It's probably not possible to add the emissions control equipment necessary to make these cars pass, or at least not cost-effectively. These are generally small cars, so it comes down to a physical space/packaging problem, and they're probably not going to be allowed to just cobble something together and hope that the dealerships can install it correctly.
There are three reasons a product is recalled. The first reason is user-error that's so widespread that the company cannot afford the liability even though the product, if used properly, is safe. The second reason is for a defect that's not fatal to the function of the product but is too expensive/difficult to field correct. Third reason is a fatal flaw in a product that poses a significant danger and for all practical purposes, cannot be corrected.
We had received a recall notice for a barbecue grille several years ago. We really liked the grille, so we researched the nature of the recall, expecting the first or second reasons (ie, widespread incorrect unsafe use or a flaw that could be remedied but was too expensive for the manufacturer to have field-fixed), figuring we were smart enough to not use it wrongly or could field-fix a simple problem, and we instead discovered that it was a fundamental flaw in the product, the grille housing was made out of magnesium. The outer layers of magnesium would oxidize, leaving a protective coating between raw metal and the flames and grease and other flammables, but if one was studious about cleaning one's grille one would scrape-off that layer of oxide and expose raw magnesium to the fire, which would then ignite the grille itself, over the propane tank, and could not be readily extinguished.
This emissions control problem, assuming that the goal is to maintain performance, will probably cost more to correct in the field than buying-back the cars would cost. It's not fatal to the product, but if it can't be corrected properly then it's going to be subject to recall.
The EPA does not have the resources to do all of the testing itself. It relies on the automakers to follow the rules, but it also makes those rules very clear. The EPA probably did spot-checks, but again, if their testing regimen involved connecting to the OBD-II / CANBUS interface on the car (which put the car into emissions-mode) they can't necessarily be expected to detect that this has happened.
You want the EPA to be able to do this? Fund them with a mandate to emissions-certify every drivetrain configuration.
If the fuel economy drops then the cars will be in violation of other rules. Performance is what will drop, because that's the only thing not mandated. That in-turn will yield a class-action lawsuit from car owners.
If cheating is as widespread as you allege I have a sneaking suspicion that European diesel cars are going to fall out of favor as performance drops dramatically. It's a damn shame that they did this, for a long time I was disappointed that so many of the diesel options in Europe weren't available in the US, but if they were breaking the law to put them on the road then I won't feel so bad about it anymore.
Given that OBD-II/CANBUS is used for modern emissions testing (basically ask the car's computer if the car is passing) it's very likely that as long as an OBD-II code reader capable of asking about emissions or doing live-monitoring was plugged in, the car went into the alternate emissions mode. I expect that even a roadgoing test with a sniffer test would probably involve that kind of interface to the car's computer, so unless someone was concerned that they were being duped they probably wouldn't have done a solely-sniff test without the computer interface.
Obviously someone eventually did feel that they needed to do the sniff test with no other aspect involved, and got quite a surprise.
Retrofit happens. All of these cars will have to be recalled to dealerships and their computers flashed to not be in this state. The owner will be upset as soon as he or she drives it off the lot.
I fully expect all states to be given lists of VINs that are subject to the problem, and unless proof of retrofit is supplied either by the manufacturer through the EPA to the states, or by the dealership through the owner or through the EPA, the cars will not be able to have their registration renewed.
This doesn't mean don't punish the wrongdoers, but saying that you want to "hurt" VW means that you are going to hurt a lot of people who didn't benefit from the original wrongdoing.
And while that is not fair, that is life.
Are you willing to have the state take over and operate the company as a wholly-owned subsidiary to keep those people employed?
Automotive engineers and designers, and even manufacturing workers are not the people that I would be too worried about so long as they weren't part of the diesel engine team. People working in those aspects of the automotive industry move around a lot as the industry is ever in flux with new models and shifting ideas. Even executives move around a lot. I'd be more worried about the office/clerical staff.
They will also care greatly when those cars must be retrofitted to force emissions-compliance, stripping them of their roadgoing performance. I fully expect a complete list of VINs to be provided to state motor vehicle departments, and regardless if those cars are operated in emissions-test zones or not, unless proof of retrofit is supplied, they will not be able to renew their registration after a certain point.
I think that as punishment, given that most of these cars are probably still in the hands of their original owners, VW should be forced to buy-back at original transaction price all of these cars, as no owner will be satisfied by the performance of the cars post-retrofit. Other industries have been forced to buy-back product during a recall and couldn't depreciate that purchase price, I don't see how VW and automobiles should be any different in this circumstance.
