SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the you-can't-make-this-stuff-up dept.
A trade magazine, http://www.todaysmotorvehicles.com/article/5-myths-about-connected-cars/ ran this article by Shaun Kirby, Cisco Consulting CTO, "5 Myths About Connected Cars". Haven't read anything this funny all year, some clips include:
Myth: Securing connected cars requires breakthroughs in security technology.
Fact: Connected cars are extremely complex, with many sensors, computers, and networks, along with an ever-growing list of features. Fortunately, technologies already exist that have proven effective in securing some of the largest enterprise information technology (IT) infrastructures. Existing technologies are well equipped to keep drivers and their data safe now and into the future.
...and this one, the punch line at the end had me rolling in the aisle:
Myth: Automakers are responsibile for securing connected cars.
Fact: The vehicle manufacturer is just one link in the security chain. Multiple tiers of suppliers, dealerships, developers of aftermarket devices and services, regulatory bodies, and other industries creating devices and services that interact with connected cars are all responsible for keeping cars and drivers safe and secure.
It is especially important for third parties who provide connected car applications to have secure infrastructures. For instance, a mall operator installing vehicle-to-infrastructure units to guide heavy traffic to optimal parking spots will need to ensure that all the proper security controls are in place.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday September 11 2017, @06:43AM (8 children)
How would third parties add all this value if the car was secure?
They'll all be perfectly upright and rest assured, mr auto maker, they will worry about security so you don't have to.
Thanks, yeah, this was a riot.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @06:50AM (7 children)
Not to mention that the cars are almost certainly going to run 100% non-free proprietary user-subjugating software. Have fun with all the spying, digital restrictions management, and backdoors! To some extent, these problems already exist in current vehicles, but I imagine the problem will only get worse from here on.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 11 2017, @10:01AM (3 children)
I'd worry about that for my next car but I doubt I'll have a next car. I'm in my 40s, own a non-connected Toyota with under 500K miles on it, and drive less than 7K miles a year, so I should be good for the rest of my life.
If necessary though, I'm fully willing and able to buy an old 50s or 60s car and restore it entirely by myself. I'd likely have to buy some new tools but I shall persevere through such tribulations should they come.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fraxinus-tree on Monday September 11 2017, @01:10PM (1 child)
Cars from '70, '80 are perfectly OK in "security" sense. Most of '90 and '00, too. Well, thieves are some concern, but they tend to work on modern cars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @01:16PM
90's (and some earlier?) tend to have first generation airbags -- these are fine if you are "in position" for a frontal crash and if you are large. Not good if you are a smaller/lighter person, the first gen bags are quite powerful.
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Monday September 11 2017, @07:54PM
(Score: 0, Funny) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday September 11 2017, @02:42PM (2 children)
It'll be interesting to see where the misogynerd narrative goes given that cars are only going to have more and more software as time marches on.
The catch-22 that the misogynerd narrative currently relies on is this. All assigned males who use GNU + Linux/BSD/(What else? Haiku? Hurd?) continue to be pervasively labeled in the media and on the ground as misogynists. The idea is to build off the old narrative that these systems are user-unfriendly.
(Perhaps because hardware manufacturers have little, if any, respect for standards like say HID, sometimes we need to edit our kernel of choice's source code so that, say, a new mouse we just bought, which likely relies on a bug or oversight in M$'s HID parser, will function with free software—often gratis, but libre is what empowers even a lowly end user with no kernel development creds, like yours truly, to add to her kernel's functionality.)
Now, not only does the capability of being empowered to edit one's own kernel constitute “not user friendly,” but, perhaps with some help from Sandra Harding [wikipedia.org]'s notion that maths constitute violent sexual assault, this capability is now, in a flourish of doublethink (because I simply cannot comprehend how being empowered are these things), anti-feminist and misogynist.
Feminism has decided to side with proprietary software vendors. Why? If there is proprietary software everywhere, and assigned males may not change how that software works or fix its bugs, it's that much easier to hold all 3.6 billion assigned males collectively and severally accountable for the bugs that impact womyn-born-womyn's use of said software. Anybody who is going to assert that feminists don't do that is a damned liar, because I've been held personally accountable to my face more than enough times for problems in proprietary software.
Anyway, where I'm going with this is that as cars get more and more software, feminism will encourage that software to be proprietary. GNU is misogynist. Being empowered with ownership of one's own devices, including the software, is anti-feminist. I'll be disappointed if feminists don't conjure up some wild-eyed rape scenario where, if the software on our cars were to be free libre software, one of those dastardly assigned males would replace a perfect, innocent princess' car software with an altered version that does something like lock her inside of her car. Or something. Proprietary software and security through obscurity, feminism will say, is what's empowering to women.
Womyn-born-womyn may also find they've always been at war with Eurasia, but I digress.
Then when the inevitable hacks happen to the proprietary software running all our cars, guess who feminists will blame? That's right! All 3.6 billion assigned males on the planet, collectively and severally, same as happens to me to my face, for failing at creating quality software. The Lovelace cudgel will come out, and we'll get to hear how, because the first “programmer” (visionary and mathematician if you ask me, but it's not her fault she was stuck in the 1830s so could not truly be a “programmer”) was a womyn-born-womyn, that by way of sympathetic magic [wikipedia.org], if only womyn-born-womyn were able to work on software, software would have no bugs!
(Libre software would be feminist software, if only feminists were not pathological liars about their goals.)
Where it really gets interesting is when most of us assigned males get fed up with proprietary shit software in our rides, and if we are unable to break the DRM, we exclusively buy and maintain cars built before say 1990 or someodd. Then we'll hear all about how you can spot a rapist misogynerd from a mile away just by checking what year their car is, and how all assigned males who own cars made before 1990 are just awful, horrible, no good, very bad people. And sexually frustrated. Can't ever forget the sexually frustrated part. Can't ever forget the homophobia. If you're an assigned male, and you drive a car made before 1990, you're a sexually frustrated dork who can't get laid!
At least remember to snicker a bit when this happens and suddenly a guy with a wife and kids who drives a nice classic Mustang say, becomes a sexually frustrated rapist who can't get laid and is probably an AIDS-infested secret gay to boot.
(Score: 5, Funny) by http on Monday September 11 2017, @03:59PM (1 child)
OK, I admit it. You've got the time to type out all this stuff, and clearly have access to better drug dealers than I do.
What's the real secret to making money online?
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 3, Funny) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday September 11 2017, @04:09PM
Only buy American, and insist on locally grown organic heirloom varieties. If Monsanto or Big Alcohol/Tobacco is starting to get involved in the production of your drug of choice, beware!
Easy! Obviously time travel is involved. You have to go to just after Bitcoin opened to mining (back before you needed ASICs to mine), mine some bitcoins, take your wallet back to the future, and sell at any point in time Bitcoins are trading at four to five figures!
I thought everybody knew these things!