Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
@topspin said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@cheong said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
sledgehammer
without making too much noise or other troubleThere's still windows.
If only they would have installed Linux, their building would have been theft proof.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
There are some german car insurances offering such tariffs, too.
My insurance offered me up to 30% rebate if I installed their app that would monitor my driving.
I told them I'll pay the full price
-
@TimeBandit said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
I'll pay the full price
No, you'll pay 43% more than the full price.
-
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
No, you'll pay 43% more than the full price.
Still less than if they monitored my driving
-
@TimeBandit said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
No, you'll pay 43% more than the full price.
Still less than if they monitored my driving
At least until all the other sheeple install the spyware and then us luddites are paying the "crazy high risk" pool rate because Big Insurance knows there's no safe drivers left in gen pop.
-
A thief who stole a teenager’s first car unwittingly helped bring down his insurance costs - by scoring a perfect ten out of ten on the vehicle’s ‘black box’ safety system.
-
Turns out that Sweden is now automatically taxing anyone they think drives past their checkpoint. I just got a bill for €0.81 for allegedly driving past a tax booth in Göteborg - with a car that has never left Finland.
Here's news article about it, from 2019, so the problem has been going on for quite some time:
Apparently the Swedish government can just decide to tax someone who's hasn't gone anywhere near Sweden for a decade or more. (And not just me. They event sent a bill to some Finnish fire department. I really wish that department had taken the matter to court. But unfortunately not.) Finland apparently lets Sweden's scheme go on, and will dutifully uphold the bill in court, which is because, honestly, what kind of miserable government allows another state to fleece their tax base?
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
I just got a bill for €0.81
Sounds like they're going for the "people will just pay it because it's not worth the effort to protest".
-
@dcon Every drivers' association here is recommending that you send in a correction request, in the hopes that the cost of processing those will offset Sweden's profits. Considering I got the bill in paper mail though, it's possible that they're sending these out at a loss already.
I still submitted a correction request to the Swedish tax office. I want my money back on principle. Apparently they got enough correction requests that they set up a web portal for submitting them. I considered sending it via paper mail anyway just to waste more of their time and money. But that would have cost me more money too.
-
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Turns out that Sweden is now automatically taxing anyone they think drives past their checkpoint. I just got a bill for €0.81 for allegedly driving past a tax booth in Göteborg - with a car that has never left Finland.
Here's news article about it, from 2019, so the problem has been going on for quite some time:
Apparently the Swedish government can just decide to tax someone who's hasn't gone anywhere near Sweden for a decade or more. (And not just me. They event sent a bill to some Finnish fire department. I really wish that department had taken the matter to court. But unfortunately not.) Finland apparently lets Sweden's scheme go on, and will dutifully uphold the bill in court, which is because, honestly, what kind of miserable government allows another state to fleece their tax base?
It's been broken since it was built. Swedes also get the bill for Finns driving through them on occasion. Great stuff!
And the bill might be really low, but if you don't pay on time, the late charge is retarded.
-
That reminds me of the parking system implemented in Paris since a few years. You have to pay to park in the street (this has been the case for... longer than I've been alive?) and they recently moved to enforcement by cars equipped with cameras driving along the streets and automatically reading all license plates (since quite some time you have to enter your car license plate when paying for the parking -- this is also used in some places to allow e.g. 1 h free per day, but only once per car).
(as an aside, I have no idea how they read license plates on tiny streets where cars are parked nose-to-tail... maybe this is a good way to avoid issues, though you'd need to make sure both ends of your car are blocked this way and then you can't get out of the parking spot... you could always put something to hide your license plate but this is obviously illegal and likely to get you in more trouble than a parking fine...)
Anyway, for added the system has been contracted out to a private company which of course only has the number of fines as its incentive. So there are countless false positives.
So much that there is a dedicated service in the city hall to handle them. Except that they're swamped by requests and take something like 2 years to answer. And the law is such that you must pay before being allowed to contest the fine. Also to contest you'd need some proof that you paid (or weren't there, but for most people the issue is that they paid but were still fined), but since you only receive the fine by post some days later that means you have to keep all the paper tickets for your parking. That is, assuming you even got a paper ticket in the first place since now that the enforcement doesn't look at the ticket I think in some cases the machine doesn't even deliver a ticket to you. Yeah, good luck with that.
One of the most infuriating "glitch" of the system is that in France disabled badge holders don't pay for parking but instead just have to display their badge in the window. But the automatic system only reads the license plates and thus systematically fines them. And since the badge is linked to a person, not to a car (you can take the badge with you if you use a different car) you can't just say "here's the badge for this car."
-
@topspin said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@cheong said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
sledgehammer
without making too much noise or other troubleThere's still windows.
Lots of HongKongers have metal fences installed to drive away thieves.
-
-
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
He identifies as a Tesla car?
Not if he jumped on the truck. Tesla's go under.
-
@dcon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
He identifies as a Tesla car?
Not if he jumped on the truck. Tesla's go under.
So he identifies as a Black Tesla then.
-
-
@boomzilla The
FloridaPennsylvania? Man thread is .
-
-
@loopback0 Jill's wrong. It definitely slowed that car down.