If the police have enough evidence acquired through legal means then the prosecution may still be able to seek or secure a conviction. If the police have no evidence or insufficient evidence that demonstrates the guilt of the charged then they have no case.
The point is to force the state, in the form of the police and the prosecution, to behave and to give everyone equal treatment. People are convicted based on proof of their actions, not on their character alone. Someone can be a scumbag but that doesn't necessarily mean that they've broken the law that they're accused of, and it's the responsibility of the police and the prosecutor to prove that they're guilty of that crime.
Part of the point is that confessing under pressure or torture doesn't mean that the confession is real. If one is being tortured, one may say anything that one believes will end the torture, if the torturer has stated that saying that thing will cause the torture to stop.
Also, don't forget, everyone is innocent until they're convicted in a court of law. Right now, in the eyes of the law, Bill Cosby is completely innocent of any and all accusations that have been made against him. Individuals may choose whether or not to believe that he has or has not done the things that he has been accused of, but he has not been indicted or convicted of anything, and given that it doesn't sound like any evidence exists to substantiate these claims of acts a long time ago, it's very likely that he will not see criminal charges based on the accusations. That doesn't mean that people will trust him like they did before, but in the eyes of the law he is an innocent man.
If your corporate credentials are stored as one-way hashes, then there still isn't a practical way to retrieve the actual text to use on other devices that have different hash algorithms.
I guess it depends on how your authorization server works.
I've configured every single browser on every computer that I've used with any regularity for the last decade this way, as my first order of business when I use it for the first time, and I've configured browsers for others the same way.
As far as I understand it, destroying evidence requires doing something after evidence has been created, or taking specific steps in anticipation of doing something wrong, not simply as a matter of course.
It may not actually be, but sometimes it feels like a perversion of the open-source movement, which had a whole lot of people writing small utilities or programs and distributing them because they enjoyed doing it. Obviously Linux and Free/Net/Open BSD had the most truly free software, but there was a lot of open-source software distributed for Windows and MacOSX platforms. At some point the application-store model took over as it became increasingly difficult to install software from any random source onto iOS and Android platforms and the small-transaction model became more and more prevalent. Now it's working its way into Windows devices and MacOSX devices.
I suppose this is why I don't install a lot of non-stock programs on my phone. There have been some programs that started out all right, but after they became somewhat popular the developer started adding ads and requesting increasing permissions. It would be one thing if these programs did something truly original and novel, but some programs like loan/mortgage calculators are based on algorithms that anyone can implement.
Are you saying that because there are several competing cell carriers that either share physical tower space or have to worry about spectrum and radiation patterns, that it makes it harder to get high speed connectivity because of congested airwaves?
Last time I checked the various companies didn't use each others' spectrum except under-license.
I was having a bit of a rough day, one of our major sites was down because the backbone provider screwed up and everyone was pissed, and you managed to make me laugh out out for the first time today despite all of that. Thanks!
My solution that I've used for a decade is to clear all of everything when the browser gets closed and to not cache anything to disk. I'm on a computer with 8GB RAM and a high-speed Internet connection; my setup is more than capable of caching to RAM everything that I'll need for the next few minutes and quickly downloading that which needs to be retrieved over longer timescales.
I don't see a reason for any of them. I didn't even see a reason for the two faces featured in 256-character code-page 437 ASCII. The only times I've ever seen them used as display characters it's been gratuitous and unnecessary, like the interface designer threw them in because they happened to be in the code page, not because they contributed anything.
Western languages with alphabets around the common 26-letter model construct concepts by grouping letters into words and then words into sentences. Eastern languages with logograms like Hanzi or Kanji can have their logograms 'built' as they can be reduced to a combination of particular strokes that when put together create a specific meaning, so in effect, keyboards for Eastern logograms can be assembled through keystrokes in a fashion similarly to how they're drawn through brush strokes.
This Emoji keyboard is silly, especially as a form of logogram, Emojis only contain so many varieties of each type of characteristic. That's why we used to type them on our keyboards using ASCII or extended ASCII, because we could represent the expression without having to have a specific icon for it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's probably not possible to add the emissions control equipment necessary to make these cars pass, or at least not cost-effectively. These are generally small cars, so it comes down to a physical space/packaging problem, and they're probably not going to be allowed to just cobble something together and hope that the dealerships can install it correctly.
