LOL! You think I'm a right-wing nutjob? That's weird; I more often get accused of being exactly the opposite. In reality, I'm a moderate anti-authoritarian, and want both government and corporations to GTFO of my business.
Besides, you're a dumbass, since you apparently fail to understand that negligence is a completely separate, irrelevant issue that's already covered by existing laws. I would already be liable if I modified my car to be unsafe, and computers don't change that!
Go re-read that last sentence, and let it sink in. Then read it again. Got it? Good! Now you'll realize that the stunt these automakers are trying to pull has nothing whatsoever to do with actual safety, and everything to do with them trying to assert control over their customers' property, so that they can restrict customer choice and increase their own power and profits. Nothing more, nothing less.
No, there isn't a difference. You vastly underestimate the ability of an idiot to screw up a mechanical system. I mean, OK, a literal brick would be deliberate, but that was hyperbole. Something like an improperly-tensioned throttle cable or an improperly-bled brake system, on the other hand, is very likely to happen by accident.
The point is, claiming that "on a computer!!!" makes working on a car more dangerous is as bunk as claiming "on a computer!" makes an invention suddenly new again, or that "on a computer!" turns (e.g.) fraud into some kind of new and different crime.
Auto mechanics has always required knowledge, skill, and personal responsibility, and nothing has changed!
The ECU (engine control unity) has nothing to do with the infotainment unit.
That's what you think. In reality, in modern cars they're both hooked to a CAN bus with no security whatsoever, so misbehavior by the infotainment unit actually could plausibly screw up the ECU. Besides, even if they weren't automakers would use that as an excuse and un-technical bureaucrats wouldn't know the difference.
Sorry but I dont want to be driving down the road with some backyard genius who has "tweaked" their ECU and ABS in such a way as it disables the breaks and locks the throttle open.
Well then you'd better fucking quit driving, because any backyard genius has always been able to do that with a fucking brick on the pedal (or under it, as applicable)!
Who the fuck cares?! I can make up ridiculous "what if" scenarios all day long that would seem to justify making every goddamn thing illegal until all that's left is to lock yourself in a padded room with a straight jacket on. But that's stupid, because you'd be acting completely disproportionately to the risk.
And that's what you're doing here too. So fucking what if the modded ECU might cause a fire? So might spilling some gasoline when you fill the car up! So might a short in the wiring! So might a stuck brake caliper! So might crashing into something! There's bunches of different things that could "possibly" go wrong, but they're all perfectly acceptable risks and ECU tuning is no different. Maybe the manufacturer might get blamed for something that was the vehicle owner's fault. Or maybe the owner will get blamed for a crash that was actually caused by a manufacturing defect. Sometimes life isn't fair. Boo fucking hoo; deal with it!
But that's all beside the point, because modding an ECU sure as HELL isn't dangerous enough to justify destroying the concept of ownership of property and replacing it with corporate serfdom, which is what this evil abortion of a policy would do!
You have no clue. On many cars -- especially the increasingly-common turbocharged ones -- ECU tuning is the first, best-bang-for-the-buck, easiest* mod you do.
(* "Easy" in the sense that you pay a tuner who's already broken the DRM and correctly modified the boost map, so all you have to do yourself is plug the ECU-flashing tool into the ODB II port.)
BULLSHIT. This is about using computers -- via copyright -- as the excuse to subjugate vehicle owner's actual property rights to manufacturers Imaginary Property rights, using "safety!" as the emotional red herring that they hope will distract people enough to let them get away with it.
The manufacturers want exactly one thing: post-purchase control, so that they can restrict vehicle owner choice and freeze out independent mechanics. They want to be able to say "oh, you want to pair your new phone with the infotainment system? Sure, that'll be "only" $1000, and no, you're not allowed to hack it yourself or get a cheaper third party to do it. It's all because of 'safety,' not profit -- we swear!"
