Google Driverless Cars Get Into More Accidents Following Road Rules

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Google Driverless Cars Get Into More Accidents Following Road Rules

Google Driverless Car

Google's driverless cars are getting into more accidents because they follow the rules of the road and other drivers do not.

Google's driverless cars are an accident waiting to happen. Apparently, the vehicles have a crash rating of double that of human drivers, according to a University of Michigan study. But it's for a reason you might not suspect.

The cars follow ALL traffic rules, ALL the time. Without exception. Human drivers obviously do not. Luckily,all the accidents to this point have been minor ones and the Google cars have never been at fault. But that hasn't stopped engineers from debating whether they should program the vehicles to break the law once in awhile.

"It's a constant debate inside our group," Raj Rajkumar, co-director of the General Motors-Carnegie Mellon Autonomous Driving Collaborative Research Lab in Pittsburgh, told MSN. "And we have basically decided to stick to the speed limit. But when you go out and drive the speed limit on the highway, pretty much everybody on the road is just zipping past you. And I would be one of those people."

An example of one of the accidents was where the Google car came to a complete stop at a red light and wanted to make a right turn on red. It slowly started to inch out so its sensors could get a better "look" at the traffic. Another car behind it inched forward also, but right into the driverless car's bumper.

The Google cars have also been pulled over on occasion, usually fro going too slow, such as one incident in Mountain View, CA, where the car was doing 24 in a 35-mph zone. The engineers in the car were warned, but police said that sometimes the cars tend to be too cautious.

Google disagrees. "We err on the conservative side," said Dmitri Dolgov, principal engineer of the program. "(The cars are) a little bit like a cautious student driver or a grandma."

Google is looking at more "aggressive" programming to more replicate law-abiding human drivers so they can more easily fit into traffic flow, but the process is ongoing.

"These vehicles are either stopping in a situation or slowing down when a human driver might not," said Brandon Schoettle, co-author of the Michigan study. "They're a little faster to react, taking drivers behind them off guard."

But programming them to break the law? Nothing egregious like speeding or running a stop sign, but more like when to cross a double yellow line if construction or a bicycle is present.

"It's a sticky area," Schoettle said. "If you program them to not follow the law, how much do you let them break the law?"

Source: MSN

Permalink

Driving too slow is breaking the law, and is a ticketable offense so wouldn't they are doing that already? Driving too slow is worse than driving too fast..

"3. Driving Too Slow Many may be surprised to learn how many accidents are caused by someone driving too slow. It's been proven statistically (e.g., the "Crash Risk Curve") that traffic accidents are caused much more often by drivers who are driving below the speed limit than those who are driving too fast. In fact, driving even 10 MPH slower that the surrounding traffic greatly increases your chance of being in an accident."

http://southfloridainjuryaccidentblog.com/2015/03/26/speeding-causes-accidents-but-so-does-driving-too-slow/

The worst ones are the ones that hurry up and pull out in front of a driver and then do not give them enough time to slow down. this is Especially dangerous if they are driving a vehicle that is unable to slow down that quickly such as a semi or a bus. Failing to keep up with the flow of traffic is a danger to everyone on the road with them. I honestly do not think they should be driving autonomous cars on the road at all, there are too many things that could go wrong that you would need a human to react to. Like the time I was driving home and a tornado formed right on me.. no tornado warning at the time at all and I had to drive off road while trees were thrown on the hood and windshield of my car, what would a computer do in that situation? If it stopped at all during that the occupants of the vehicle would be killed s my forward motion is what avoided the larger objects being hurled at my vehicle.. They cannot see an accident and determine whether or not they need to stop and render aid, they cannot see a police officer or other person waving for them to stop on the side of the road and make a judgement call. What happens when their computer gets hacked or malfunctions? The number of times I have had to format my computers terrifies me to think of one being in control of my life and others..

As offensive as this sounds, I wonder if the title can be reworded to reflect what's going on. The situation doesn't seem to be "accidents", and it's not the car following the rules that causes them as much as it is other people not following the rules while around them. The fact that the engineers are considering having the cars break the law in certain areas to increase safety actually seems more noteworthy than the fact that other people keep bumping into the things.

I'd definitely agree that going too slow, at least in comparison to the speed limit, is a no-no. No reason for this thing to be less efficient than normal driving if it wants to be able to catch on in the modern world.

Still, don't see this working until you can get every single person in the world driving one. And I don't see that happening until... quite frankly, ever.

Awesome. It looks like they've actually got the cars all worked out but now they just need to make them less strict! I SO can't wait for these.

Arnoxthe1:
Awesome. It looks like they've actually got the cars all worked out but now they just need to make them less strict! I SO can't wait for these.

No, they are a LONG ways away from having this anywhere near worked out. The reality is they do not have solutions for most of the issues they have to resolve, nor do they have any ideas of how to resolve them yet. They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

Why aren't people looking at this and saying, "Hey, these things follow the laws exactly and it's causing problems. The laws seem to actually be pretty bad; maybe we should do some revision." or maybe, "Wow, it looks like a majority of people are breaking the law. Maybe we should be more consistent in enforcing them."

It seems like people are trying to focus on the wrong problem here.

I remember the days of Drivers Ed. and following the turning rules exactly and cutting off so many people while my teacher never said anything because I was driving properly. I'd purposefully make a right turn just as the person across from me was making a left turn (us both turning onto the same street), I'd stay in the right most lane while they wouldn't stay in their left most lane like they are supposed to.

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:
Awesome. It looks like they've actually got the cars all worked out but now they just need to make them less strict! I SO can't wait for these.

No, they are a LONG ways away from having this anywhere near worked out. The reality is they do not have solutions for most of the issues they have to resolve, nor do they have any ideas of how to resolve them yet. They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

So much of a safety hazard right now that they're having them drive on public roads and actually are stopping for police? It's all in the article. As to adverse weather conditions, you may have a point there but I don't know. Again, they're already testing this on public roads so...

Ergh... These findings really strike a nerve in me. I am often annoyed by just how badly most drive, to the point that I'd want to say "fuck it" to the careless human drivers. I don't buy the reasoning that they should have to break the traffic laws, because when corners are cut the severity of the collisions will increase. But a vindictive approach towards "bad drivers" is not right either, because I know that some days it will be me who is the bad driver.

The only reasonable improvements I can think of for the engineers would be:

1. Cars that communicate their intentions even more clearly.

2. Profiling of nearby, unskilled drivers so the car can plan to let them pass.

3. Guidelines that are derived from the underlying principles behind the local traffic laws. If you can speak to the ones who designed the traffic layout, they can probably tell you why the road is designed as it is. By following these guidelines, reasonable decisions can still be made when laws must be broken to maintain safety.

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:
Awesome. It looks like they've actually got the cars all worked out but now they just need to make them less strict! I SO can't wait for these.

No, they are a LONG ways away from having this anywhere near worked out. The reality is they do not have solutions for most of the issues they have to resolve, nor do they have any ideas of how to resolve them yet. They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

So much of a safety hazard right now that they're having them drive on public roads and actually are stopping for police? It's all in the article. As to adverse weather conditions, you may have a point there but I don't know. Again, they're already testing this on public roads so...

They will only stop for police under specific conditions, not all the conditions that they would have to stop for police. Like an officer on the side of the road waving for traffic to stop..

I am fully aware of the testing, they heavily map the specific routes and the issues I mentioned are the issues they say need to be addressed..
For example:
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530276/hidden-obstacles-for-googles-self-driving-cars/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e698c396-8d61-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3v61wUX3y
http://gizmodo.com/6-simple-things-googles-self-driving-car-still-cant-han-1628040470

In addition, their current testing may also be hindered due to the law..
http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-proposes-rules-for-autonomous-cars-1450293308
You will still have to have a licensed driver responsible regardless of if they are doing the driving.
You will have to havea steering wheel and ability to manually override in an emergency.

They have not resolved the issues of GPS hacking, or what happens if the car gets a virus.. When humans get a virus they are just sick. Whena computer gets a virus, it's programming is altered. There is no such thing as " secure" . "Security" is just guys trying to change code faster than someone else breaks the code... It isn't something that is even really " attainable" or sustainable.

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:

No, they are a LONG ways away from having this anywhere near worked out. The reality is they do not have solutions for most of the issues they have to resolve, nor do they have any ideas of how to resolve them yet. They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

So much of a safety hazard right now that they're having them drive on public roads and actually are stopping for police? It's all in the article. As to adverse weather conditions, you may have a point there but I don't know. Again, they're already testing this on public roads so...

They will only stop for police under specific conditions, not all the conditions that they would have to stop for police. Like an officer on the side of the road waving for traffic to stop..

I am fully aware of the testing, they heavily map the specific routes and the issues I mentioned are the issues they say need to be addressed..
For example:
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530276/hidden-obstacles-for-googles-self-driving-cars/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e698c396-8d61-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3v61wUX3y
http://gizmodo.com/6-simple-things-googles-self-driving-car-still-cant-han-1628040470

Well, these articles are assuming that they all need to rely completely on self-driving. Why can't we have it like I, Robot where you can switch from automatic driving to manual driving whenever you need it?

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:

So much of a safety hazard right now that they're having them drive on public roads and actually are stopping for police? It's all in the article. As to adverse weather conditions, you may have a point there but I don't know. Again, they're already testing this on public roads so...

They will only stop for police under specific conditions, not all the conditions that they would have to stop for police. Like an officer on the side of the road waving for traffic to stop..

I am fully aware of the testing, they heavily map the specific routes and the issues I mentioned are the issues they say need to be addressed..
For example:
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530276/hidden-obstacles-for-googles-self-driving-cars/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e698c396-8d61-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3v61wUX3y
http://gizmodo.com/6-simple-things-googles-self-driving-car-still-cant-han-1628040470

Well, these articles are assuming that they all need to rely completely on self-driving. Why can't we have it like I, Robot where you can switch from automatic driving to manual driving whenever you need it?

That also creates a dangerous situation if the driver is not prepared at all times to take the wheel. When people assume the car is doing the driving, they are not overly concerned with making sure they are capable of doing so at a milliseconds notice.

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:
They will only stop for police under specific conditions, not all the conditions that they would have to stop for police. Like an officer on the side of the road waving for traffic to stop..

I am fully aware of the testing, they heavily map the specific routes and the issues I mentioned are the issues they say need to be addressed..
For example:
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530276/hidden-obstacles-for-googles-self-driving-cars/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e698c396-8d61-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3v61wUX3y
http://gizmodo.com/6-simple-things-googles-self-driving-car-still-cant-han-1628040470

Well, these articles are assuming that they all need to rely completely on self-driving. Why can't we have it like I, Robot where you can switch from automatic driving to manual driving whenever you need it?

