And later went on to liberate almost all of Europe. Do your point is ?
You exaggerate (probably because you're some sort of Soviet apologist).
The Soviets were doomed without the help of the rest of the Allies.
And here you're exaggerating.
The outcome in WWII would have been the same, except that all the conquered German territories would have been in Soviet hands. So France, Norway, Holland, Greece and so forth. It would have cost Stalin another 10 or 20 million people (most of them to starvation, disease and non battle related causes) but he would have succeeded.
The sad fact of the matter is that even if the British had acceded to Hitler's peace offering in 1941, he still would have fallen to the Russians because he would have made the same mistakes in the Crimea, at Kursk, Stalingrad, freezing near Moscow. Stalin didn't win the eastern front as much as Hitler lost it. In the mean time, the industrial base of the Soviets had been moved into the Urals outside the longest ranges of Nazi bombers and could produce T34 tanks in staggering numbers.
In 1944 it took the combined power of all the allies to make Stalin blink enough to agree to split Europe at Yalta. The full power of the US, the British and the dominion (India, Canada, Australia, et al.).
Depends if the rock was falling due to natural means or artificial intervention.
If it's natural, it certainly isn't a weapon (you've still go the mass destruction part, but we all saw that movie and well I'm not that attached to Paris anyway).
Ahh, WebKit, you mean KHTML that Apple STOLE from Konqueror and that Google and Opera had to fix with Blink.
How do you "steal" a GPL project by adopting it and working on it? Isn't that the point of open source? Code that is available for anyone to use and improve (Apple did give give back their changes, as fully stipulated in the licence).
Is it only "stealing" if a company you don't like uses open source code?
It's stealing credit.
Apple didn't invent Webkit, the forked it from KHTML.
And stealing credit is expressly verboten by the GPL.
Your lack of imagination does not make a thing impossible.
You're lack of understanding does not make your fantasy exploits real.
None of the CAN busses follow a standard protocol
And here you demonstrate you don't know what CAN bus is. It's a bus, not a protocol. CAN bus specifies the physical layer and encapsulation, but not the content and it's the content that differs between manufacturers.
It's like using FTP and Bit Torrent, both run over ethernet but that doesn't make them compatible.
Changing from CAN bus to ethernet wont change a thing except for speed and cost, because Ethernet is faster and cheaper. Oh and your OBD2 port might become a RJ45... thats about it. Vendors will continue to use their own protocols on a different network technology.
The radio, in most cases, has direct access to the CAN bus.
The radio often does not connect to the same CAN bus as the MAF sensor or ECU and the amount of information available to it is limited. Beyond that, the ECU itself needs to be modified before you can make any real changes.
You've never modified car. No, I'm not asking, it's obvious that you've never even googled it if you think a buffer exploit from a head unit is a good way to do some damage (such as masquerading as a MAF sensor).
The biggest impediments to someone writing a script that can take over your car are
1) Implementation requires physical access.
This is such a big one, it's almost a waste of time continuing.
2) In most cases, you need to car to be modified before an exploit becomes dangerous (yep, you could bugger around with the radio, or maybe the seat adjustment, but not anything important like turbo engagement, throttle response or AWD systems).
3) the sheer number of different types of systems make a large scale exploit extremely difficult.
There's plenty of financial incentive from law enforcement, militaries and insurance companies.
It sounds like you've been watching too many Fast and the Furious movies. You cant simply fire a grapple at a car and override all the electronics. Your medication, sounds like you need two of these and you need them by tonight.
Stop and go traffic is among the most accident prone situations.
This might be true. But accidents are not all equal. You are MUCH more likely to die
or seriously injure someone while driving at high speed than in slow stop and go traffic
because of both the speed of collision as well as reaction time.
This is true.
But fixing a polyurethane bumper because Dopey Doris was too busy on their phone to notice traffic had stopped (or to keep her foot on the brake pedal) is an expensive PITA.
There are a lot of stupid drivers out there with no insurance and even if your insurance covers you at no cost you still lose your car for 3 or so days (if you want the job done properly).
So you're not likely to die from a little shunt in peak hour traffic, but that doesn't make it OK.
If you're in the car, you're off the phone. I live in WA (Western Australia) and the rules here are clear, you can only touch the phone if you're parked.
What a fantastic idea! By switching to a well understood standard it will finally make our vehicles trivial to hack!