Then there are the special cute things that can go wrong, like an injector that sticks open instead of pulsing properly. That will turn it into a blowtorch that will burn right through the top of the piston.
Don't forget engine runaways caused by oil leaks in the turbo!
Of course, isn't that all just part of the fun of owning a TDI?
There was plenty of shit in the early nineties, too. OBDII was actually a blessing because you could read your car's codes without a manufacturer's specific tool.
I haven't tried it out yet, but apparently the '90 Miata I recently bought is supposed to beep diagnostic codes at me.
Well, somebody needs to play Devil's Advocate here, so I will. What if onboard vehicle computers truthfully are (or soon will become) so complicated - and so integral to the functioning of the vehicle - that an untrained hobbyist screwing with it could cause injury or death?
Fuck, man, brakes have been like that for a hundred goddamn years!
Stop letting "buh-buh-buh-computers!" be an excuse for corporate sociopaths and nanny-state asswipes to destroy your rights. Seriously.
We have two choices: we can be free, or we can be safe. These are mutually exclusive. And in the United States of America, the only correct choice is to be free. Sniveling infantile cowards who think otherwise can fuck off and die.
I have to wonder if we are getting to the point the drive speed just isn't a factor, that the other components like CPU, GPU, and RAM will be bottlenecking before the drive, because no matter how faster you get the data off the drive you still gotta process it.
Fundamentally, that doesn't make sense because if it were true, we'd just use SSDs instead of RAM.
At that location they are so far above us in speed. It's sad when the middle of nowhere in a useless state has access about eight times faster than us for about a tenth of the cost. I wish Seattle would catch-up so the shithole of South Carolina.
Gee, it sure sounds to me like it's Seattle that's the shithole!
Based on this list [wikipedia.org], it looks like merger activity between US banks dramatically slowed since Obama took office, after going through the roof during the Bush years.
I counted 48 mergers during the Clinton years versus 39 during Bush.
Well, shit, when an industry is consolidating of course there are going to be a bunch of mergers (of small companies into medium companies) at the beginning, then a moderate amount of mergers (of medium companies into big companies), then just a few mergers (of big companies into gigantic, dangerous ones).
So yeah, we should fully expect Clinton mergers > Bush (II) mergers > Obama mergers, just because by the time Obama got in office there were hardly any companies left to merge!
i have no problem with opposing monsanto, the corporation with dubious goals that should be opposed
I want labels on GMO crops because I'm opposed to use of the "terminator gene" and Monsanto's contractual prohibition of seed-saving. I want to be able to buy corn and know it's wasn't grown by a farmer in cahoots with Monsanto, and GMO labeling is a very good proxy to inform me about that.
Perhaps because all the modern devices are meant to work with your fingers and not with a stylus?
You've got the cause and effect backwards: devices are designed not to use a stylus because their makers had no desire to support handwriting recognition, not the other way around.
The neighborhood in that area isn't like that -- the neighborhood itself is probably about a 50%/45%/5% black/white/other mix. If there were only one school that all the kids went to, it would be thoroughly integrated.
If you think you can get an average 13-year old ready for college-level CS in one year, without sacrificing the rest of their usual middle school and high school education, you're severely deluded.
Absolute bullshit.
First of all, they're not trying to teach "average" 13-year-olds; they're trying to teach 13-year-olds who've applied to a special magnet school because they want to be software engineers (and presumably have at least some aptitude for it). That's a very different demographic.
Second, I coasted through my college intro to programming class (and the data structures / object-oriented programming class after that) on what I had taught myself back in middle school and high school. Anyone who can't do at least as well with a year (or less) of actual, dedicated instruction is completely unsuited to the field.
What, you mean with the trolling ACs spouting bullshit? Slashdot has always been that way.
More importantly, I'm right and you're wrong. Go use your reading comprehension skills to RTFS[ummary], specifically the sentence that says "Students in GALA will follow a six year sequence of computer courses starting in middle school that will culminate in AP Computer Science Principles."