That also creates a dangerous situation if the driver is not prepared at all times to take the wheel. When people assume the car is doing the driving, they are not overly concerned with making sure they are capable of doing so at a milliseconds notice.

If they need to take control at a milliseconds notice, then it's most likely already too late anyway. For everything else, just announce very loudly that manual control will have to be taken in, say 5 or 3 seconds. That's enough time to get your basic bearings and snap out of it. But yes, you're right, even with that, it still won't completely eliminate stupid accidents. But honestly, it's just as easy when you're driving normally to screw up, so there's not that big a difference. At least this way's much more comfortable.

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:

Well, these articles are assuming that they all need to rely completely on self-driving. Why can't we have it like I, Robot where you can switch from automatic driving to manual driving whenever you need it?

That also creates a dangerous situation if the driver is not prepared at all times to take the wheel. When people assume the car is doing the driving, they are not overly concerned with making sure they are capable of doing so at a milliseconds notice.

If they need to take control at a milliseconds notice, then it's most likely already too late anyway. For everything else, just announce very loudly that manual control will have to be taken in, say 5 or 3 seconds. That's enough time to get your basic bearings and snap out of it. But yes, you're right, even with that, it still won't completely eliminate stupid accidents. But honestly, it's just as easy when you're driving normally to screw up, so there's not that big a difference. At least this way's much more comfortable.

That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

It's because it's programmed to follow the rules, not drive safely. There is a subtle but important difference. If everyone is over the speed limit, then it's very dangerous to be the one going slower than everyone. You won't pull a ticket for it the vast majority of the time, but you will get into accident.

It's only valuable if it's adaptive. If you are going strait and someone in on coming traffic is making a left, you have the right of way, but that doesn't mean the other person won't turn anyway. This will cause an accident. And sure, you are not to blame, the other driver is. But the goal should be to drive safer, not according to the rules.

NOTE: if everyone was using one and everyone of them followed the rules, they would be the same. But since it is following the rules and others are not, it needs to be able to tell on a whim when that is, and the technology is just not there yet.

Lil devils x:
That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

OK, let me present one more counterpoint to you. Why would it suddenly need to hand back control to the driver when it could be programmed to stop and/or swerve out of the way for you? Unless the entire system went out in a freak glitch of course.

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:
That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

OK, let me present one more counterpoint to you. Why would it suddenly need to hand back control to the driver when it could be programmed to stop and/or swerve out of the way for you? Unless the entire system went out in a freak glitch of course.

In any emergency situation the car is not equipped to make a " judgement call" for. For example: You are driving home and a tornado forms on top of you and is suddenly throwing trees, fences, metal poles and 2x4's at your vehicle.. Which objects do you avoid and which do you let hit your car? Where do you let them hit? and What path off road do you take to live?
( What actually happened to me while driving home from work one day).

Or how about there is a herd of cattle in the road, how do you safely maneuver around them to prevent from injuring them, scaring them or injuring yourself? ( that happened last week)

Or how about.. There is an accident ahead and fire and ambulance needs through and the bridge ahead is blocked and no exit ramp nearby to move to the service road. An officer is off to the side directing cars to drive off road to get to the service road through uneven ground slowly to allow emergency vehicles to make it through traffic. How does the vehicle respond? ( that happens repeatedly at a bridge near here when there is an accident on it)

Lil devils x:

Arnoxthe1:

Lil devils x:
That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

OK, let me present one more counterpoint to you. Why would it suddenly need to hand back control to the driver when it could be programmed to stop and/or swerve out of the way for you? Unless the entire system went out in a freak glitch of course.

In any emergency situation the car is not equipped to make a " judgement call" for. For example: You are driving home and a tornado forms on top of you and is suddenly throwing trees, fences, metal poles and 2x4's at your vehicle.. Which objects do you avoid and which do you let hit your car? Where do you let them hit? and What path off road do you take to live?
( What actually happened to me while driving home from work one day).

Or how about there is a herd of cattle in the road, how do you safely maneuver around them to prevent from injuring them, scaring them or injuring yourself? ( that happened last week)

Or how about.. There is an accident ahead and fire and ambulance needs through and the bridge ahead is blocked and no exit ramp nearby to move to the service road. An officer is off to the side directing cars to drive off road to get to the service road through uneven ground slowly to allow emergency vehicles to make it through traffic. How does the vehicle respond? ( that happens repeatedly at a bridge near here when there is an accident on it)

For the first example, seconds are not particularly important, so control should obviously shift to the driver when extreme weather or flying objects is/are seen. For the second, if there's a huge obstruction in the road, it should obviously stop and give control over. For the third, while the programming might not be there yet, obviously the car should alert the driver when any police strobes are visible, with the driver taking the conscious decision to manually drive.

None of these are particularly difficult examples. I think that driving in winter areas would be far, far harder to program, since things like black ice can't reliably be detected by a car and milliseconds really would matter.

Arnoxthe1:
If they need to take control at a milliseconds notice, then it's most likely already too late anyway

Just like with the broken alpha software that Tesla recklessly vomited out onto the market, that will end up getting people killed.
It doesn't matter what drivers should be able to do, if they don't, people get hurt.

I deal with that all the time in traffic related projects. People don't do what they *should* do, so we have to redesign the road, basically making it 'foolproof'.

Our latest was a situation where cyclists heading in a certain direction cross two roads, making two 90 degree turns.
Clearly indicated, clearly marked, nothing that you can possibly misunderstand about that place.

You know what happened?
Cyclists made sloppy 45 degree turns to cross the second road diagonally in a highly dangerous and unlogical fashion, ended up on the wrong side of the cycling lane, and straight into frontal colissions with incoming cyclists.

Now it has a raised divider in the middle so people making the first turn physically can't end up on the wrong side of the road.

It might become less of an issue as auto-cars saturate the market so there are less human drivers to compete with.

Arnoxthe1:
snip

last time one of these articles popped up, lil devils was the one leading the charge on vehemently being against google cars, so I just wouldn't worry about trying to discuss anything, they won't remotely acknowledge backed up data or any other point of view.

OT: The title seems worded differently than it should be, but whatev's, not gonna care about that, I do agree that driverless cars have to be adaptable, especially to "going with the flow", but once they become mainstream it'll hopefully make this kind of arrangement disappear as all auto-travel becomes autonomous and traffic systems become updated to work together with driverless cars.

The issue with designing the cars to be capable of deliberately breaking the law, even in emergency situations, is that they could jeopardize their ability to legally sell them. Just look at the uphill battle the tech industry is already facing over just allowing people to use encryption, at all, ever. Governments see technology like this as a means of control over the citizenry, and treat anything else as a threat. Even self defense is only an excuse when we fight to keep it that way.

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law,

As fast as I know driving too slow is ONLY illegal on highways/freeways. In residential or any other area you are allowed to go under the limit. I don't like it when people do, but it is legal.

Qizx:

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law,

As fast as I know driving too slow is ONLY illegal on highways/freeways. In residential or any other area you are allowed to go under the limit. I don't like it when people do, but it is legal.

That depends on where you live, this varies by state so you have to check with the laws in that state. Depending on what state you are driving in, there are three different types of laws, Basic, Absolute and presumed so it can be up to the officers discretion to determine whether or not you are considered a "road hazard" if you live in a state with presumed laws. You can be ticketed in Texas, for example, for driving too slow on any public road, residential or otherwise due to the " impeding traffic law". "A person shall not drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable forward movement of traffic." Texas Transportation Code -Section 545.363. Different states vary in the leeway they give officers to determine what is and is not ticket worthy.

so what i am reading is that other drivers are not driving safely and do not keep safe distance from the google cars and therefore cause accidents that google somehow gets blamed for.

John Keefer:

"It's a constant debate inside our group," Raj Rajkumar, co-director of the General Motors-Carnegie Mellon Autonomous Driving Collaborative Research Lab in Pittsburgh, told MSN. "And we have basically decided to stick to the speed limit. But when you go out and drive the speed limit on the highway, pretty much everybody on the road is just zipping past you. And I would be one of those people."

Then i hope you get your license revoked Mr Rajkumar, because you are advocating for endangering other people and admitting to be doing so already.

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law, and is a ticketable offense so wouldn't they are doing that already? Driving too slow is worse than driving too fast..

<...> Especially dangerous if they are driving a vehicle that is unable to slow down that quickly such as a semi or a bus. Failing to keep up with the flow of traffic is a danger to everyone on the road with them. I honestly do not think they should be driving autonomous cars on the road at all, there are too many things that could go wrong that you would need a human to react to.

google cars are not driving too slow. its other people that are breaking the speed limit.

Actually Semis/bus have a whole different break system that is in fact multiple times more powerful than regular cars and break tests show that they stop quicker than regular cars. So if a Semi is not stopping as fast as a car its either the driver not doing his job or the breaks being incorrectly set up (happens on both cars and trucks). Either way a driver aware of his suroundings would leave enough space for breaking in vast majority of situations.

Actual traffic studies show that slowing down the flow of traffic often ends up in quicker travel times in cities due to less agressive driving. if the majority is breaking the speed limit and google car isnt, then thats on those breaking the limit. and yes, i know how those streets where everyone drives 10 above the limit work, i live next to one of them.

Lil devils x:
They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

thats what you, the human, is there for. These cars are not a safety hazard however, its the human drivers and their errors due to low human reaction times and lack of concentration that causes the safety hazard.

Lil devils x:

They have not resolved the issues of GPS hacking, or what happens if the car gets a virus.. When humans get a virus they are just sick. Whena computer gets a virus, it's programming is altered. There is no such thing as " secure" . "Security" is just guys trying to change code faster than someone else breaks the code... It isn't something that is even really " attainable" or sustainable.

i guess by GPS hacking you mean feeding the car false GPS data? because to do that youd need to hack actual satellites, multiple of them. people with resources to do that have better things to do than crash your cars.
Have you ever had a computer virus? id guess yes, very likely. has it made your computer suddenly turn into a death machine?

Lil devils x:
That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

the cars computer can react far quicker and more precisely than human ever could. if the computer is unable to react properly its already too late for the human to react. the ONLY way manual control would be beneficial is in situation you can predict ahead of time to require manual override, like say the mentioned police waving to a stop. for the situations where "Things happen very quickly" human is already too late.

Lil devils x:

In any emergency situation the car is not equipped to make a " judgement call" for. For example: You are driving home and a tornado forms on top of you and is suddenly throwing trees, fences, metal poles and 2x4's at your vehicle.. Which objects do you avoid and which do you let hit your car? Where do you let them hit? and What path off road do you take to live?
( What actually happened to me while driving home from work one day).

