What is Digg?52 Comments
- padraic2112, on 01/23/2009, -4/+53Wow, this is such a bad idea on so many levels.
Although seeing this deployed and the inevitable "social protest" hack of stalling out every car so equipped, that would be hilarious. Not to mention all the song and dance afterward... "It was irresponsible and juvenile for [hacker Foo] to compromise the system this way..." - anagoge, on 01/25/2009, -4/+25plz stp i cnt kep up wiv u lolz txt bk xx
- jp12380, on 01/25/2009, -1/+20Bad idea.
Crooks would disable this system on their vehicles.
People could hack the system to stop the cars of other people for all sorts of reasons.
Police could start abusing the new found power they would be given like they always do. Tazers were originally there only in place of a gun and now they are used all the time. - johnnick, on 01/23/2009, -5/+22This is a bad idea because it's a bad capability to introduce. Not only is there the possibility of the unauthorized person using the system, but there is also the potential for "joke" uses (How would the police respond to a person pretending to be hysterical reporting a "carjacking" of a friend's car and claiming there was a child in the car?). How long would it be before Repo Men figured out how to access the system and disable cars so they can be more easily recovered? Those are just a couple of the abuses I could come up with off the top of my head.
What level of authentication would be required as part of the report to confirm the disabling is authorized?
The justification seems pretty flimsy, as well. The idea of disabling a getaway car is silly when you think of this conversation:
Thief 1: "Did you get a getaway car?"
Thief 2: "Yes."
Thief 1: "Did you disable the text message engine-disabling system?"
Thief 2: "Doh! Be right back."
If the car won't run if the text message engine-disabling system isn't working, then that's going to be a fault that sends a car to a mechanic far more often than it's used to stop a stolen car or a vehicle involved in a chase. - mehan, on 01/25/2009, -4/+20I wish text messages could be used to stop mrbabyman.
- voldron, on 01/24/2009, -2/+12Pshh LoJack already does this.
- Trunkhouse, on 01/25/2009, -4/+13Play in traffic, mr babyman. kthxbye.
- Stormwern, on 01/23/2009, -3/+11Lol, stupid old government. Imagine if they spent £10B fitting every brittish car with that device, and "somehow" it got cracked, and they'd have to spend another £10B and ground all car traffic for a month before they got them all out again... I don't think I would be able to stop laughing for the rest of my life.
- jinx122985, on 01/25/2009, -0/+7If i were a hacker, i would sit on a hill overlooking the freeway and watch the cars stop one by one
- nevski264a, on 01/24/2009, -2/+9Even thought his initially sounds a cool idea....the crooks are always one step ahead and will probably come up with something on the black market to overcome such a device
- Hellman109, on 01/25/2009, -0/+7Like the easily avaliable mobile jammers...
Thats half the problem, the technology is already defeated. - inactive, on 01/25/2009, -9/+15Bury as old and as MrBabyMan.
- Snarfy, on 01/25/2009, -1/+7It's funny until you realize they are paying for all that stupidity with your money.
- michaelhood, on 01/25/2009, -0/+6Maybe he's not a Brit.
- Shuk, on 01/25/2009, -1/+6Cars must stay DRM-free!
- cerealjynx, on 01/25/2009, -1/+6This would never be abused by forces outside the law!!
I on purposed the sarcasm! - diggydougie, on 01/25/2009, -1/+6Sounds great as long as your car is stolen. But what about when the cops are chasing YOU?
- Eurynom0s, on 01/25/2009, -3/+8Didn't they have this EXACT idea in Idiocracy? Wasn't there a scene where Frito is driving Joe (Luke Wilson's character) in his car, and the police are able to remotely disable the vehicle?
Yeah, this isn't open to abuse at all. Not a bit. Can't imagine what could go wrong. - LeepII, on 01/25/2009, -1/+5Yea, and the police are just soooooooo responsible, no this won't be abused in anyway, no sir.
- AlexAmore, on 01/25/2009, -0/+4lol lyk omg try h4rd3r...lolol
- johnnick, on 01/25/2009, -0/+3I'll break it down more simply for you. It's a cost benefit analysis thing. You add the actual cost of the system, plus the estimated cost of the potential harms times the probability that those harms will happen, and compare it to the benefit society will get from the program.