Ohh.. wait.. maybe that isn't such a good thing? *shrug*
Erm...
Ethernet can be easily made a closed system like CAN is.
Also CAN is already easily hacked... However you need to get physical access to the CAN BUS which either involves a lot of fucking about in the engine bay or plugging into the OBD2 socket in the drivers footwell. Something tells me an Ethernet replacement for CAN would be the same, but swapping the OBD2 for RJ45.
However for most cars, to actually change anything you need to replace the ECU or at the very least, the ECU firmware (car enthusiasts have been "hacking" their engines for decades now).
I know it borders on sacrilege to point this out but Google Maps conks out on you the moment you don't have network coverage and while it has a caching function I'll still put my trust in an old fashioned Garmin unit any time.
That may have been the case years ago, but not any more. I drove from Las Vegas to San Francisco using Google Maps on my Galaxy Nexus and ran out of data (AT&T prepaid... I was a tourist) somewhere around Pismo Beach thanks to a self updating app. Once you've got your course locked in, you don't need a data connection.
That being said, most dedicated nav units will calculate and recalculate routes faster. But I'm of two minds about this because I'm yet to find one that's as nice to use as Google Maps on my GNex. They all seem to use horrible UI's and terrible, unresponsive resistive touch screens which... Also the last Garmin I used had a horrible dataset that hadn't been updated in a while (to be fair, it was a rental)... I was looking for an aerospace museum but found Venice beach entirely by accident.
Their usual first-mover advantage? Has Apple ever been a first-mover?
Apple's never been a first mover. Apple are only ever successful when they move into an existing yet uncontested market.
However the in car entertainment market is far from uncontested. You've got everyone from Pioneer to Microsoft to small outfits putting Android onto head units. This is the environment where Apple typically fails because the competition can move faster and produce better products.
It's also, as the article points out, essentially torture. Do we want that even for violent offenders? I don't.
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H. L. Mencken
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for men of good conscience to do nothing." - Thomas Jefferson
I could go on, but I shouldn't have to.
However we're talking about people who have been judged by a jury of their peers.
But prisoners don't get thrown into solitary without a good reason (well mostly, I'll accept that some jailers are corrupt). It's normally because they've attacked a guard, been in a riot or killed someone whilst inside. I believe that jails should be rehabilitation first and punishment last but when a violent or potentially violent prisoner does something particularly bad, they do need to be punished in a way that would discourage the behaviour in the future.
Solitary is a sad necessity of any prison.
However I also dont have an issue with TV's in prisons. It's the carrot and the stick argument. Prisoner A keeps his nose down, does his assigned work and gets TV privileges. Prisoner B does not, so no TV for him. However Prisoner C attacks a guard, this requires a greater response than simply revoking TV privileges.
The world is not black and white. Whilst the ideals of the quotes you posted are something to strive towards, we still have to deal with the realities of violent criminals.
You see, calling someone a "hater" is nothing but juvenile name calling and because you resorted to calling them a name rather than debunking his point, you've demonstrated that you don't have an argument good enough to debunk the GP's point.
And again, name calling using "hater" instead of a more original and comical name again demonstrates you also have no creativity.
Sadly, this entire argument does not fit into the 120 character./ sig.
I am certain that any notice that mentions that GEMA has requested the vid be blocked will not be allowed.
Which is pretty much what they were complaining about. YouTube has blocked the video because they fear - usually quite correctly - that it contains music which GEMA hasn't granted them a license for. Digging a little deeper I'm starting to agree with GEMA on this one, it seems the bad press really started when a webcam feed from the Kiev protests was blocked by YouTube's automatic scanner. If this was because copyrighted music was heard on the feed or it was just a glitch or whatever is not certain, what is certain is that GEMA got the flak for censoring this webcam even though they had never requested it nor had any knowledge of it. However the message leads everyone to believe they are to blame when it's really YouTube at fault.
YouTube isn't at fault.
They were forced to block any content that may belong to GEMA, seeing as GEMA aren't paying for this service Google have the right to do it in their way. GEMA made their bed, now they dont want to lie in it.
What will happen when a driver is bored enough? That may be even worse than chatting on the phone because a bored driver may fall asleep from boredom.
Drivers are not children.
They are expected to maintain discipline despite how bored they get. Anyone who used the boredom excuse for bad driving behaviour needs to have their license taken off them and their feet cut off so they can endanger other people on the road.