Neither are humans. In fact human mistakes result in far more injuries than the currently limited scope of judgement. so if those machines are not equipped, then humans arent either. your example is so rare that its as effective an argument against these cars as a chance of having a brick fall on top of your head is an argument against ever going outside. Yes, it could happen, the chances are so low that its well worth the risk. And even in such sudden scenarios simply stopping actually solves the problem 99% of times.
( Also most of the world does not actually get tornadoes. at all).

Or how about there is a herd of cattle in the road, how do you safely maneuver around them to prevent from injuring them, scaring them or injuring yourself? ( that happened last week)

I'd guess the car stops and waits till the herd is out of the way at a safe distance. it is illegal to allow animals reach the road outside of intentional herding them to specific direction by a group of people.
No idea how it is where you live but where i live farmers have a cool invention called fences that means this pretty much never happens.

Or how about.. There is an accident ahead and fire and ambulance needs through and the bridge ahead is blocked and no exit ramp nearby to move to the service road. An officer is off to the side directing cars to drive off road to get to the service road through uneven ground slowly to allow emergency vehicles to make it through traffic. How does the vehicle respond? ( that happens repeatedly at a bridge near here when there is an accident on it)

and thats the situation where you have ample time to take manual control. Do note that this accident would not have happened had the other cars were also automated. as well as that if it happens this often its clearly badly designed bridge.

Qizx:

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law,

As fast as I know driving too slow is ONLY illegal on highways/freeways. In residential or any other area you are allowed to go under the limit. I don't like it when people do, but it is legal.

It is also illegal if it "needlessly endanger other traffic participants". though what that means is up for the court to decide. It also states, at least where i live, that if you are driving 30 km/h bellow the speed limit (note that its the speed limit, not the speed of other cars) and if other cars cannot easily overtake you, you have to stop and let them through.

Strazdas:
so what i am reading is that other drivers are not driving safely and do not keep safe distance from the google cars and therefore cause accidents that google somehow gets blamed for.

John Keefer:

"It's a constant debate inside our group," Raj Rajkumar, co-director of the General Motors-Carnegie Mellon Autonomous Driving Collaborative Research Lab in Pittsburgh, told MSN. "And we have basically decided to stick to the speed limit. But when you go out and drive the speed limit on the highway, pretty much everybody on the road is just zipping past you. And I would be one of those people."

Then i hope you get your license revoked Mr Rajkumar, because you are advocating for endangering other people and admitting to be doing so already.

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law, and is a ticketable offense so wouldn't they are doing that already? Driving too slow is worse than driving too fast..

<...> Especially dangerous if they are driving a vehicle that is unable to slow down that quickly such as a semi or a bus. Failing to keep up with the flow of traffic is a danger to everyone on the road with them. I honestly do not think they should be driving autonomous cars on the road at all, there are too many things that could go wrong that you would need a human to react to.

google cars are not driving too slow. its other people that are breaking the speed limit.

Actually Semis/bus have a whole different break system that is in fact multiple times more powerful than regular cars and break tests show that they stop quicker than regular cars. So if a Semi is not stopping as fast as a car its either the driver not doing his job or the breaks being incorrectly set up (happens on both cars and trucks). Either way a driver aware of his suroundings would leave enough space for breaking in vast majority of situations.

Actual traffic studies show that slowing down the flow of traffic often ends up in quicker travel times in cities due to less agressive driving. if the majority is breaking the speed limit and google car isnt, then thats on those breaking the limit. and yes, i know how those streets where everyone drives 10 above the limit work, i live next to one of them.

Lil devils x:
They do not stop for police officers, or stop to render aid, which is illegal. They are unable to drive outside of well mapped routes, if a stop sign appears ovber night on their already mapped route, they will not stop for it. They are unable to make decisions outside of what they are programmed to do if the situation calls for it, they are unable to drive in different weather situations.. There is MUCH work to be done before this can even be considered, even for in city short distance driving due to the issues that must be resolved for them not to be a safety hazard.

thats what you, the human, is there for. These cars are not a safety hazard however, its the human drivers and their errors due to low human reaction times and lack of concentration that causes the safety hazard.

Lil devils x:

They have not resolved the issues of GPS hacking, or what happens if the car gets a virus.. When humans get a virus they are just sick. Whena computer gets a virus, it's programming is altered. There is no such thing as " secure" . "Security" is just guys trying to change code faster than someone else breaks the code... It isn't something that is even really " attainable" or sustainable.

i guess by GPS hacking you mean feeding the car false GPS data? because to do that youd need to hack actual satellites, multiple of them. people with resources to do that have better things to do than crash your cars.
Have you ever had a computer virus? id guess yes, very likely. has it made your computer suddenly turn into a death machine?

Lil devils x:
That is not how things work while driving, you do not " announce" you react as quickly as possible to survive and prevent casualties. Not being able to do that, or creating situations were that is not possible means it is not safe to be on the road. It is not " just as easy".. things happen very quickly. When you are already driving, you will react and respond faster than if you are not.

the cars computer can react far quicker and more precisely than human ever could. if the computer is unable to react properly its already too late for the human to react. the ONLY way manual control would be beneficial is in situation you can predict ahead of time to require manual override, like say the mentioned police waving to a stop. for the situations where "Things happen very quickly" human is already too late.

Lil devils x:

In any emergency situation the car is not equipped to make a " judgement call" for. For example: You are driving home and a tornado forms on top of you and is suddenly throwing trees, fences, metal poles and 2x4's at your vehicle.. Which objects do you avoid and which do you let hit your car? Where do you let them hit? and What path off road do you take to live?
( What actually happened to me while driving home from work one day).

Neither are humans. In fact human mistakes result in far more injuries than the currently limited scope of judgement. so if those machines are not equipped, then humans arent either. your example is so rare that its as effective an argument against these cars as a chance of having a brick fall on top of your head is an argument against ever going outside. Yes, it could happen, the chances are so low that its well worth the risk. And even in such sudden scenarios simply stopping actually solves the problem 99% of times.
( Also most of the world does not actually get tornadoes. at all).

Or how about there is a herd of cattle in the road, how do you safely maneuver around them to prevent from injuring them, scaring them or injuring yourself? ( that happened last week)

I'd guess the car stops and waits till the herd is out of the way at a safe distance. it is illegal to allow animals reach the road outside of intentional herding them to specific direction by a group of people.
No idea how it is where you live but where i live farmers have a cool invention called fences that means this pretty much never happens.

Or how about.. There is an accident ahead and fire and ambulance needs through and the bridge ahead is blocked and no exit ramp nearby to move to the service road. An officer is off to the side directing cars to drive off road to get to the service road through uneven ground slowly to allow emergency vehicles to make it through traffic. How does the vehicle respond? ( that happens repeatedly at a bridge near here when there is an accident on it)

and thats the situation where you have ample time to take manual control. Do note that this accident would not have happened had the other cars were also automated. as well as that if it happens this often its clearly badly designed bridge.

Qizx:

Lil devils x:
Driving too slow is breaking the law,

As fast as I know driving too slow is ONLY illegal on highways/freeways. In residential or any other area you are allowed to go under the limit. I don't like it when people do, but it is legal.

It is also illegal if it "needlessly endanger other traffic participants". though what that means is up for the court to decide. It also states, at least where i live, that if you are driving 30 km/h bellow the speed limit (note that its the speed limit, not the speed of other cars) and if other cars cannot easily overtake you, you have to stop and let them through.

GPS hacking:
https://www.rt.com/usa/iran-drone-hack-stealth-943/
http://www.ibtimes.com/gps-terrorism-hackers-could-exploit-location-technology-hijack-ships-airplanes-1362937
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/24/hackers-reveal-nasty-new-car-attacks-with-me-behind-the-wheel-video/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/07/31/this_security_flaw_allows_hackers_to_intercept_spoof_or_jam_gps_tracking.html
https://www.hackread.com/hacking-smartphones-gps-in-car-navigation-system/

I ALSO strongly disagree that computers are yet capable of thinking " better than humans" when it comes to extreme situations because they are only equipped to handle situations for which they are programmed for, if they are not programmed to deal with the current situation they are dealing with, they do not have a way to properly respond, unlike humans who ARE capable of making a judgement call as to let the tree hit the hood of the car to avoid the pole being hurled at them in a weather event. Computers do what they are programmed to do and only if they are functioning properly. Humans change and adapt to survive as they have for millions of years even often when they are not " functioning properly". Speaking of tornadoes... this was taken over the weekend here..
image
In addition:
Yes, the cars have had issues of going too slow:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34808105
They have even been making jokes about this..
http://www.informationweek.com/it-life/google-self-driving-cars-10-reasons-they-go-so-slowly/a/d-id/1323151

Here you can get a ticket for going 10mph under the speed limit.

ALSO, if the cattle is in the road, you do not sit there all day and wait for someone to move them.. they could be there all day. If an officer has not arrived to assist you in directing you to drive slowly around them, it is safe to slowly navigate off road around the cattle s well without causing harm to you or your vehicle. This happens so frequently around here that it would be a daily issue if self driving cars were allowed on the road here. We often have officers and road workers manually directing traffic with hands here from everything from pot hole repairs, to furniture and ladders falling off trucks to escaped cattle.

Lil devils x:

GPS hacking:
https://www.rt.com/usa/iran-drone-hack-stealth-943/
http://www.ibtimes.com/gps-terrorism-hackers-could-exploit-location-technology-hijack-ships-airplanes-1362937
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/24/hackers-reveal-nasty-new-car-attacks-with-me-behind-the-wheel-video/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/07/31/this_security_flaw_allows_hackers_to_intercept_spoof_or_jam_gps_tracking.html
https://www.hackread.com/hacking-smartphones-gps-in-car-navigation-system/

I ALSO strongly disagree that computers are yet capable of thinking " better than humans" when it comes to extreme situations because they are only equipped to handle situations for which they are programmed for, if they are not programmed to deal with the current situation they are dealing with, they do not have a way to properly respond, unlike humans who ARE capable of making a judgement call as to let the tree hit the hood of the car to avoid the pole being hurled at them in a weather event. Computers do what they are programmed to do and only if they are functioning properly. Humans change and adapt to survive as they have for millions of years even often when they are not " functioning properly". Speaking of tornadoes... this was taken over the weekend here..
image
In addition:
Yes, the cars have had issues of going too slow:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34808105
They have even been making jokes about this..
http://www.informationweek.com/it-life/google-self-driving-cars-10-reasons-they-go-so-slowly/a/d-id/1323151

Here you can get a ticket for going 10mph under the speed limit.