It's pretty clear to me that that's what the people designing this program think, at least!
I mean, holy shit! They're talking about implementing a six-year academic program just to get these girls ready to pass the AP exam, which is only equivalent to an introductory college CS course! How fucking insulting can they be, to imply that those girls need six years to learn what they should be learning in one?!
Slashdot Mirror
LOL! You think I'm a right-wing nutjob? That's weird; I more often get accused of being exactly the opposite. In reality, I'm a moderate anti-authoritarian, and want both government and corporations to GTFO of my business.
Besides, you're a dumbass, since you apparently fail to understand that negligence is a completely separate, irrelevant issue that's already covered by existing laws. I would already be liable if I modified my car to be unsafe, and computers don't change that!
Go re-read that last sentence, and let it sink in. Then read it again. Got it? Good! Now you'll realize that the stunt these automakers are trying to pull has nothing whatsoever to do with actual safety, and everything to do with them trying to assert control over their customers' property, so that they can restrict customer choice and increase their own power and profits. Nothing more, nothing less.
No, there isn't a difference. You vastly underestimate the ability of an idiot to screw up a mechanical system. I mean, OK, a literal brick would be deliberate, but that was hyperbole. Something like an improperly-tensioned throttle cable or an improperly-bled brake system, on the other hand, is very likely to happen by accident.
The point is, claiming that "on a computer!!!" makes working on a car more dangerous is as bunk as claiming "on a computer!" makes an invention suddenly new again, or that "on a computer!" turns (e.g.) fraud into some kind of new and different crime.
Auto mechanics has always required knowledge, skill, and personal responsibility, and nothing has changed!
Good point! I stand corrected. Let me amend my statement:
That's what you think. In reality, in modern cars they're both hooked to a CAN bus with no security whatsoever, so misbehavior by the infotainment unit actually could plausibly screw up the ECU. Besides, even if they weren't automakers would use that as an excuse and un-technical bureaucrats wouldn't know the difference.
Well then you'd better fucking quit driving, because any backyard genius has always been able to do that with a fucking brick on the pedal (or under it, as applicable)!
What part of "correct" did you not understand? I may not be able to stop my country from fucking up, but I don't have to like it!
Who the fuck cares?! I can make up ridiculous "what if" scenarios all day long that would seem to justify making every goddamn thing illegal until all that's left is to lock yourself in a padded room with a straight jacket on. But that's stupid, because you'd be acting completely disproportionately to the risk.
And that's what you're doing here too. So fucking what if the modded ECU might cause a fire? So might spilling some gasoline when you fill the car up! So might a short in the wiring! So might a stuck brake caliper! So might crashing into something! There's bunches of different things that could "possibly" go wrong, but they're all perfectly acceptable risks and ECU tuning is no different. Maybe the manufacturer might get blamed for something that was the vehicle owner's fault. Or maybe the owner will get blamed for a crash that was actually caused by a manufacturing defect. Sometimes life isn't fair. Boo fucking hoo; deal with it!
But that's all beside the point, because modding an ECU sure as HELL isn't dangerous enough to justify destroying the concept of ownership of property and replacing it with corporate serfdom, which is what this evil abortion of a policy would do!
You have no clue. On many cars -- especially the increasingly-common turbocharged ones -- ECU tuning is the first, best-bang-for-the-buck, easiest* mod you do.
(* "Easy" in the sense that you pay a tuner who's already broken the DRM and correctly modified the boost map, so all you have to do yourself is plug the ECU-flashing tool into the ODB II port.)
BULLSHIT. This is about using computers -- via copyright -- as the excuse to subjugate vehicle owner's actual property rights to manufacturers Imaginary Property rights, using "safety!" as the emotional red herring that they hope will distract people enough to let them get away with it.