If you find you're getting bored driving, please stop driving (or get a manual).
Also you're wrong. A distracted driver is far more dangerous.
What study has shown that it is safe to drive while eating a Big Mac?
I'm pretty sure I've seen stories about people eating apples while driving being pulled over and prosecuted in my country (the UK), and our general laws against poor driving certainly cover that kind of case if the standard of driving is unacceptable as a result.
To be fair, the standard of driving in the UK is very high compared to most other countries.
However we're talking about the US here and they make the shocking standard of driving in Australia look good.
On the other hand, the motivation for introducing the phone-specific law was that too many people are deluded enough to believe they can drive at their normal standard while on the phone
This is a huge problem we have in Australia, a lot of people have no idea how badly they drive whilst on the phone... in fact most people have no idea how badly they drive.
So in Australia, talking on your phone in a car is baned, not just texted. Although you can talk on your phone if you have a handsfree (bluetooth ear piece or built-in to the car; you can only look at your phone to answer it).
I avoid the issue entierly because I sold my car two years ago.
Depends, there's a crapload of laws around it and it varies from state to state.
Generally, in order to use your phone for voice calls it must be hands free and placed in a "commercially made cradle attached to the car" and may not be operated for any other purpose besides voice calls or as a drivers aid (I.E. navigation or instrumentation).
In some states, P-Platers (novice drivers) are not permitted to use phones at all.
I agree with the phone ban, the number of times I've almost been taken out by what we in Australia call MOPs (Morons On Phones) is astounding. People have demonstrated that they aren't able to drive and use a phone at the same time because people will prioritise the phone over the driving.
So, you don't look at your speed, or your sideview mirrors, or to the side/rear when changing lanes?
Most people dont, no.
Many people dont look at their speedo because they stare at it (at least that's their excuse for speeding, if I didn't speed I'd have to constantly stare at my speedo). I don't get this, it takes me less than half a second of looking at my speedo to register my speed.
I was taught to drive properly, much like yourself so you're regularly scanning your mirrors and instrument cluster. Every 10 or 15 seconds I look into my mirrors, check my speed and back to watching the road in front and make any changes to what I'm doing if needed... I've been doing it since I was a learner so now I do it without thinking.
The automatically controlled clutch may be faster, but there's just something about doing it yourself that makes you feel more connected with the car, and just plain more enjoyable to drive. Plus, there's no nanny to get in the way. It would drive me crazy if I requested a shift and it refused, or if there was a noticeable delay.
Was driving an paddle shifter Camaro (rental), coming up to a tunnel and wanted to hear some noise so I shifted down...
Nothing reminds you that you're not in control of an automatic when you see the words "shift denied" when pressing the paddle.
The SYNC system has nothing to do with the powertrain. It's only used for infotainment and climate control.
So you're saying it'll still have a shit transmission.
Ford seems to have their priorities seriously screwed up if that is the case. Shouldn't they make sure the powertrain works before working on the infotainment system.
Just curious, did you lift your foot from the gas while changing gear? I've never driven a (semi-)automatic gearbox car, and wondered if keeping the foot to the floor gas wise affected it's behaviour on when to change gear.
Personally, I'm happy driving stick, clutch and all. No computer to blame for bad gear changes.
Keeping your foot on the accelerator has no effect on the gearshifting behaviour in an automatic, older auto boxes will have a cut-off, modern automatics are all electronic, so the accelerator pedal doesn't have a throttle cable any more so the accelerator response is entirely computer controlled.
In fact when racing an automatic car, you shouldn't lift off for gear changes.
People that buy paddle shifting automatics are silly.
If you dont have a clutch pedal, you drive an automatic.
I agree, anyone calling a paddle shifter a manual is an idiot.
A manual has a mechanical connection between the gearlever and selector fork as well as some form of clutch control. Automatic's with gear selection functions are still automatics, although they may be called manumatics for brevity's sake.
As to the automatics, the current crop are very, very good. Have you even driven a ford since......oh......'05?
2013 Focus (in three different continents, all had the same terrible gearbox), 2013 Mustang, 2012 Falcon.
All of them have terrible automatic transmissions and it's not like their terrible just because their auto's... I've driven the following automatics that didn't have the same problems as the fords, 2008 Subaru Impreza (non turbo), 2013 Chevy Camaro, 2013 Toyota Corolla, 2006 BWM 320d, 2009 Nissan GTR, 1994 SAAB 900i.