Aside from the potential for abuse, there are two ways the system could be installed: (1) so that the car can only run if the system is working, or (2) so that the system can be disabled. If (1), the cost of the system plus the cost of repairs and the opportunity cost to people who's cars won't run because the system will break is probably much higher than the benefit to society of having that system installed, because those high speed chases are relatively rare events.
If (2), then criminals will simply disable the system and it won't be used for its intended purpose as often as it should, and the cost differential will be even higher.
So, since I think it's highly likely that the cost of this system outweighs it's benefits, then I think it's a bad idea. - Foofoofoofoobar, on 01/25/2009, -1/+4Wow this article is biased as hell. Not a single quote from anybody opposing the plan. If it takes just 5 minutes for Internet-people to think of 10 ways this system could do harm, surely there has to be somebody out there that is against it.
Here's my contribution (~ 1 minute):
1) People could hack the system and disable cars (might be mitigated with a public key system)
2) Cell phone jammers
3) Impossible to prevent tampering
4) Civil liberties (this is debatable, to some, but the others definitely are not)
Add yours! - inactive, on 01/25/2009, -2/+5The New World Order does not want you to escape when the SHTF.
- phillc, on 01/25/2009, -1/+4samething every other year...
microwave transmitters to stop stolen cars
infrared signal to stop stolen cars
satellite transmission to stop stolen cars
next article will be bluetooth to stop stolen cars and we can come up with the exact same reasons why remotely stopping cars is a stupid idea - dudestuff, on 01/25/2009, -1/+4OMG like sum1 stole my car LOL l8er dude.
- jave8u, on 01/25/2009, -1/+3This is great. So while this guy is driving my car, I'll stop his engine, not knowing that my car was in the middle of crossing an intersection. Genius.
- dougs55, on 01/25/2009, -0/+2It wouldn't be a ten cent text message either. :D
- inactive, on 01/23/2009, -5/+7I say, make the robbed autos play cha cha cha music at top volume. They will stop the car in no time.
- Ductapemaster, on 01/25/2009, -2/+4Just wait, we will have to start paying for cell plans for our cars...
- NodOfficer, on 01/25/2009, -0/+25) Implementation/Money
- PopcornDave, on 01/25/2009, -0/+2So the technology that has the cell phone jammer in the key for teenage drivers would automatically defeat this? Watch for a rise in the carjacking of teenage drivers if this idiocy were ever to come to fruition.
- inactive, on 01/25/2009, -1/+3As technology advances, criminals get it easier
- mxmj, on 01/26/2009, -1/+2And what happens when the car stops in the middle of a busy highway or intersection?
- DRIVEBUY, on 08/13/2009, -0/+1stolen cars? get your vehicles history in seconds! Car HPi text checks only £3! Car, van, bike, truck HPi check texts sent instantly to your mobile phone! text DRIVEBUY space REGNO to 83600. or visit www.thecheck.co.uk
- quomen, on 01/25/2009, -1/+2I'm not trying to be judgmental or anything, but why does the UK believe in such big brother technology. This is a terrible idea. Think about the type of terrible things that this could set a precedent for. What would they do next, implant humans with tazer chips to immobilize them if they rob a bank?
- sinembarg0, on 01/25/2009, -1/+2I think most car traffic is already grounded…
- WiseWeasel, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1Go live in some totalitarian dictatorship if you want to feel safe, tool! The world is really not as dangerous as the media will lead you to believe...
- czeman, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1That's why people need to maintain a safe following distance and pay attention while driving.
- johnnick, on 01/24/2009, -5/+6What should we do to you, then, for posting the same comment twice?
- RoyHobbs, on 01/25/2009, -6/+6mr babyman buried
- katzeyes, on 01/24/2009, -1/+1Um yeah - pretty good idea in a perfect world I suppose, but here? Naaahhh...
- jftitan, on 01/25/2009, -3/+3I'll stick to stealing old cars then thank you very much.
- Useight, on 01/25/2009, -3/+3I don't care what kind of car I'm driving, it won't have this technology.
- MCJackhammer, on 01/25/2009, -1/+1im in ur base, steelin ur whipz
- EternalTyranny, on 01/25/2009, -2/+2Just another awful way in which the police and government intend to be 'hip', 'cool' and 'with it'.
- czeman, on 01/25/2009, -2/+1I'd welcome such technology in my vehicles. I'd rather get it back with minimal damage than smashed up as the result of a high speed chase.
- inactive, on 01/25/2009, -1/+0Could a car be used to stop a stolen cell phone
-
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is