There are three reasons a product is recalled. The first reason is user-error that's so widespread that the company cannot afford the liability even though the product, if used properly, is safe. The second reason is for a defect that's not fatal to the function of the product but is too expensive/difficult to field correct. Third reason is a fatal flaw in a product that poses a significant danger and for all practical purposes, cannot be corrected.
We had received a recall notice for a barbecue grille several years ago. We really liked the grille, so we researched the nature of the recall, expecting the first or second reasons (ie, widespread incorrect unsafe use or a flaw that could be remedied but was too expensive for the manufacturer to have field-fixed), figuring we were smart enough to not use it wrongly or could field-fix a simple problem, and we instead discovered that it was a fundamental flaw in the product, the grille housing was made out of magnesium . The outer layers of magnesium would oxidize, leaving a protective coating between raw metal and the flames and grease and other flammables, but if one was studious about cleaning one's grille one would scrape-off that layer of oxide and expose raw magnesium to the fire, which would then ignite the grille itself, over the propane tank, and could not be readily extinguished.
This emissions control problem, assuming that the goal is to maintain performance, will probably cost more to correct in the field than buying-back the cars would cost. It's not fatal to the product, but if it can't be corrected properly then it's going to be subject to recall.
The EPA does not have the resources to do all of the testing itself. It relies on the automakers to follow the rules, but it also makes those rules very clear. The EPA probably did spot-checks, but again, if their testing regimen involved connecting to the OBD-II / CANBUS interface on the car (which put the car into emissions-mode) they can't necessarily be expected to detect that this has happened.
You want the EPA to be able to do this? Fund them with a mandate to emissions-certify every drivetrain configuration.
If the fuel economy drops then the cars will be in violation of other rules. Performance is what will drop, because that's the only thing not mandated. That in-turn will yield a class-action lawsuit from car owners.
I think that with the retrofits that will be required, you actually should forget that sweet, sweet torque.
If cheating is as widespread as you allege I have a sneaking suspicion that European diesel cars are going to fall out of favor as performance drops dramatically. It's a damn shame that they did this, for a long time I was disappointed that so many of the diesel options in Europe weren't available in the US, but if they were breaking the law to put them on the road then I won't feel so bad about it anymore.
Given that OBD-II/CANBUS is used for modern emissions testing (basically ask the car's computer if the car is passing) it's very likely that as long as an OBD-II code reader capable of asking about emissions or doing live-monitoring was plugged in, the car went into the alternate emissions mode. I expect that even a roadgoing test with a sniffer test would probably involve that kind of interface to the car's computer, so unless someone was concerned that they were being duped they probably wouldn't have done a solely-sniff test without the computer interface.
Obviously someone eventually did feel that they needed to do the sniff test with no other aspect involved, and got quite a surprise.
Retrofit happens. All of these cars will have to be recalled to dealerships and their computers flashed to not be in this state. The owner will be upset as soon as he or she drives it off the lot.
I fully expect all states to be given lists of VINs that are subject to the problem, and unless proof of retrofit is supplied either by the manufacturer through the EPA to the states, or by the dealership through the owner or through the EPA, the cars will not be able to have their registration renewed.
And while that is not fair, that is life.
Are you willing to have the state take over and operate the company as a wholly-owned subsidiary to keep those people employed?
Automotive engineers and designers, and even manufacturing workers are not the people that I would be too worried about so long as they weren't part of the diesel engine team. People working in those aspects of the automotive industry move around a lot as the industry is ever in flux with new models and shifting ideas. Even executives move around a lot. I'd be more worried about the office/clerical staff.
They will also care greatly when those cars must be retrofitted to force emissions-compliance, stripping them of their roadgoing performance. I fully expect a complete list of VINs to be provided to state motor vehicle departments, and regardless if those cars are operated in emissions-test zones or not, unless proof of retrofit is supplied, they will not be able to renew their registration after a certain point.
I think that as punishment, given that most of these cars are probably still in the hands of their original owners, VW should be forced to buy-back at original transaction price all of these cars, as no owner will be satisfied by the performance of the cars post-retrofit. Other industries have been forced to buy-back product during a recall and couldn't depreciate that purchase price, I don't see how VW and automobiles should be any different in this circumstance.
If the police have enough evidence acquired through legal means then the prosecution may still be able to seek or secure a conviction. If the police have no evidence or insufficient evidence that demonstrates the guilt of the charged then they have no case.