ALSO, if the cattle is in the road, you do not sit there all day and wait for someone to move them.. they could be there all day. If an officer has not arrived to assist you in directing you to drive slowly around them, it is safe to slowly navigate off road around the cattle s well without causing harm to you or your vehicle. This happens so frequently around here that it would be a daily issue if self driving cars were allowed on the road here. We often have officers and road workers manually directing traffic with hands here from everything from pot hole repairs, to furniture and ladders falling off trucks to escaped cattle.

1st link: Russian today, really? anyway, i remmeber that incident. the drones communicated their orders via unencrypted wireless signal, Iranians mimicked this signal and told the drone different instructions. no GPS signal involved.

2nd: "Humphreys' team built the world's most powerful GPS spoofer, which dupes GPS antennas with fake signals. "

and yet nothing happened. but yeah, this is actual spoofing that may affect these cars if GPS was the only thing they relied on.

3rd: nothing even relevant. he connected directly, with wires, to the cars computer and for some illegal reason the cars breaks were fully controlled by the computer (which as i mentioned is illegal to do. the break pedal is required by car regulation to be able to directly connect to the break blocks, so even if you lost all power, you could still break (though with power-breaks you will have to jam the breaks around 5-7 times harder to have any effect. before power breaks were invented some people were barred from driving simply because they didnt have enough strenght to power the break pedals)

4th: no GPS hacking either, but this is at least related to your concerns. but like i said, people that have knowledge to do this arent interested in your car, they are interested in that 4 million gold truck.

5th: ignoring the clickbait opening that looks like some tabloit like "The Sun" more than anything worth reading. While the article provides no details assuming they arent just blowing things out of proportions this may actually be a good argument in your favor.

No, driving on the road is not survival of the species challenge and the human adaptability there is required far less than ability to react quickly and safely, something we know for a fact driver humans are incapable of. so by the sole fact that google cars can sometimes do this they are already better than humans that NEVER can.

If you got weekly tornados that throw trees at your car the only thing i can come up with for why people live there is a suicidal death wish.

Notice how the first link explicitly says that google cars have never had a ticket issued to them for over 1.2 million miles and shows exactly how humans failed to drive properly?

the second link is just some guy making bad jokes about google. at least it has a nice picture of a dog in it :)

The only way cattle is in the road is if people are moving it somewhere. any other case cattle is in the road the cattle owner probably wont be able to afford to own it very quickly. I dont know how much you know about cattle, but cattle wont just stand there whole day looking at your car. they get bored way too quickly and will go find some grass to chew. If cattle on the road is a "daily issue" where you live i once agian have to ask what the fuck is wrong with that place? and how did that cattle wasnt flown away by those weekly tornadoes yet?

Also this could once again be easily solved by the car stopping and letting you take manual control to drive around the cattle.

Strazdas:

Lil devils x:

GPS hacking:
https://www.rt.com/usa/iran-drone-hack-stealth-943/
http://www.ibtimes.com/gps-terrorism-hackers-could-exploit-location-technology-hijack-ships-airplanes-1362937
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/24/hackers-reveal-nasty-new-car-attacks-with-me-behind-the-wheel-video/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/07/31/this_security_flaw_allows_hackers_to_intercept_spoof_or_jam_gps_tracking.html
https://www.hackread.com/hacking-smartphones-gps-in-car-navigation-system/

I ALSO strongly disagree that computers are yet capable of thinking " better than humans" when it comes to extreme situations because they are only equipped to handle situations for which they are programmed for, if they are not programmed to deal with the current situation they are dealing with, they do not have a way to properly respond, unlike humans who ARE capable of making a judgement call as to let the tree hit the hood of the car to avoid the pole being hurled at them in a weather event. Computers do what they are programmed to do and only if they are functioning properly. Humans change and adapt to survive as they have for millions of years even often when they are not " functioning properly". Speaking of tornadoes... this was taken over the weekend here..
image
In addition:
Yes, the cars have had issues of going too slow:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34808105
They have even been making jokes about this..
http://www.informationweek.com/it-life/google-self-driving-cars-10-reasons-they-go-so-slowly/a/d-id/1323151

Here you can get a ticket for going 10mph under the speed limit.

ALSO, if the cattle is in the road, you do not sit there all day and wait for someone to move them.. they could be there all day. If an officer has not arrived to assist you in directing you to drive slowly around them, it is safe to slowly navigate off road around the cattle s well without causing harm to you or your vehicle. This happens so frequently around here that it would be a daily issue if self driving cars were allowed on the road here. We often have officers and road workers manually directing traffic with hands here from everything from pot hole repairs, to furniture and ladders falling off trucks to escaped cattle.

1st link: Russian today, really? anyway, i remmeber that incident. the drones communicated their orders via unencrypted wireless signal, Iranians mimicked this signal and told the drone different instructions. no GPS signal involved.

2nd: "Humphreys? team built the world?s most powerful GPS spoofer, which dupes GPS antennas with fake signals. "

and yet nothing happened. but yeah, this is actual spoofing that may affect these cars if GPS was the only thing they relied on.

3rd: nothing even relevant. he connected directly, with wires, to the cars computer and for some illegal reason the cars breaks were fully controlled by the computer (which as i mentioned is illegal to do. the break pedal is required by car regulation to be able to directly connect to the break blocks, so even if you lost all power, you could still break (though with power-breaks you will have to jam the breaks around 5-7 times harder to have any effect. before power breaks were invented some people were barred from driving simply because they didnt have enough strenght to power the break pedals)

4th: no GPS hacking either, but this is at least related to your concerns. but like i said, people that have knowledge to do this arent interested in your car, they are interested in that 4 million gold truck.

5th: ignoring the clickbait opening that looks like some tabloit like "The Sun" more than anything worth reading. While the article provides no details assuming they arent just blowing things out of proportions this may actually be a good argument in your favor.

No, driving on the road is not survival of the species challenge and the human adaptability there is required far less than ability to react quickly and safely, something we know for a fact driver humans are incapable of. so by the sole fact that google cars can sometimes do this they are already better than humans that NEVER can.

If you got weekly tornados that throw trees at your car the only thing i can come up with for why people live there is a suicidal death wish.

Notice how the first link explicitly says that google cars have never had a ticket issued to them for over 1.2 million miles and shows exactly how humans failed to drive properly?

the second link is just some guy making bad jokes about google. at least it has a nice picture of a dog in it :)

The only way cattle is in the road is if people are moving it somewhere. any other case cattle is in the road the cattle owner probably wont be able to afford to own it very quickly. I dont know how much you know about cattle, but cattle wont just stand there whole day looking at your car. they get bored way too quickly and will go find some grass to chew. If cattle on the road is a "daily issue" where you live i once agian have to ask what the fuck is wrong with that place? and how did that cattle wasnt flown away by those weekly tornadoes yet?

Also this could once again be easily solved by the car stopping and letting you take manual control to drive around the cattle.

You realize I just grabbed the first few links when googling " GPS Hacking"? There is much more if you actually read up on it. Hobbyist have even been doing this now. Second, come drive in Texas and tell me about how driving is not a matter of adapting to survive. We have 80 mph speed limits where the actual flow of traffic exceeds 100mph and ,yes, people are better than computers currently under the same situations as they have been attempting to test the vehicles here as well. In well mapped, slow driving routes they sustain but outside of that they are not viable yet. In addition to GPS hacking what happens when the Auto dealership is hacked? For example:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/07/22/hacks-on-the-highway/

What happens if the people who are supposed to maintain the vehicles and update them gets hacked? The truth is there is no such thing as " secure" when it comes to a programmable device, since you can just change it's programming.The idea that " oh people won't hack regular cars.. they will hack a gold truck" is completely false. They hack what they know. That is why schools and education sites are actually worse than porn sites for being hacked. They hack their friends, their peers, they hack that " evil hag teacher that made their day a living hell".

http://arcticwolf.com/news/security-it-trendsnews/schools-increasingly-targeted-by-hackers/
http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/06/16/03hackers.h03.html
https://www.contentkeeper.com/sites/default/files/whitepapers/WHITEPAPER%20-%20Malware%20Threats%20and%20Education%20(04-13-US).pdf
http://onairpk.com/uos-cs-student-hacks-university-website-to-record-protest-against-management/

My cousin actually traps viruses and experiments on them to see what kind of damage they can inflict. Even with the security measures they have put in place to prevent computers from catching fire from viruses as they used to, there are still viruses that have been able to do some serious damage melting the motherboard and setting the printers on fire. There is no such thing as " secure" as no firewall or antivirus stops even 90%. Even the best software only stops like 75% and that is acceptable when it is not a car.

How many computer issues have you had with the car you drive right now or one you have previously owned? I have had computer issues with every single car I have owned. Not just one of them, but every single one of them. The computers error, they break down, they even sometimes go berserk turning themselves on and off randomly and doing strange things like lock and unlock the doors and set off panic mode for no apparent reason and lock your windows and you take your cars into a specialist to have it repaired and they tell you they have no idea why it is doing that either... That is the reality of technology. I build computers as a hobby, I can solder boards and replace capacitor and chips.. but I could not tell you why they do the things they do sometimes either because when you look at everything, it shows it should not be doing that, if it were that easy to determine what it is going to do when it errors, gets hacked or becomes damaged, they would have solved the problems before they sold the devices. The difference between when your computer malfunctions in your home and when it does it in your car is people can die.

We do have autonomous cars already on the road in tornado alley.
http://gizmodo.com/google-is-now-testing-its-autonomous-cars-in-austin-te-1716174014

On car hacking:
http://fortune.com/2015/09/15/intel-car-hacking/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11964140/Three-quarters-of-cars-stolen-in-France-electronically-hacked.html
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/researcher-hacks-selfdriving-car-sensors
http://www.popsci.com/hackers-can-trick-lidar-used-in-autonomous-cars-with-laser-pointer
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/will-car-hacking-become-the-new-carjacking-2014-06-03
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2015/May/Pages/ResearchersHackIntoDriverlessCarSystemTakeControlofVehicle.aspx
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/07/hackers-trick-self-driving-cars-lidar-sensor
http://destinhaus.com/driverless-cars-the-car-hack-security-challenge/
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/25/killer-cars-auto-computer-systems-open-to-malfunction-hackers
http://fortune.com/2014/10/07/car-hacking-how-big-is-the-data-threat-to-self-driving-cars/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010645/self-driving-cars-could-bring-a-new-world-of-hacking.html
http://us.norton.com/yoursecurityresource/detail.jsp?aid=car_computer
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-car-hacking-20150914-story.html
http://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/state-trooper-vehicles-hacked-/d/d-id/1322415
http://thehackernews.com/2015/10/hacking-car-airbag.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/29/technology/uber-hires-two-engineers-who-showed-cars-could-be-hacked.html?_r=0
to name a few...