Do you know how to drive? or are you just a hopeless Ford fanboy (erm... in my experience, these are the same thing).
The irony is, if not for the gearboxes, I think the Focus and Mustang are good cars in their respective classes (the mustangs handling surprised me for a car with a live rear axle) however a gearbox is such a key component is that they can ruin a car that is perfect in every other way.
And it would never sell. Really what we need is something like iOS/OS X running on it
That is the absolute worst thing that could happen.
Convoluted touch gestures, a pathological hate of physical buttons. What we need to do is detach these horrible touchscreen devices from functions people use often, air conditioners, radio/CD/MP3 players and so forth and move them back to physical controls you can operate without looking at them.. Hell, its even a bad idea having a navigation system that cant be updated by anyone except the cars manufacturer.
Ultimately we need a standard for in car computers, but Ford and GM are dead against this (as are the likes of BMW, MB, VAG over in Europe)* because it takes away the dependence on the dealer/manufacturer network for updates, repairs and replacements because we can simply go out, buy our own and update and service it ourselves... which kills the $150 service charge for doing a simple radio update. Manufacturers cant even keep a standard DIN or Double DIN slot for the radio which is why you need to hunt for third party brackets and wiring looms when replacing a stereo.
But I'm not holding my breath, the US Govt mandated OBDII as a standard interface in cars but even then manufacturers got around this by making their own codes/protocols so you need manufacturer specific software/equipment to understand the data.
And I don't trust Japanese/Asian manufacturers to be any better either, but it's a lot easier to find something that understands Honda or Toyota ECU's (not to mention aftermarket Honda/Toyota ECU's).
Slashdot Mirror
And later went on to liberate almost all of Europe. Do your point is ?
You exaggerate (probably because you're some sort of Soviet apologist).
The Soviets were doomed without the help of the rest of the Allies.
And here you're exaggerating.
The outcome in WWII would have been the same, except that all the conquered German territories would have been in Soviet hands. So France, Norway, Holland, Greece and so forth. It would have cost Stalin another 10 or 20 million people (most of them to starvation, disease and non battle related causes) but he would have succeeded.
The sad fact of the matter is that even if the British had acceded to Hitler's peace offering in 1941, he still would have fallen to the Russians because he would have made the same mistakes in the Crimea, at Kursk, Stalingrad, freezing near Moscow. Stalin didn't win the eastern front as much as Hitler lost it. In the mean time, the industrial base of the Soviets had been moved into the Urals outside the longest ranges of Nazi bombers and could produce T34 tanks in staggering numbers.
In 1944 it took the combined power of all the allies to make Stalin blink enough to agree to split Europe at Yalta. The full power of the US, the British and the dominion (India, Canada, Australia, et al.).
A rock falling from orbit would be a WMD!
Depends if the rock was falling due to natural means or artificial intervention.
If it's natural, it certainly isn't a weapon (you've still go the mass destruction part, but we all saw that movie and well I'm not that attached to Paris anyway).
Ahh, WebKit, you mean KHTML that Apple STOLE from Konqueror and that Google and Opera had to fix with Blink.
How do you "steal" a GPL project by adopting it and working on it? Isn't that the point of open source? Code that is available for anyone to use and improve (Apple did give give back their changes, as fully stipulated in the licence).
Is it only "stealing" if a company you don't like uses open source code?
It's stealing credit.
Apple didn't invent Webkit, the forked it from KHTML.
And stealing credit is expressly verboten by the GPL.
Your lack of imagination does not make a thing impossible.
You're lack of understanding does not make your fantasy exploits real.
None of the CAN busses follow a standard protocol
And here you demonstrate you don't know what CAN bus is. It's a bus, not a protocol. CAN bus specifies the physical layer and encapsulation, but not the content and it's the content that differs between manufacturers.
It's like using FTP and Bit Torrent, both run over ethernet but that doesn't make them compatible.
Changing from CAN bus to ethernet wont change a thing except for speed and cost, because Ethernet is faster and cheaper. Oh and your OBD2 port might become a RJ45... thats about it. Vendors will continue to use their own protocols on a different network technology.