The manufacturers want exactly one thing: post-purchase control, so that they can restrict vehicle owner choice and freeze out independent mechanics. They want to be able to say "oh, you want to pair your new phone with the infotainment system? Sure, that'll be "only" $1000, and no, you're not allowed to hack it yourself or get a cheaper third party to do it. It's all because of 'safety,' not profit -- we swear!"
Don't forget engine runaways caused by oil leaks in the turbo!
Of course, isn't that all just part of the fun of owning a TDI?
I haven't tried it out yet, but apparently the '90 Miata I recently bought is supposed to beep diagnostic codes at me.
This is where all this copyright bullshit is getting out of hand.
There is one essential thing that copyright is supposed to require: making a damn copy!
Unless the owner is doing that -- and people modifying their own cars won't be -- then copyright has no fucking business kicking in to begin with.
Fuck, man, brakes have been like that for a hundred goddamn years!
Stop letting "buh-buh-buh-computers!" be an excuse for corporate sociopaths and nanny-state asswipes to destroy your rights. Seriously.
We have two choices: we can be free, or we can be safe. These are mutually exclusive. And in the United States of America, the only correct choice is to be free. Sniveling infantile cowards who think otherwise can fuck off and die.
Fundamentally, that doesn't make sense because if it were true, we'd just use SSDs instead of RAM.
Do you know what the acronym "RFC" fucking means?!
If you have no intention of accepting "Comments" suggesting changes to your protocol, then WTF is the point of submitting a "Request For" them?
That's what They want you to think!!!
Gee, it sure sounds to me like it's Seattle that's the shithole!
Well, shit, when an industry is consolidating of course there are going to be a bunch of mergers (of small companies into medium companies) at the beginning, then a moderate amount of mergers (of medium companies into big companies), then just a few mergers (of big companies into gigantic, dangerous ones).
So yeah, we should fully expect Clinton mergers > Bush (II) mergers > Obama mergers, just because by the time Obama got in office there were hardly any companies left to merge!
I want labels on GMO crops because I'm opposed to use of the "terminator gene" and Monsanto's contractual prohibition of seed-saving. I want to be able to buy corn and know it's wasn't grown by a farmer in cahoots with Monsanto, and GMO labeling is a very good proxy to inform me about that.
You've got the cause and effect backwards: devices are designed not to use a stylus because their makers had no desire to support handwriting recognition, not the other way around.
Because Steve Jobs fucked everything up by refusing to support it on the original iPhone, and Google followed suit.
If Palm -- or Microsoft, for that matter -- had been the breakthrough smartphone innovator, we'd have had handwriting recognition all along.
The neighborhood in that area isn't like that -- the neighborhood itself is probably about a 50%/45%/5% black/white/other mix. If there were only one school that all the kids went to, it would be thoroughly integrated.
Absolute bullshit.
First of all, they're not trying to teach "average" 13-year-olds; they're trying to teach 13-year-olds who've applied to a special magnet school because they want to be software engineers (and presumably have at least some aptitude for it). That's a very different demographic.
Second, I coasted through my college intro to programming class (and the data structures / object-oriented programming class after that) on what I had taught myself back in middle school and high school. Anyone who can't do at least as well with a year (or less) of actual, dedicated instruction is completely unsuited to the field.
AMD chips run all three latest-gen gaming consoles...
What, you mean with the trolling ACs spouting bullshit? Slashdot has always been that way.
More importantly, I'm right and you're wrong. Go use your reading comprehension skills to RTFS[ummary], specifically the sentence that says "Students in GALA will follow a six year sequence of computer courses starting in middle school that will culminate in AP Computer Science Principles."
Now fuck off.
It's pretty clear to me that that's what the people designing this program think, at least!
I mean, holy shit! They're talking about implementing a six-year academic program just to get these girls ready to pass the AP exam, which is only equivalent to an introductory college CS course! How fucking insulting can they be, to imply that those girls need six years to learn what they should be learning in one?!