You DO realize that the google cars are driving the same well mapped, well prepared route over and over to get their "millions" of miles?

http://gizmodo.com/how-to-teach-an-autonomous-car-to-drive-1694725874
http://fusion.net/story/213265/google-robocars-accidents/
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2492807,00.asp

Of course it isn't just tornadoes or cows people have to worry about being in the road..
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Elephant-seal-crossing-the-road-causes-North-Bay-6724315.php
There is all kinds of crap in the road on a daily basis in every city, state, country in the world we have to be concerned about..

The primary reason cattle are in the road here is they escaped, not because someone is moving them. Cows, lamas, alpacas, horses, bulls, pigs.. all escape, all the time here. Fences break, gates break when no one is around and they get out and run amuck, then you get a show as the sheriff and other "cowboys" get on their horses and lasso and round them up...

What do you mean what is wrong with the place if there are animals in the road? Doesn't that happen everywhere? I am not aware of a place where animals do not go into the road. It isn;t like we are the only animals living on this planet, we have been living alongside them for quite some time now. If it isn't cows, it is horses, deer, moose, elephants.. hell in California it is seals.. LOL



You are assuming the car has a steering wheel or a driver.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/28/technology/googles-next-phase-in-driverless-cars-no-brakes-or-steering-wheel.html

Lil devils x:

You realize I just grabbed the first few links when googling " GPS Hacking"? There is much more if you actually read up on it. Hobbyist have even been doing this now. Second, come drive in Texas and tell me about how driving is not a matter of adapting to survive. We have 80 mph speed limits where the actual flow of traffic exceeds 100mph and ,yes, people are better than computers currently under the same situations as they have been attempting to test the vehicles here as well. In well mapped, slow driving routes they sustain but outside of that they are not viable yet. In addition to GPS hacking what happens when the Auto dealership is hacked? For example:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/07/22/hacks-on-the-highway/

What happens if the people who are supposed to maintain the vehicles and update them gets hacked? The truth is there is no such thing as " secure" when it comes to a programmable device, since you can just change it's programming.The idea that " oh people won't hack regular cars.. they will hack a gold truck" is completely false. They hack what they know. That is why schools and education sites are actually worse than porn sites for being hacked. They hack their friends, their peers, they hack that " evil hag teacher that made their day a living hell".

http://arcticwolf.com/news/security-it-trendsnews/schools-increasingly-targeted-by-hackers/
http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/06/16/03hackers.h03.html
https://www.contentkeeper.com/sites/default/files/whitepapers/WHITEPAPER%20-%20Malware%20Threats%20and%20Education%20(04-13-US).pdf
http://onairpk.com/uos-cs-student-hacks-university-website-to-record-protest-against-management/

My cousin actually traps viruses and experiments on them to see what kind of damage they can inflict. Even with the security measures they have put in place to prevent computers from catching fire from viruses as they used to, there are still viruses that have been able to do some serious damage melting the motherboard and setting the printers on fire. There is no such thing as " secure" as no firewall or antivirus stops even 90%. Even the best software only stops like 75% and that is acceptable when it is not a car.

How many computer issues have you had with the car you drive right now or one you have previously owned? I have had computer issues with every single car I have owned. Not just one of them, but every single one of them. The computers error, they break down, they even sometimes go berserk turning themselves on and off randomly and doing strange things like lock and unlock the doors and set off panic mode for no apparent reason and lock your windows and you take your cars into a specialist to have it repaired and they tell you they have no idea why it is doing that either... That is the reality of technology. I build computers as a hobby, I can solder boards and replace capacitor and chips.. but I could not tell you why they do the things they do sometimes either because when you look at everything, it shows it should not be doing that, if it were that easy to determine what it is going to do when it errors, gets hacked or becomes damaged, they would have solved the problems before they sold the devices. The difference between when your computer malfunctions in your home and when it does it in your car is people can die.

We do have autonomous cars already on the road in tornado alley.
http://gizmodo.com/google-is-now-testing-its-autonomous-cars-in-austin-te-1716174014

On car hacking:
http://fortune.com/2015/09/15/intel-car-hacking/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11964140/Three-quarters-of-cars-stolen-in-France-electronically-hacked.html
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/researcher-hacks-selfdriving-car-sensors
http://www.popsci.com/hackers-can-trick-lidar-used-in-autonomous-cars-with-laser-pointer
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/will-car-hacking-become-the-new-carjacking-2014-06-03
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2015/May/Pages/ResearchersHackIntoDriverlessCarSystemTakeControlofVehicle.aspx
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/07/hackers-trick-self-driving-cars-lidar-sensor
http://destinhaus.com/driverless-cars-the-car-hack-security-challenge/
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/25/killer-cars-auto-computer-systems-open-to-malfunction-hackers
http://fortune.com/2014/10/07/car-hacking-how-big-is-the-data-threat-to-self-driving-cars/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010645/self-driving-cars-could-bring-a-new-world-of-hacking.html
http://us.norton.com/yoursecurityresource/detail.jsp?aid=car_computer
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-car-hacking-20150914-story.html
http://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/state-trooper-vehicles-hacked-/d/d-id/1322415
http://thehackernews.com/2015/10/hacking-car-airbag.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/29/technology/uber-hires-two-engineers-who-showed-cars-could-be-hacked.html?_r=0
to name a few...

You DO realize that the google cars are driving the same well mapped, well prepared route over and over to get their "millions" of miles?

http://gizmodo.com/how-to-teach-an-autonomous-car-to-drive-1694725874
http://fusion.net/story/213265/google-robocars-accidents/
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2492807,00.asp

Of course it isn't just tornadoes or cows people have to worry about being in the road..
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Elephant-seal-crossing-the-road-causes-North-Bay-6724315.php
There is all kinds of crap in the road on a daily basis in every city, state, country in the world we have to be concerned about..

The primary reason cattle are in the road here is they escaped, not because someone is moving them. Cows, lamas, alpacas, horses, bulls, pigs.. all escape, all the time here. Fences break, gates break when no one is around and they get out and run amuck, then you get a show as the sheriff and other "cowboys" get on their horses and lasso and round them up...

What do you mean what is wrong with the place if there are animals in the road? Doesn't that happen everywhere? I am not aware of a place where animals do not go into the road. It isn;t like we are the only animals living on this planet, we have been living alongside them for quite some time now. If it isn't cows, it is horses, deer, moose, elephants.. hell in California it is seals.. LOL



You are assuming the car has a steering wheel or a driver.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/28/technology/googles-next-phase-in-driverless-cars-no-brakes-or-steering-wheel.html

you have done very poor screening of those links then.

I wonder why no speed cameras were established on those roads then. sounds like you have a big problem and instead of admitting it you are claiming that the fix to that problem is somehow dangerous. no wonder car accidents is the second most common cause of death in US.

dealer hacking link: "The staff suspected malfunctions in a new Internet device, installed behind dashboards of second-hand cars, that allowed the dealership to remind customers of overdue payments by taking remote control of some vehicle functions. "
Oh, we just installed this extremely illegal device in your car but its not our fault your car didnt start because of it. This dealership management should be in jail now.

the rest of the post goes into posturing how scary "the evil internet" is and how they want government to choke it to death. i especially love this one: ""I don't want to want to wait until there are cars crashing on the news every month," Charlie Miller says". Well i do, that would mean a 30-fold reduction in car crashes. Only one major crash a month as opposed to one major crash per day!

Well i guess you should stop driving right now, because there is a computer inside every car that can make you crash now. since anything can be hacked, so can your car.

School hacks are common because there is a clash of horrible security (seriously, most schools dont even have IT personnel at all, just a regular teacher that "knows computers" setting everything up) and the crowd that is most likely to have innovative hackers - young people. worth noting that despite all that, this single gold truck is still more damage than all school hacks put together.

My cousin actually traps viruses and experiments on them to see what kind of damage they can inflict. Even with the security measures they have put in place to prevent computers from catching fire from viruses as they used to, there are still viruses that have been able to do some serious damage melting the motherboard and setting the printers on fire. There is no such thing as " secure" as no firewall or antivirus stops even 90%. Even the best software only stops like 75% and that is acceptable when it is not a car.

Either you just made this up or your cousin is actually extremely horrible at what he does. just put the virus in a sandbox and use emulated hardware instead of direct hook. the virus cant do shit. Also "printers on fire" has been a thing in the 90s, now it is literally impossible to do that even if your goal is intentionally to do that. So perhaps what you meant to say is your cousin used to trap viruses 20 years ago.

I had a single issue with a car computer for a single car. the issue consisted of falsely detecting engine error and going into error mode which mean the computer stopped regulating fuel intake. this meant that i was burning a bit more fuel than i should, so i had the computer brain replaced (for effing 130 euros) and now its fine again. Though granted i am only driving for 8 years so far so perhaps your experience is over a longer span of time. that being said, thats 1 car, 1 incident, over 8 years and 3 cars, with effects that are not dangerous. so its already beating your experience by far.

Ah, good, do you have the numbers of those cars meeting tornadoes and then killing its passenger from a falling tree? from what i understand that happens to you every other week there.

looks like you spent more time googling links. but you once again forgot to read them. most of them overlap and talk about same 3 topics, with the ending message of "we are aware of dangers and will pay attention to security". you should also realize that these cars will never get legalized unless they meet the same accident chance standards as regular cars anyway. Also some unrelated stories again, like the one about french car thieves.

And it doesnt matter what kind of animal it is. the procedure is almost always the same. perhaps it would be different if you met an aggressive bear or something. otherwise just stop and maneuver around.

No, animals dont go loose on the roads daily here. we have utilized a great thing called "a fence". Perhaps you Texans should try it too, it works great! Yes, once in a while we do have a deer break through a fence or something like that (deers love trying to jump over fences for some reason). But that is rare. as in you will see it once in 3 years.

and yes, all current driver-less cars DO have wheels and a person inside it. it may be different in the future, but it is like that now.