The radio often does not connect to the same CAN bus as the MAF sensor or ECU and the amount of information available to it is limited. Beyond that, the ECU itself needs to be modified before you can make any real changes.
You've never modified car. No, I'm not asking, it's obvious that you've never even googled it if you think a buffer exploit from a head unit is a good way to do some damage (such as masquerading as a MAF sensor).
The biggest impediments to someone writing a script that can take over your car are
1) Implementation requires physical access.
This is such a big one, it's almost a waste of time continuing.
2) In most cases, you need to car to be modified before an exploit becomes dangerous (yep, you could bugger around with the radio, or maybe the seat adjustment, but not anything important like turbo engagement, throttle response or AWD systems).
3) the sheer number of different types of systems make a large scale exploit extremely difficult.
There's plenty of financial incentive from law enforcement, militaries and insurance companies.
It sounds like you've been watching too many Fast and the Furious movies. You cant simply fire a grapple at a car and override all the electronics. Your medication, sounds like you need two of these and you need them by tonight.
Stop and go traffic is among the most accident prone situations.
This might be true. But accidents are not all equal. You are MUCH more likely to die
or seriously injure someone while driving at high speed than in slow stop and go traffic
because of both the speed of collision as well as reaction time.
This is true.
But fixing a polyurethane bumper because Dopey Doris was too busy on their phone to notice traffic had stopped (or to keep her foot on the brake pedal) is an expensive PITA.
There are a lot of stupid drivers out there with no insurance and even if your insurance covers you at no cost you still lose your car for 3 or so days (if you want the job done properly).
So you're not likely to die from a little shunt in peak hour traffic, but that doesn't make it OK.
If you're in the car, you're off the phone. I live in WA (Western Australia) and the rules here are clear, you can only touch the phone if you're parked.
What a fantastic idea! By switching to a well understood standard it will finally make our vehicles trivial to hack!
Ohh.. wait.. maybe that isn't such a good thing? *shrug*
Erm...
Ethernet can be easily made a closed system like CAN is.
Also CAN is already easily hacked... However you need to get physical access to the CAN BUS which either involves a lot of fucking about in the engine bay or plugging into the OBD2 socket in the drivers footwell. Something tells me an Ethernet replacement for CAN would be the same, but swapping the OBD2 for RJ45.
However for most cars, to actually change anything you need to replace the ECU or at the very least, the ECU firmware (car enthusiasts have been "hacking" their engines for decades now).
I know it borders on sacrilege to point this out but Google Maps conks out on you the moment you don't have network coverage and while it has a caching function I'll still put my trust in an old fashioned Garmin unit any time.
That may have been the case years ago, but not any more. I drove from Las Vegas to San Francisco using Google Maps on my Galaxy Nexus and ran out of data (AT&T prepaid... I was a tourist) somewhere around Pismo Beach thanks to a self updating app. Once you've got your course locked in, you don't need a data connection.
That being said, most dedicated nav units will calculate and recalculate routes faster. But I'm of two minds about this because I'm yet to find one that's as nice to use as Google Maps on my GNex. They all seem to use horrible UI's and terrible, unresponsive resistive touch screens which... Also the last Garmin I used had a horrible dataset that hadn't been updated in a while (to be fair, it was a rental)... I was looking for an aerospace museum but found Venice beach entirely by accident.
Third mover.
eBay search keywords: 2din android
Erm, they're pretty much the last to market here with everyone from Pioneer and Kenwood to Microsoft producing in car entertainment products.
Their usual first-mover advantage? Has Apple ever been a first-mover?
Apple's never been a first mover. Apple are only ever successful when they move into an existing yet uncontested market.
However the in car entertainment market is far from uncontested. You've got everyone from Pioneer to Microsoft to small outfits putting Android onto head units. This is the environment where Apple typically fails because the competition can move faster and produce better products.
It's also, as the article points out, essentially torture. Do we want that even for violent offenders? I don't.
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H. L. Mencken
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for men of good conscience to do nothing." - Thomas Jefferson
I could go on, but I shouldn't have to.
However we're talking about people who have been judged by a jury of their peers.
But prisoners don't get thrown into solitary without a good reason (well mostly, I'll accept that some jailers are corrupt). It's normally because they've attacked a guard, been in a riot or killed someone whilst inside. I believe that jails should be rehabilitation first and punishment last but when a violent or potentially violent prisoner does something particularly bad, they do need to be punished in a way that would discourage the behaviour in the future.