-
-
Maybe not as bad as it sounds though:
As of this article’s publishing, there isn’t a great defense against this sort of theft. On the good news front, a thief trying to steal a car this way will need to do some real work to get it. Ripping off body panels takes time, and so does wiring into the car. Basically, a thief would need to have uninterrupted access to your vehicle in a private area to make it work.
...
As for a permanent fix, Lindell believes that a “Zero Trust” approach to CAN bus systems is the only way to go. Every message from one ECU to another would need to be encrypted and carry authentication codes that can’t be spoofed.Internet of Shit on wheels.
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Basically, a thief would need to have uninterrupted access to your vehicle in a private area to make it work.
Yeah, sure, that's why there's not a lot of incidences of catalytic converters getting stolen.
-
@Rhywden Stealing a catalytic converter does not require uninterrupted access for an extended period of time. With a reciprocating saw, it can be gone in only a minute or so; it's not quiet, but it's quick.
-
And, crucially, their location on the exterior of a car's underside makes them easy to steal, David Glawe of the NCIB told NPR earlier this year.
Stealing a converter takes just a few minutes and a battery-operated saw. "You slide under the car, slice through your exhaust system, and you're in and out usually within 30 seconds to a minute," Glawe said.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Rhywden Stealing a catalytic converter does not require uninterrupted access for an extended period of time. With a reciprocating saw, it can be gone in only a minute or so; it's not quiet, but it's quick.
If you know how to get past the panelling to get at connections underneath, that's also quick and not particularly loud
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Internet of Shit on wheels.
That's a bit unfair. It requires physical access, which is a point where a lot of security solutions stop being effective.
Also, a properly encrypted internal bus would:
- require every single device connected to the bus to have enough processing power to handle the encryption/decryption process. Maybe it's viable today, but it definitely wasn't so in the past (or at least not without a significant cost increase).
- make it impossible for third-party mechanics to diagnose and fix lots of electronics/wiring faults. (Which, ironically, may be a motivation for car manufacturers to actually implement it.)
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
As for a permanent fix, Lindell believes that a “Zero Trust” approach to CAN bus systems is the only way to go. Every message from one ECU to another would need to be encrypted and carry authentication codes that can’t be spoofed.
That would be massive 0verkill and not really to the point.
- The simplest, and most appropriate, control would be to make sure removing those panels (without the car being unlocked and the hood open button inside being pushed) would trigger the alarm.
- Reading the messages isn't a problem, spoofing them is, so they don't need to be encrypted, just signed. And only the messages from lock and ignition; spoofing things like speed or fuel quantity won't help anybody steal the car.
- When switched from CAN (which is a bus) to automotive Ethernet (switched), it will no longer be possible to send the signal from the wrong wire, so getting to an easy-ish reachable one like the one to lights won't be helpful any more even without authentication.
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
The simplest, and most appropriate, control would be to make sure removing those panels (without the car being unlocked and the hood open button inside being pushed) would trigger the alarm.
Just what I need on my car, more sensors that fail.
-
@Dragoon Would the sensors be routed through the CAN bus?
-
@Dragoon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
The simplest, and most appropriate, control would be to make sure removing those panels (without the car being unlocked and the hood open button inside being pushed) would trigger the alarm.
Just what I need on my car, more sensors that fail.
Doesn't necessarily need more sensors. If non-destructively removing the panels needed to get to the wiring for the headlights needs the bonnet to be open, then it's already covered by the alarm sensor for the bonnet.
-
@loopback0 said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Doesn't necessarily need more sensors. If non-destructively removing the panels needed to get to the wiring for the headlights needs the bonnet to be open, then it's already covered by the alarm sensor for the bonnet.
No alarm on my car, but the hood ajar sensor has broken twice, I just ignore it now.
-
-
-
If I didn't tell you this was Chicago, would you think this happened in a developed nation?
It didn't; it happened in Chicago.
-
-
@boomzilla The GTA series of games is not intended as an instruction manual or driver's educational aid.
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
‘Unreal’: Car crashes into second story of California home
Unreal is amazing; the graphics just keep getting better and better. However, the author of that scene needs to work on the believability.
-
-
@Luhmann Darwin missed an opportunity.
-
So you are driving along the autobahn, and suddenly, there is a high-voltage on the tarmac... Happened on A7 in Germany (unfortunately, no informative images in the article):
-
@BernieTheBernie It must be to charge your electric car
-
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
it had been stolen from
may be different from
he stole it from
. Maybe...
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
it had been stolen from
may be different from
he stole it from
. Maybe...Maybe he just bought it from a second hand seller?
-
@cheong And, consequently, arresting him is not the right thing to do?
That's the difference: steal vs. buy a stolen item (without knowing that it was stolen).
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@cheong And, consequently, arresting him is not the right thing to do?
That's the difference: steal vs. buy a stolen item (without knowing that it was stolen).I suppose the police have right to detent him for interrogation on whether he know it's stolen car when he bought it. And try to retrieve transaction record if bank transaction is done to help trace back to the thiefs (very unlikely)
-
@cheong paid with ?
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@cheong paid with ?
I don't know how much these cars are sold, but I've heard tales about people buying possibly stolen cars with as low as £2,000 in cash for common non-RV models.
-
@cheong In NL, purchasing or selling stolen goods ('heling') is a crime, and it does not require the purchasing party to know the good was stolen. If the asking price sounds too good to be true, it probably is.