Strazdas:

Lil devils x:

You realize I just grabbed the first few links when googling " GPS Hacking"? There is much more if you actually read up on it. Hobbyist have even been doing this now. Second, come drive in Texas and tell me about how driving is not a matter of adapting to survive. We have 80 mph speed limits where the actual flow of traffic exceeds 100mph and ,yes, people are better than computers currently under the same situations as they have been attempting to test the vehicles here as well. In well mapped, slow driving routes they sustain but outside of that they are not viable yet. In addition to GPS hacking what happens when the Auto dealership is hacked? For example:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/07/22/hacks-on-the-highway/

What happens if the people who are supposed to maintain the vehicles and update them gets hacked? The truth is there is no such thing as " secure" when it comes to a programmable device, since you can just change it's programming.The idea that " oh people won't hack regular cars.. they will hack a gold truck" is completely false. They hack what they know. That is why schools and education sites are actually worse than porn sites for being hacked. They hack their friends, their peers, they hack that " evil hag teacher that made their day a living hell".

http://arcticwolf.com/news/security-it-trendsnews/schools-increasingly-targeted-by-hackers/
http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/06/16/03hackers.h03.html
https://www.contentkeeper.com/sites/default/files/whitepapers/WHITEPAPER%20-%20Malware%20Threats%20and%20Education%20(04-13-US).pdf
http://onairpk.com/uos-cs-student-hacks-university-website-to-record-protest-against-management/

My cousin actually traps viruses and experiments on them to see what kind of damage they can inflict. Even with the security measures they have put in place to prevent computers from catching fire from viruses as they used to, there are still viruses that have been able to do some serious damage melting the motherboard and setting the printers on fire. There is no such thing as " secure" as no firewall or antivirus stops even 90%. Even the best software only stops like 75% and that is acceptable when it is not a car.

How many computer issues have you had with the car you drive right now or one you have previously owned? I have had computer issues with every single car I have owned. Not just one of them, but every single one of them. The computers error, they break down, they even sometimes go berserk turning themselves on and off randomly and doing strange things like lock and unlock the doors and set off panic mode for no apparent reason and lock your windows and you take your cars into a specialist to have it repaired and they tell you they have no idea why it is doing that either... That is the reality of technology. I build computers as a hobby, I can solder boards and replace capacitor and chips.. but I could not tell you why they do the things they do sometimes either because when you look at everything, it shows it should not be doing that, if it were that easy to determine what it is going to do when it errors, gets hacked or becomes damaged, they would have solved the problems before they sold the devices. The difference between when your computer malfunctions in your home and when it does it in your car is people can die.

We do have autonomous cars already on the road in tornado alley.
http://gizmodo.com/google-is-now-testing-its-autonomous-cars-in-austin-te-1716174014

On car hacking:
http://fortune.com/2015/09/15/intel-car-hacking/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11964140/Three-quarters-of-cars-stolen-in-France-electronically-hacked.html
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/researcher-hacks-selfdriving-car-sensors
http://www.popsci.com/hackers-can-trick-lidar-used-in-autonomous-cars-with-laser-pointer
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/will-car-hacking-become-the-new-carjacking-2014-06-03
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2015/May/Pages/ResearchersHackIntoDriverlessCarSystemTakeControlofVehicle.aspx
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/07/hackers-trick-self-driving-cars-lidar-sensor
http://destinhaus.com/driverless-cars-the-car-hack-security-challenge/
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/25/killer-cars-auto-computer-systems-open-to-malfunction-hackers
http://fortune.com/2014/10/07/car-hacking-how-big-is-the-data-threat-to-self-driving-cars/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010645/self-driving-cars-could-bring-a-new-world-of-hacking.html
http://us.norton.com/yoursecurityresource/detail.jsp?aid=car_computer
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-car-hacking-20150914-story.html
http://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/state-trooper-vehicles-hacked-/d/d-id/1322415
http://thehackernews.com/2015/10/hacking-car-airbag.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/29/technology/uber-hires-two-engineers-who-showed-cars-could-be-hacked.html?_r=0
to name a few...

You DO realize that the google cars are driving the same well mapped, well prepared route over and over to get their "millions" of miles?

http://gizmodo.com/how-to-teach-an-autonomous-car-to-drive-1694725874
http://fusion.net/story/213265/google-robocars-accidents/
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2492807,00.asp

Of course it isn't just tornadoes or cows people have to worry about being in the road..
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Elephant-seal-crossing-the-road-causes-North-Bay-6724315.php
There is all kinds of crap in the road on a daily basis in every city, state, country in the world we have to be concerned about..

The primary reason cattle are in the road here is they escaped, not because someone is moving them. Cows, lamas, alpacas, horses, bulls, pigs.. all escape, all the time here. Fences break, gates break when no one is around and they get out and run amuck, then you get a show as the sheriff and other "cowboys" get on their horses and lasso and round them up...

What do you mean what is wrong with the place if there are animals in the road? Doesn't that happen everywhere? I am not aware of a place where animals do not go into the road. It isn;t like we are the only animals living on this planet, we have been living alongside them for quite some time now. If it isn't cows, it is horses, deer, moose, elephants.. hell in California it is seals.. LOL



You are assuming the car has a steering wheel or a driver.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/28/technology/googles-next-phase-in-driverless-cars-no-brakes-or-steering-wheel.html

you have done very poor screening of those links then.

I wonder why no speed cameras were established on those roads then. sounds like you have a big problem and instead of admitting it you are claiming that the fix to that problem is somehow dangerous. no wonder car accidents is the second most common cause of death in US.

dealer hacking link: "The staff suspected malfunctions in a new Internet device, installed behind dashboards of second-hand cars, that allowed the dealership to remind customers of overdue payments by taking remote control of some vehicle functions. "
Oh, we just installed this extremely illegal device in your car but its not our fault your car didnt start because of it. This dealership management should be in jail now.

the rest of the post goes into posturing how scary "the evil internet" is and how they want government to choke it to death. i especially love this one: "?I don?t want to want to wait until there are cars crashing on the news every month,? Charlie Miller says". Well i do, that would mean a 30-fold reduction in car crashes. Only one major crash a month as opposed to one major crash per day!

Well i guess you should stop driving right now, because there is a computer inside every car that can make you crash now. since anything can be hacked, so can your car.

School hacks are common because there is a clash of horrible security (seriously, most schools dont even have IT personnel at all, just a regular teacher that "knows computers" setting everything up) and the crowd that is most likely to have innovative hackers - young people. worth noting that despite all that, this single gold truck is still more damage than all school hacks put together.

My cousin actually traps viruses and experiments on them to see what kind of damage they can inflict. Even with the security measures they have put in place to prevent computers from catching fire from viruses as they used to, there are still viruses that have been able to do some serious damage melting the motherboard and setting the printers on fire. There is no such thing as " secure" as no firewall or antivirus stops even 90%. Even the best software only stops like 75% and that is acceptable when it is not a car.

Either you just made this up or your cousin is actually extremely horrible at what he does. just put the virus in a sandbox and use emulated hardware instead of direct hook. the virus cant do shit. Also "printers on fire" has been a thing in the 90s, now it is literally impossible to do that even if your goal is intentionally to do that. So perhaps what you meant to say is your cousin used to trap viruses 20 years ago.

I had a single issue with a car computer for a single car. the issue consisted of falsely detecting engine error and going into error mode which mean the computer stopped regulating fuel intake. this meant that i was burning a bit more fuel than i should, so i had the computer brain replaced (for effing 130 euros) and now its fine again. Though granted i am only driving for 8 years so far so perhaps your experience is over a longer span of time. that being said, thats 1 car, 1 incident, over 8 years and 3 cars, with effects that are not dangerous. so its already beating your experience by far.

Ah, good, do you have the numbers of those cars meeting tornadoes and then killing its passenger from a falling tree? from what i understand that happens to you every other week there.

looks like you spent more time googling links. but you once again forgot to read them. most of them overlap and talk about same 3 topics, with the ending message of "we are aware of dangers and will pay attention to security". you should also realize that these cars will never get legalized unless they meet the same accident chance standards as regular cars anyway. Also some unrelated stories again, like the one about french car thieves.

And it doesnt matter what kind of animal it is. the procedure is almost always the same. perhaps it would be different if you met an aggressive bear or something. otherwise just stop and maneuver around.

No, animals dont go loose on the roads daily here. we have utilized a great thing called "a fence". Perhaps you Texans should try it too, it works great! Yes, once in a while we do have a deer break through a fence or something like that (deers love trying to jump over fences for some reason). But that is rare. as in you will see it once in 3 years.

and yes, all current driver-less cars DO have wheels and a person inside it. it may be different in the future, but it is like that now.

No, this is not 20 years ago, this is STILL a problem today. I think you misunderstand how our well internet security actually works..
http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security/323973-is-antivirus-software-ineffective
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2472120/security0/how-useful-is-antivirus-software-.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/exclusive-millions-printers-open-devastating-hack-attack-researchers-say-f118851
http://www.pcworld.com/article/236875/batteries_go_boom.html

My cousin does what he does very well. He is not trying to stop the viruses.. he does the opposite, he tries to see what damages they can actually do if you have some ignorant operator that just lets the viruses pile up on their computer ( LIKE MANY PEOPLE WHO USE THEM TODAY) and do not take active measures to stop their progress. SO many these days disable their firewalls because they think using their crappy shareware is more important than having a firewall slow them down. They are more concerned with opening the garbage files they want to than making sure any of it is safe to do so. Thousands of viruses are created daily. most are not that bad, but some are pretty awful.

Here is the thing you do not seem to understand. "The government" isn't going to be able to provide you with better security.. they are getting hacked more often than you do. No one can provide you with better security because it isn't something that actually exists. They are not fear mongering you into having more government control, as that would not even help the situation. The reality is it is impossible to secure the internet, so you should not allow things that need to be secure access to the internet. That is the only option to actually secure them. I was being extremely generous with the 75%, it is actually less secure, not more than it was years ago when antivirus stopped up to 75%. The reality is the code for your antivirus was already broken and they can do as they please with that as well, you can go get any program you wish for free as the codes are ALL cracked and available online. LOL

" Internet security" is pretty much something people tell themselves to give them a false sense of security, but is not going to be effective if you are actually targeted. The car I am driving now is a custom built car and no it does not have GPS. 3 of my brothers are mechanics, and my Dad was a prostock race car driver who designed, built and raced prostock cars... The cars I had the most problems with the computers on were ones I bought from dealerships, not had built for me to my specifications.

It very much " does matter what kind of animal it is" .. Yes they are in fences, then fences break and animals get out.. we have WILD animals here as well and that is the real world. We have 90mph straight winds here, even when there are not tornadoes...
I really have to see this "gator fence" you made to keep all the gators from the creeks, swamps, lakes and streams out of the road as well. HAHAHA.