Solitary is a sad necessity of any prison.
However I also dont have an issue with TV's in prisons. It's the carrot and the stick argument. Prisoner A keeps his nose down, does his assigned work and gets TV privileges. Prisoner B does not, so no TV for him. However Prisoner C attacks a guard, this requires a greater response than simply revoking TV privileges.
The world is not black and white. Whilst the ideals of the quotes you posted are something to strive towards, we still have to deal with the realities of violent criminals.
Hater
You see, calling someone a "hater" is nothing but juvenile name calling and because you resorted to calling them a name rather than debunking his point, you've demonstrated that you don't have an argument good enough to debunk the GP's point.
./ sig.
And again, name calling using "hater" instead of a more original and comical name again demonstrates you also have no creativity.
Sadly, this entire argument does not fit into the 120 character
I am certain that any notice that mentions that GEMA has requested the vid be blocked will not be allowed.
Which is pretty much what they were complaining about. YouTube has blocked the video because they fear - usually quite correctly - that it contains music which GEMA hasn't granted them a license for. Digging a little deeper I'm starting to agree with GEMA on this one, it seems the bad press really started when a webcam feed from the Kiev protests was blocked by YouTube's automatic scanner. If this was because copyrighted music was heard on the feed or it was just a glitch or whatever is not certain, what is certain is that GEMA got the flak for censoring this webcam even though they had never requested it nor had any knowledge of it. However the message leads everyone to believe they are to blame when it's really YouTube at fault.
YouTube isn't at fault. They were forced to block any content that may belong to GEMA, seeing as GEMA aren't paying for this service Google have the right to do it in their way. GEMA made their bed, now they dont want to lie in it.
People who make death threats aren't rational people.
If the death threats achieve the desired end, then why aren't they rational?
Is everything that achieved automatically made rational?
Or in other words, are you saying that results not only justify the means, but the motivations as well.
From the pics in the article, it's pretty fugly... However I'd still buy one but it would be the first phone I've owned that I'd buy a case for.
Because you could upgrade your phone without interrupting the current call?
But I still wouldn't bet that the carrier doesn't drop the call before you finish swapping the components.
Dunno about where you live, but around here, police use LIDAR ...
THAT's why I covered my ride in black velvet.
The fact he's also a pimp is entirely coincidental.
What will happen when a driver is bored enough? That may be even worse than chatting on the phone because a bored driver may fall asleep from boredom.
Drivers are not children.
They are expected to maintain discipline despite how bored they get. Anyone who used the boredom excuse for bad driving behaviour needs to have their license taken off them and their feet cut off so they can endanger other people on the road.
If you find you're getting bored driving, please stop driving (or get a manual).
Also you're wrong. A distracted driver is far more dangerous.
What study has shown that it is safe to drive while eating a Big Mac?
I'm pretty sure I've seen stories about people eating apples while driving being pulled over and prosecuted in my country (the UK), and our general laws against poor driving certainly cover that kind of case if the standard of driving is unacceptable as a result.
To be fair, the standard of driving in the UK is very high compared to most other countries.
However we're talking about the US here and they make the shocking standard of driving in Australia look good.
On the other hand, the motivation for introducing the phone-specific law was that too many people are deluded enough to believe they can drive at their normal standard while on the phone
This is a huge problem we have in Australia, a lot of people have no idea how badly they drive whilst on the phone... in fact most people have no idea how badly they drive.
So in Australia, talking on your phone in a car is baned, not just texted. Although you can talk on your phone if you have a handsfree (bluetooth ear piece or built-in to the car; you can only look at your phone to answer it).
I avoid the issue entierly because I sold my car two years ago.
Depends, there's a crapload of laws around it and it varies from state to state.
Generally, in order to use your phone for voice calls it must be hands free and placed in a "commercially made cradle attached to the car" and may not be operated for any other purpose besides voice calls or as a drivers aid (I.E. navigation or instrumentation).
In some states, P-Platers (novice drivers) are not permitted to use phones at all.
I agree with the phone ban, the number of times I've almost been taken out by what we in Australia call MOPs (Morons On Phones) is astounding. People have demonstrated that they aren't able to drive and use a phone at the same time because people will prioritise the phone over the driving.
I just don't use my phone whilst driving.
