Ummm... (Score: 4, Funny)
by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2016-08-23 01:29 (#1RB16)
Seems like asking "How long before chainsaws are weaponized". Both are pretty-close to a weapon in their regular form.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by genericuser@pipedot.org on 2016-08-23 21:05 (#1RE1D)
>Seems like asking "How long before chainsaws are weaponized". Both are pretty-close to a weapon in their regular form.
Well, yes, but chainsaws aren't on the verge of being able to operate autonomously. People screw up and cause accidents with both chainsaws and cars, but chainsaws aren't usually used in crowds or operated in swarms (like traffic) the way cars are. No one is busy outfitting chainsaws to work without human guidance and they aren't usually let loose on the highways where they could cause major havoc. A chainsaw is typically a one-on-one operation and when you drop it, it usually stops being an active hazard. Autonomous cars have the ability to cause far more damage to groups of people, especially if driven into a crowd or made to cross into oncoming traffic.
Well, yes, but chainsaws aren't on the verge of being able to operate autonomously. People screw up and cause accidents with both chainsaws and cars, but chainsaws aren't usually used in crowds or operated in swarms (like traffic) the way cars are. No one is busy outfitting chainsaws to work without human guidance and they aren't usually let loose on the highways where they could cause major havoc. A chainsaw is typically a one-on-one operation and when you drop it, it usually stops being an active hazard. Autonomous cars have the ability to cause far more damage to groups of people, especially if driven into a crowd or made to cross into oncoming traffic.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2016-08-24 07:32 (#1RF8P)
You seem to be talking about chainsaw *accidents*, versus *intentional* car sabotage. If you're inclined to cause a lot of damage with a chainsaw, you certainly can do so.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 2, Interesting)
by genericuser@pipedot.org on 2016-08-24 16:34 (#1RGTB)
> You seem to be talking about chainsaw *accidents*, versus *intentional* car sabotage. If you're inclined to cause a lot of damage with a chainsaw, you certainly can do so
That's why I don't think it's a good comparison. It's difficult to intentionally sabotage a chainsaw to cause widespread injury, but a car...the possibilities are endless. And that doesn't even bring into account the idea of an autonomous VBIED or one that can be driven remotely.
That's why I don't think it's a good comparison. It's difficult to intentionally sabotage a chainsaw to cause widespread injury, but a car...the possibilities are endless. And that doesn't even bring into account the idea of an autonomous VBIED or one that can be driven remotely.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 0)
by Anonymous Coward on 2016-08-25 13:18 (#1RKT0)
It isn't that difficult right now to just drive a truck through a crowd full of people in France.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by genericuser@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 16:42 (#1RMG6)
> It isn't that difficult right now to just drive a truck through a crowd full of people in France
My point exactly. It's easy enough now, how much more likely will it be when you can do it by remote with almost no chance of getting caught?
My point exactly. It's easy enough now, how much more likely will it be when you can do it by remote with almost no chance of getting caught?
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by hyper@pipedot.org on 2016-09-09 14:27 (#1T67G)
Taking into account human nature? Certain.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 0)
by Anonymous Coward on 2016-08-25 13:13 (#1RKS5)
chainsaws aren't on the verge of being able to operate autonomouslyOh for the love of... STOP GIVING THEM IDEAS!
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by vanderhoth@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 14:15 (#1RKZQ)
Oh my sweet, sweet, summer child.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Viwwetf0gU
NOTE: I realize there's probably someone controlling this from a remote, which you see at one point, but it's a pretty small step for this to be automatized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Viwwetf0gU
NOTE: I realize there's probably someone controlling this from a remote, which you see at one point, but it's a pretty small step for this to be automatized.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by genericuser@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 16:39 (#1RMG5)
Nonsense.
There are loads of companies working on developing autonomous vehicles; I doubt there's even one working on developing autonomous chainsaws.
If you really think that chainsaws are as a big a potential danger as autonomous vehicles are, I have some wonderful seaside property in Arizona I'd like to sell you. I also own a bridge in New York I'd be willing to part with for the right price.
There are loads of companies working on developing autonomous vehicles; I doubt there's even one working on developing autonomous chainsaws.
If you really think that chainsaws are as a big a potential danger as autonomous vehicles are, I have some wonderful seaside property in Arizona I'd like to sell you. I also own a bridge in New York I'd be willing to part with for the right price.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by vanderhoth@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 17:17 (#1RMKM)
My original comment was meant as a joke.