They DID have no wheel cars on the road..They started testing driverless care with no steering wheel on the roads in 2014, but were forced to add steering even though google claims that made the cars less safe.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/28/google-reveals-driverless-car-prototype
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/11051009/Google-forced-to-add-steering-wheel-to-driverless-cars.html

Lil devils x:

No, this is not 20 years ago, this is STILL a problem today. I think you misunderstand how our well internet security actually works..
http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security/323973-is-antivirus-software-ineffective
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2472120/security0/how-useful-is-antivirus-software-.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/exclusive-millions-printers-open-devastating-hack-attack-researchers-say-f118851
http://www.pcworld.com/article/236875/batteries_go_boom.html

My cousin does what he does very well. He is not trying to stop the viruses.. he does the opposite, he tries to see what damages they can actually do if you have some ignorant operator that just lets the viruses pile up on their computer ( LIKE MANY PEOPLE WHO USE THEM TODAY) and do not take active measures to stop their progress. SO many these days disable their firewalls because they think using their crappy shareware is more important than having a firewall slow them down. They are more concerned with opening the garbage files they want to than making sure any of it is safe to do so. Thousands of viruses are created daily. most are not that bad, but some are pretty awful.

Here is the thing you do not seem to understand. "The government" isn't going to be able to provide you with better security.. they are getting hacked more often than you do. No one can provide you with better security because it isn't something that actually exists. They are not fear mongering you into having more government control, as that would not even help the situation. The reality is it is impossible to secure the internet, so you should not allow things that need to be secure access to the internet. That is the only option to actually secure them. I was being extremely generous with the 75%, it is actually less secure, not more than it was years ago when antivirus stopped up to 75%. The reality is the code for your antivirus was already broken and they can do as they please with that as well, you can go get any program you wish for free as the codes are ALL cracked and available online. LOL

" Internet security" is pretty much something people tell themselves to give them a false sense of security, but is not going to be effective if you are actually targeted. The car I am driving now is a custom built car and no it does not have GPS. 3 of my brothers are mechanics, and my Dad was a prostock race car driver who designed, built and raced prostock cars... The cars I had the most problems with the computers on were ones I bought from dealerships, not had built for me to my specifications.

It very much " does matter what kind of animal it is" .. Yes they are in fences, then fences break and animals get out.. we have WILD animals here as well and that is the real world. We have 90mph straight winds here, even when there are not tornadoes...
I really have to see this "gator fence" you made to keep all the gators from the creeks, swamps, lakes and streams out of the road as well. HAHAHA.

They DID have no wheel cars on the road..They started testing driverless care with no steering wheel on the roads in 2014, but were forced to add steering even though google claims that made the cars less safe.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/28/google-reveals-driverless-car-prototype
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/11051009/Google-forced-to-add-steering-wheel-to-driverless-cars.html

No, burning printers is not a problem today, hasnt been for 20 years. the problem with overheating ink compartment was fixed two decades ago and now they cannot physically burn regardless of what they are told to do. it is physically impossible.

I see you keep google handy to add links not relevant to what you are saying again!

1st link: shows that some antivirus software in VirusTotal is ineffective. hardly big news, some antiviruses are better than others. not related to internet security.

2nd link: even more outdated virus total test with the writer not knowing what the results mean. do note that only 2 of the dozens of tested viruses were actually not detected. at least the author recognizes poor performers in the scan this time. though not enough to realize the premise is incorrect to begin with.

heres a more realistic comparison done by actual independent security organization:
image

3rd link: Is HP. of couse its HP. their troubles never end :D. Still nothing new here. remote access to internet printers, no fire hazards. but yes, lets include the obligatory "internet printers are insecure, stop using them".

4th link: no fire hazard either, only a chance of making your computer unusable by making it think the battery is broken. they also hint at code injection but does not prove any such exploit exists. also apple being insecure again is just apple doing its thing. Do note that you need physical access to the computer for this, and if the hacker has physical access he can disable any security anyway.

No, if what you describe is correct then your cousin is not doing his job correctly. i gave you two simple steps how to enable him to work without destruction of the test computer regardless of what virus does. something any security researched should know.

i never claimed the government is providing any security whatsoever. not sure where that is coming from. the link where i mention government takeover most definitely is trying to scare people into internet panic and begs for government regulation though.

wait, did you just equate cracking a license on an antivirus (something not all antivirus crackers managed succesfully even) to reverse engineering the real time scanner? thats not even in the same league. its the difference between being able to download copyrtighted version of an ubisoft game without uplay and a modder rebuilding all game mechanics as he reverse engineer the games engine.

a simple fence suffices here. we have no aligators. though if we had we probably found a face to keep them out too. most wild animals dont make it thier live goals to break fences you know. like i said, animal on a road happens, but rarely, not the daily occurrence you make it out to be.

No, they didnt. what your links said is that they wanted to, but their first test vehicles still had manual control because otherwise they would not be street-legal.

P.S. happy new years. i may be slow to respond due to the holiday weekend.

Strazdas:

Lil devils x:

No, this is not 20 years ago, this is STILL a problem today. I think you misunderstand how our well internet security actually works..
http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security/323973-is-antivirus-software-ineffective
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2472120/security0/how-useful-is-antivirus-software-.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/exclusive-millions-printers-open-devastating-hack-attack-researchers-say-f118851
http://www.pcworld.com/article/236875/batteries_go_boom.html

My cousin does what he does very well. He is not trying to stop the viruses.. he does the opposite, he tries to see what damages they can actually do if you have some ignorant operator that just lets the viruses pile up on their computer ( LIKE MANY PEOPLE WHO USE THEM TODAY) and do not take active measures to stop their progress. SO many these days disable their firewalls because they think using their crappy shareware is more important than having a firewall slow them down. They are more concerned with opening the garbage files they want to than making sure any of it is safe to do so. Thousands of viruses are created daily. most are not that bad, but some are pretty awful.

Here is the thing you do not seem to understand. "The government" isn't going to be able to provide you with better security.. they are getting hacked more often than you do. No one can provide you with better security because it isn't something that actually exists. They are not fear mongering you into having more government control, as that would not even help the situation. The reality is it is impossible to secure the internet, so you should not allow things that need to be secure access to the internet. That is the only option to actually secure them. I was being extremely generous with the 75%, it is actually less secure, not more than it was years ago when antivirus stopped up to 75%. The reality is the code for your antivirus was already broken and they can do as they please with that as well, you can go get any program you wish for free as the codes are ALL cracked and available online. LOL

" Internet security" is pretty much something people tell themselves to give them a false sense of security, but is not going to be effective if you are actually targeted. The car I am driving now is a custom built car and no it does not have GPS. 3 of my brothers are mechanics, and my Dad was a prostock race car driver who designed, built and raced prostock cars... The cars I had the most problems with the computers on were ones I bought from dealerships, not had built for me to my specifications.

It very much " does matter what kind of animal it is" .. Yes they are in fences, then fences break and animals get out.. we have WILD animals here as well and that is the real world. We have 90mph straight winds here, even when there are not tornadoes...
I really have to see this "gator fence" you made to keep all the gators from the creeks, swamps, lakes and streams out of the road as well. HAHAHA.

They DID have no wheel cars on the road..They started testing driverless care with no steering wheel on the roads in 2014, but were forced to add steering even though google claims that made the cars less safe.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/28/google-reveals-driverless-car-prototype
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/11051009/Google-forced-to-add-steering-wheel-to-driverless-cars.html

No, burning printers is not a problem today, hasnt been for 20 years. the problem with overheating ink compartment was fixed two decades ago and now they cannot physically burn regardless of what they are told to do. it is physically impossible.

I see you keep google handy to add links not relevant to what you are saying again!

1st link: shows that some antivirus software in VirusTotal is ineffective. hardly big news, some antiviruses are better than others. not related to internet security.

2nd link: even more outdated virus total test with the writer not knowing what the results mean. do note that only 2 of the dozens of tested viruses were actually not detected. at least the author recognizes poor performers in the scan this time. though not enough to realize the premise is incorrect to begin with.

heres a more realistic comparison done by actual independent security organization:
image

3rd link: Is HP. of couse its HP. their troubles never end :D. Still nothing new here. remote access to internet printers, no fire hazards. but yes, lets include the obligatory "internet printers are insecure, stop using them".

4th link: no fire hazard either, only a chance of making your computer unusable by making it think the battery is broken. they also hint at code injection but does not prove any such exploit exists. also apple being insecure again is just apple doing its thing. Do note that you need physical access to the computer for this, and if the hacker has physical access he can disable any security anyway.

No, if what you describe is correct then your cousin is not doing his job correctly. i gave you two simple steps how to enable him to work without destruction of the test computer regardless of what virus does. something any security researched should know.

i never claimed the government is providing any security whatsoever. not sure where that is coming from. the link where i mention government takeover most definitely is trying to scare people into internet panic and begs for government regulation though.

wait, did you just equate cracking a license on an antivirus (something not all antivirus crackers managed succesfully even) to reverse engineering the real time scanner? thats not even in the same league. its the difference between being able to download copyrtighted version of an ubisoft game without uplay and a modder rebuilding all game mechanics as he reverse engineer the games engine.

a simple fence suffices here. we have no aligators. though if we had we probably found a face to keep them out too. most wild animals dont make it thier live goals to break fences you know. like i said, animal on a road happens, but rarely, not the daily occurrence you make it out to be.

No, they didnt. what your links said is that they wanted to, but their first test vehicles still had manual control because otherwise they would not be street-legal.

P.S. happy new years. i may be slow to respond due to the holiday weekend.

I think you misunderstand again. It isn't his job to protect the test machine, the test machine is expendable. It is his job to see what happens when " humans are humans" and neglect their firewall and antivirus when exposed to extreme viruses. When humans are busy being humans, that means they frequently do not take ANY measures to protect their machines and instead actively take measures that further compromise their computers to allow them to "do what they want to do" be damned the consequences because that is the reality of what many humans actually do. Luckily, most of these humans though are not exposed to the extreme viruses he is trapping to test, but if they were it would not be pretty.

You just inserted a giant ad for emsisoft showing how emsisoft is better than other antivirus and that is supposed to provide what to the discussion? Of course companies trying to get you to use their products are not going to tell you how little they actually protect you from.. None of the antivirus companies are going to do that, that is why we have independent studies like the one I was discussing. I know people like to think they are secure, but the sad truth is, they really are not. You can trust what "Security" companies trying to get you to use their products have to say about it as far as you can throw your computer... They are not going to start advertising they catch so little of what is actually out there anytime soon.