So, you don't look at your speed, or your sideview mirrors, or to the side/rear when changing lanes?
Most people dont, no.
Many people dont look at their speedo because they stare at it (at least that's their excuse for speeding, if I didn't speed I'd have to constantly stare at my speedo). I don't get this, it takes me less than half a second of looking at my speedo to register my speed.
I was taught to drive properly, much like yourself so you're regularly scanning your mirrors and instrument cluster. Every 10 or 15 seconds I look into my mirrors, check my speed and back to watching the road in front and make any changes to what I'm doing if needed... I've been doing it since I was a learner so now I do it without thinking.
But this concept is foreign to most drivers.
The automatically controlled clutch may be faster, but there's just something about doing it yourself that makes you feel more connected with the car, and just plain more enjoyable to drive. Plus, there's no nanny to get in the way. It would drive me crazy if I requested a shift and it refused, or if there was a noticeable delay.
Was driving an paddle shifter Camaro (rental), coming up to a tunnel and wanted to hear some noise so I shifted down...
Nothing reminds you that you're not in control of an automatic when you see the words "shift denied" when pressing the paddle.
The SYNC system has nothing to do with the powertrain. It's only used for infotainment and climate control.
So you're saying it'll still have a shit transmission.
Ford seems to have their priorities seriously screwed up if that is the case. Shouldn't they make sure the powertrain works before working on the infotainment system.
Just curious, did you lift your foot from the gas while changing gear? I've never driven a (semi-)automatic gearbox car, and wondered if keeping the foot to the floor gas wise affected it's behaviour on when to change gear.
Personally, I'm happy driving stick, clutch and all. No computer to blame for bad gear changes.
Keeping your foot on the accelerator has no effect on the gearshifting behaviour in an automatic, older auto boxes will have a cut-off, modern automatics are all electronic, so the accelerator pedal doesn't have a throttle cable any more so the accelerator response is entirely computer controlled.
In fact when racing an automatic car, you shouldn't lift off for gear changes.
People that buy paddle shifting automatics are silly.
If you dont have a clutch pedal, you drive an automatic.
I agree, anyone calling a paddle shifter a manual is an idiot.
A manual has a mechanical connection between the gearlever and selector fork as well as some form of clutch control. Automatic's with gear selection functions are still automatics, although they may be called manumatics for brevity's sake.
2013 Focus (in three different continents, all had the same terrible gearbox), 2013 Mustang, 2012 Falcon.
All of them have terrible automatic transmissions and it's not like their terrible just because their auto's... I've driven the following automatics that didn't have the same problems as the fords, 2008 Subaru Impreza (non turbo), 2013 Chevy Camaro, 2013 Toyota Corolla, 2006 BWM 320d, 2009 Nissan GTR, 1994 SAAB 900i.
Do you know how to drive? or are you just a hopeless Ford fanboy (erm... in my experience, these are the same thing).
The irony is, if not for the gearboxes, I think the Focus and Mustang are good cars in their respective classes (the mustangs handling surprised me for a car with a live rear axle) however a gearbox is such a key component is that they can ruin a car that is perfect in every other way.
And it would never sell. Really what we need is something like iOS/OS X running on it
That is the absolute worst thing that could happen.
Convoluted touch gestures, a pathological hate of physical buttons. What we need to do is detach these horrible touchscreen devices from functions people use often, air conditioners, radio/CD/MP3 players and so forth and move them back to physical controls you can operate without looking at them.. Hell, its even a bad idea having a navigation system that cant be updated by anyone except the cars manufacturer.
Ultimately we need a standard for in car computers, but Ford and GM are dead against this (as are the likes of BMW, MB, VAG over in Europe)* because it takes away the dependence on the dealer/manufacturer network for updates, repairs and replacements because we can simply go out, buy our own and update and service it ourselves... which kills the $150 service charge for doing a simple radio update. Manufacturers cant even keep a standard DIN or Double DIN slot for the radio which is why you need to hunt for third party brackets and wiring looms when replacing a stereo.
But I'm not holding my breath, the US Govt mandated OBDII as a standard interface in cars but even then manufacturers got around this by making their own codes/protocols so you need manufacturer specific software/equipment to understand the data.
And I don't trust Japanese/Asian manufacturers to be any better either, but it's a lot easier to find something that understands Honda or Toyota ECU's (not to mention aftermarket Honda/Toyota ECU's).