatively easy to assault the people in it without too many witnesses, then when it arrives, telling it the speed limit is 5 mph so it slows to a crawl and can't outrun them, then faking a police pull-over signal to stop and immobilize it right where they want it. The designers may very well have added a speed-limit lock that remains active even if the driver manages to override the system and try to drive away, so the best the driver is able to do is crawl along at 5 mph while the carjackers smash in the windows at their leisure.
That's still an "autonomous" car, but by framing its parameters with malicious data, it's quite definitely being remotely controlled..
Where did it say nobody was inside?
What if it has a "go find a remote parking site and come back and pick me up at (insert time here)" feature?
(Yes, I know that part of that answer is "every valet parking company in the country sues the manufacturer", but you know someone's going to think of it. I did, years ago.)
To have a free market, however, you need some level of regulation.
And the problem with that is that you have to have that level of regulation everywhere, otherwise regulation is simply an excuse to move the production to places that aren't regulated. And when that stays out of balance for too long, you find that enough of your expertise has been exported to those places that even if they do become regulated in the future, you have to start over and build up your pool of skilled labor from the ground up to become a viable player in the market again. And we are far behind the curve on that score, now.
Bear in mind that the USA was sort of a backwater in terms of technology, until the mobilization of WWII, and we came out of that wartime buildup with a huge windfall of technology spinoffs from that. We've been coasting on the momentum from WWII and Apollo since the 1960's, and the places we've been outsourcing our labor to have learned how to play the game to their advantage. That can be fixed, in time, but we can't count on the private sector to do anything but play the numbers and pocket the profits. This is a public-sector policy problem, pure and simple.