No cracking the license is not the same as having the code.. I am not putting the links here, but yes you can get all of the code for these programs online quite easily to do with as you please with it.. I would suggest using an alt browser, TOR and deep web search engines b4 heading in that direction for research though.. LOL

Animals on the roads here are a daily issue.. but we also have a great variety of animals to break and get around fences here and A ton of ground to cover, it isn't like Texas is some small amount of land here. Bobcats and mountain lions jump right over fences like they are not even there. We have deer, cows, bulls, feral hogs, alligators.. and much much more.

http://gametrails.org/mountain-lion-more-numerous-than-you-might-think-by-luke-clayton/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3030985/My-big-teeth-Man-captures-giant-400lb-11ft-alligator-bare-hands-Texas-family-s-backyard-pond.html
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-plague-of-pigs-in-texas-73769069/?no-ist
Happy New year!

Lil devils x:

I think you misunderstand again. It isn't his job to protect the test machine, the test machine is expendable. It is his job to see what happens when " humans are humans" and neglect their firewall and antivirus when exposed to extreme viruses. When humans are busy being humans, that means they frequently do not take ANY measures to protect their machines and instead actively take measures that further compromise their computers to allow them to "do what they want to do" be damned the consequences because that is the reality of what many humans actually do. Luckily, most of these humans though are not exposed to the extreme viruses he is trapping to test, but if they were it would not be pretty.

You just inserted a giant ad for emsisoft showing how emsisoft is better than other antivirus and that is supposed to provide what to the discussion? Of course companies trying to get you to use their products are not going to tell you how little they actually protect you from.. None of the antivirus companies are going to do that, that is why we have independent studies like the one I was discussing. I know people like to think they are secure, but the sad truth is, they really are not. You can trust what "Security" companies trying to get you to use their products have to say about it as far as you can throw your computer... They are not going to start advertising they catch so little of what is actually out there anytime soon.

No cracking the license is not the same as having the code.. I am not putting the links here, but yes you can get all of the code for these programs online quite easily to do with as you please with it.. I would suggest using an alt browser, TOR and deep web search engines b4 heading in that direction for research though.. LOL

Animals on the roads here are a daily issue.. but we also have a great variety of animals to break and get around fences here and A ton of ground to cover, it isn't like Texas is some small amount of land here. Bobcats and mountain lions jump right over fences like they are not even there. We have deer, cows, bulls, feral hogs, alligators.. and much much more.

http://gametrails.org/mountain-lion-more-numerous-than-you-might-think-by-luke-clayton/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3030985/My-big-teeth-Man-captures-giant-400lb-11ft-alligator-bare-hands-Texas-family-s-backyard-pond.html
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-plague-of-pigs-in-texas-73769069/?no-ist
Happy New year!

That test can still be done in a safe enviroment without killing the test machine. note that i never told you what your cousins job should be, nor do i really care. you keep bringing your family members all around though.

I inserted a reputable testing agency results. it is as much of an advertisement as GPU benchmarks are advertisement for Nvidia. yes, it shows Emsisoft as the best, but it is impossible to accurately benchmark something without one tested object ending up better than the other.

What i linked is an actual independent study you wanted so much. what you linked is some bloggers not even knowing how the tools they used works and writing about it.

oh, i have no doubt there may be some source code for these antiviruses in the so called darknet. very few people even know about it let alone navigate it though. and even source code does not guarantee that the person getting it is going to find a way to exploit it. note that im not saying that the exploit is not possible, merely that you significantly overestimate the chances of an average user ever meeting one.

well Texas has a population of 25.1 million people, so its not like its 5 people having to take care of all the fences. if animals on a road is a daily occurrence then clearly the traffic institution is not doing its job properly.

the first link ironically states "i spent my whole life outdoors but ive never seen a mountain lion", opening with a statement that they are, in fact, very rare. im not even going to give the click for dailymail, not a source to be trusted on anything.

third link - wild hogs. yep, those are a problem here as well. though they tend to be smart animals in that they go for farms to dig up rather than into traffic. i dont remmeber a single story where a hog stopped traffic but ive seen plenty where they attacked farmers even to the point where they attacked the guard dog. though i may be a bit biased since my grandfathers farm was one of the invaded ones. still, same solution really, fences. ever since they built fences on that farm the hogs moved elsewhere. the fences went without maintenance for almost 20 years now and im still not aware of any hog presence.

Strazdas:

Lil devils x:

I think you misunderstand again. It isn't his job to protect the test machine, the test machine is expendable. It is his job to see what happens when " humans are humans" and neglect their firewall and antivirus when exposed to extreme viruses. When humans are busy being humans, that means they frequently do not take ANY measures to protect their machines and instead actively take measures that further compromise their computers to allow them to "do what they want to do" be damned the consequences because that is the reality of what many humans actually do. Luckily, most of these humans though are not exposed to the extreme viruses he is trapping to test, but if they were it would not be pretty.

You just inserted a giant ad for emsisoft showing how emsisoft is better than other antivirus and that is supposed to provide what to the discussion? Of course companies trying to get you to use their products are not going to tell you how little they actually protect you from.. None of the antivirus companies are going to do that, that is why we have independent studies like the one I was discussing. I know people like to think they are secure, but the sad truth is, they really are not. You can trust what "Security" companies trying to get you to use their products have to say about it as far as you can throw your computer... They are not going to start advertising they catch so little of what is actually out there anytime soon.

No cracking the license is not the same as having the code.. I am not putting the links here, but yes you can get all of the code for these programs online quite easily to do with as you please with it.. I would suggest using an alt browser, TOR and deep web search engines b4 heading in that direction for research though.. LOL

Animals on the roads here are a daily issue.. but we also have a great variety of animals to break and get around fences here and A ton of ground to cover, it isn't like Texas is some small amount of land here. Bobcats and mountain lions jump right over fences like they are not even there. We have deer, cows, bulls, feral hogs, alligators.. and much much more.

http://gametrails.org/mountain-lion-more-numerous-than-you-might-think-by-luke-clayton/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3030985/My-big-teeth-Man-captures-giant-400lb-11ft-alligator-bare-hands-Texas-family-s-backyard-pond.html
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-plague-of-pigs-in-texas-73769069/?no-ist
Happy New year!

That test can still be done in a safe enviroment without killing the test machine. note that i never told you what your cousins job should be, nor do i really care. you keep bringing your family members all around though.

I inserted a reputable testing agency results. it is as much of an advertisement as GPU benchmarks are advertisement for Nvidia. yes, it shows Emsisoft as the best, but it is impossible to accurately benchmark something without one tested object ending up better than the other.

What i linked is an actual independent study you wanted so much. what you linked is some bloggers not even knowing how the tools they used works and writing about it.

oh, i have no doubt there may be some source code for these antiviruses in the so called darknet. very few people even know about it let alone navigate it though. and even source code does not guarantee that the person getting it is going to find a way to exploit it. note that im not saying that the exploit is not possible, merely that you significantly overestimate the chances of an average user ever meeting one.

well Texas has a population of 25.1 million people, so its not like its 5 people having to take care of all the fences. if animals on a road is a daily occurrence then clearly the traffic institution is not doing its job properly.

the first link ironically states "i spent my whole life outdoors but ive never seen a mountain lion", opening with a statement that they are, in fact, very rare. im not even going to give the click for dailymail, not a source to be trusted on anything.

third link - wild hogs. yep, those are a problem here as well. though they tend to be smart animals in that they go for farms to dig up rather than into traffic. i dont remmeber a single story where a hog stopped traffic but ive seen plenty where they attacked farmers even to the point where they attacked the guard dog. though i may be a bit biased since my grandfathers farm was one of the invaded ones. still, same solution really, fences. ever since they built fences on that farm the hogs moved elsewhere. the fences went without maintenance for almost 20 years now and im still not aware of any hog presence.

Please re-link this so called " independent study", as all I saw was an ad for emisoft. To be "independent", the company cannot be profiting from the test or internet security. The issue here is that yes, a program may be better than others, HOWEVER, being king turd on poo hill isn't exactly what we need to call something " secure". If none of the programs are detecting a very large amount of new viruses and Trojans, and they fail to use those viruses and Trojans in their study, exactly how do they show what they are missing? Oh yea.. they do not, because that is not the intention of this, this is just to compare products showing what they can do in comparison to each other,( when exposed to specific virus and Trojans) not focus on what all of them are unable to do. The university study I was discussing above was showing that none of the antivirus programs were detecting much.. This isn't something that everyone working in security didn't already know already, but of course it is pointless for them to focus on that fact while they are trying to sell products. Now antivirus is NOT completely useless, it gets much of the obvious and abundant muck, however, it in no way provides what anyone should really consider " secure internet" because that is just a myth.

In regards to the links about animals.. you do realize that was meant to be humorous.. I have personally seen multiple mountain lions here... just because some guy never saw one does not mean many other people do not. I actually saw this mountain lion being discussed here:

http://www.roysecityheraldbanner.com/news/local_news/critter-concerns-continue-in-county/article_e238068c-e706-5964-8c98-3e0d4f740c67.html

AND another holding a deer by the throat about 3 feet from the side of the road driving home one night and a cub in a field that the parks and wildlife department managed to catch. Just because that guy does not see them does not mean they are not very much present. The daily mail link was about a guy finding an alligator in the pond.. I actually linked that because my brother had a similar experience here in the pond near their house while fishing and he did not try to catch it .. he just ran away terrified and called the sheriff. LOL The point is we live alongside much wildlife and no we do not have it under " control" in any way. We have roadkill on every road around here, and some is not as small as the common armadillos, skunks, dogs, or rabbits. The reality is we do not live in a zoo where all the animals are contained. In the real world, the animals are not all contained.

Hogs are not just a digging issue here..
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-11-28/texas-feral-hog-wrecks-mark-losing-battle-with-animals
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Huge-reptile-blocks-North-Texas-highway-6332634.php

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Texas-State-University-issues-alert-for-loose-6399416.php

Though I do find it very strange that you would suggest we could keep all animals contained and out of roads in a state that is 268,820 sq miles large and filled with quite an array of wildlife. Really? Is that seriously your argument?

There is only one constant in this world and that is change. We live on an ever changing planet with a great variety of animals, natural and man made disasters, and unknown factors that we are forced to change and adapt to, often at a moments notice. This is what will be expected of autonomous vehicles as well if we expect them to be able to safely navigate our streets long term. Having a rail or closed route for them is one thing, having them exposed to the same events humans are forced to adapt to is another matter all together.

Ah, I see. So, it's obviously the drivers' fault for having instincts, not that traffic laws can sometimes expect too much or that their programming will never manage to properly replicate human driving without BEING human? Right, gotcha.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here