The point is to force the state, in the form of the police and the prosecution, to behave and to give everyone equal treatment. People are convicted based on proof of their actions, not on their character alone. Someone can be a scumbag but that doesn't necessarily mean that they've broken the law that they're accused of, and it's the responsibility of the police and the prosecutor to prove that they're guilty of that crime.
Part of the point is that confessing under pressure or torture doesn't mean that the confession is real. If one is being tortured, one may say anything that one believes will end the torture, if the torturer has stated that saying that thing will cause the torture to stop.
Also, don't forget, everyone is innocent until they're convicted in a court of law. Right now, in the eyes of the law, Bill Cosby is completely innocent of any and all accusations that have been made against him. Individuals may choose whether or not to believe that he has or has not done the things that he has been accused of, but he has not been indicted or convicted of anything, and given that it doesn't sound like any evidence exists to substantiate these claims of acts a long time ago, it's very likely that he will not see criminal charges based on the accusations. That doesn't mean that people will trust him like they did before, but in the eyes of the law he is an innocent man.
If your corporate credentials are stored as one-way hashes, then there still isn't a practical way to retrieve the actual text to use on other devices that have different hash algorithms.
I guess it depends on how your authorization server works.
Private browsing mode did not exist when I started doing this.
I've configured every single browser on every computer that I've used with any regularity for the last decade this way, as my first order of business when I use it for the first time, and I've configured browsers for others the same way.
As far as I understand it, destroying evidence requires doing something after evidence has been created, or taking specific steps in anticipation of doing something wrong, not simply as a matter of course.
It may not actually be, but sometimes it feels like a perversion of the open-source movement, which had a whole lot of people writing small utilities or programs and distributing them because they enjoyed doing it. Obviously Linux and Free/Net/Open BSD had the most truly free software, but there was a lot of open-source software distributed for Windows and MacOSX platforms. At some point the application-store model took over as it became increasingly difficult to install software from any random source onto iOS and Android platforms and the small-transaction model became more and more prevalent. Now it's working its way into Windows devices and MacOSX devices.
I suppose this is why I don't install a lot of non-stock programs on my phone. There have been some programs that started out all right, but after they became somewhat popular the developer started adding ads and requesting increasing permissions. It would be one thing if these programs did something truly original and novel, but some programs like loan/mortgage calculators are based on algorithms that anyone can implement.
Just trying to parse this...
Are you saying that because there are several competing cell carriers that either share physical tower space or have to worry about spectrum and radiation patterns, that it makes it harder to get high speed connectivity because of congested airwaves?
Last time I checked the various companies didn't use each others' spectrum except under-license.
"I can't drive 8851392" doesn't have the same ring to it...
I was having a bit of a rough day, one of our major sites was down because the backbone provider screwed up and everyone was pissed, and you managed to make me laugh out out for the first time today despite all of that. Thanks!
Sorry, I tried to watch that music video but it kept pausing to buffer... Maybe I'll try again when I'm at home on the WIFI...
My solution that I've used for a decade is to clear all of everything when the browser gets closed and to not cache anything to disk. I'm on a computer with 8GB RAM and a high-speed Internet connection; my setup is more than capable of caching to RAM everything that I'll need for the next few minutes and quickly downloading that which needs to be retrieved over longer timescales.
Uh, people that want only around a hundred keys to have to choose from in order to type quickly?
I suspect that the faces were chosen because they were already there, not created specifically for that purpose.
Seems redundant. I am not exempting myself during my teenage years from this perspective either.
I don't see a reason for any of them. I didn't even see a reason for the two faces featured in 256-character code-page 437 ASCII. The only times I've ever seen them used as display characters it's been gratuitous and unnecessary, like the interface designer threw them in because they happened to be in the code page, not because they contributed anything.
That's what I was thinking.
Western languages with alphabets around the common 26-letter model construct concepts by grouping letters into words and then words into sentences. Eastern languages with logograms like Hanzi or Kanji can have their logograms 'built' as they can be reduced to a combination of particular strokes that when put together create a specific meaning, so in effect, keyboards for Eastern logograms can be assembled through keystrokes in a fashion similarly to how they're drawn through brush strokes.
This Emoji keyboard is silly, especially as a form of logogram, Emojis only contain so many varieties of each type of characteristic. That's why we used to type them on our keyboards using ASCII or extended ASCII, because we could represent the expression without having to have a specific icon for it.