That said.
There are people working on autonomous drones.
This flying chainsaw is basically a chainsaw attached to a drone.
It's not a huge step to imagine some doofus thinking it would be a good idea to attach a chainsaw to an autonomous drone, for reasons. After all there was some doofus that thought attaching a chainsaw to a regular drone was a good idea.
I'm pretty sure all those companies developing autonomous cars are doing their damned best to secure them. They'll be sued into oblivion pretty quick if someone can demonstrate an easy method to hack these cars to go running people over. I think someone would have to be pretty dumb, or at least extremely dishonest, to think autonomous vehicles are going to pose any significant danger. There's no way they're going to release a car that's any MORE dangerous than existing manually driven cars.
That said.
There are people working on autonomous drones.
This flying chainsaw is basically a chainsaw attached to a drone.
It's not a huge step to imagine some doofus thinking it would be a good idea to attach a chainsaw to an autonomous drone, for reasons. After all there was some doofus that thought attaching a chainsaw to a regular drone was a good idea.
I'm pretty sure all those companies developing autonomous cars are doing their damned best to secure them. They'll be sued into oblivion pretty quick if someone can demonstrate an easy method to hack these cars to go running people over. I think someone would have to be pretty dumb, or at least extremely dishonest, to think autonomous vehicles are going to pose any significant danger. There's no way they're going to release a car that's any MORE dangerous than existing manually driven cars.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by genericuser@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 18:53 (#1RMY7)
>I'm pretty sure all those companies developing autonomous cars are doing their damned best to secure them.
Heh, you really think so? Oh I'm sure they're paying some lip service to making them secure, but they're likely doing it in a sloppy, low-cost way that will be full of holes and vulnerabilities. Look at the whole IoT thing...their security may be a little better than that, but not much.
>There's no way they're going to release a car that's any MORE dangerous than existing manually driven cars.
Oh boy, I'll take that bet! Just by dint of being autonomous or remotely controllable it's automatically more susceptible to misuse by malicious people. I guarantee you that an autonomous car is potentially more dangerous than a standard vehicle in terms of being used in a deliberately harmful way by outside parties. Any hardware or software that manipulates the vehicle only adds to the existing risk factor.
Heh, you really think so? Oh I'm sure they're paying some lip service to making them secure, but they're likely doing it in a sloppy, low-cost way that will be full of holes and vulnerabilities. Look at the whole IoT thing...their security may be a little better than that, but not much.
>There's no way they're going to release a car that's any MORE dangerous than existing manually driven cars.
Oh boy, I'll take that bet! Just by dint of being autonomous or remotely controllable it's automatically more susceptible to misuse by malicious people. I guarantee you that an autonomous car is potentially more dangerous than a standard vehicle in terms of being used in a deliberately harmful way by outside parties. Any hardware or software that manipulates the vehicle only adds to the existing risk factor.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 0)
by Anonymous Coward on 2016-11-05 01:50 (#20EM6)
I don't think you've thought this through: in what way is something that you would have to crack the security on more susceptible to misuse than something you only need a key for?
Seriously?
With a standard present day car, you get in and drive it into a crowd. With an autonomous car, you need to find one with the vulnerabilities you can access and then crack the OS, override the onboard security, and then drive it into a crowd IF it doesn't have extra failsafes built in.
In the time it takes you to do that, you could steal/carjack/buy a car, and then drive it into a group. It would actually be easier to get a load of explosives and detonate it in the middle of a crowd than to override an autonomous vehicle and do so.
It'd be easier to build a radio controlled car and do it.
Disagree? Demonstrate how it's easier to gain the skills to exploit an operating system, then to find an operating system you can exploit, do so without getting caught, and then drive the car into a crowd of people, and provide clear explanations of how this is so much easier than having a human drive into a crowd.
Seriously?
With a standard present day car, you get in and drive it into a crowd. With an autonomous car, you need to find one with the vulnerabilities you can access and then crack the OS, override the onboard security, and then drive it into a crowd IF it doesn't have extra failsafes built in.
In the time it takes you to do that, you could steal/carjack/buy a car, and then drive it into a group. It would actually be easier to get a load of explosives and detonate it in the middle of a crowd than to override an autonomous vehicle and do so.
It'd be easier to build a radio controlled car and do it.
Disagree? Demonstrate how it's easier to gain the skills to exploit an operating system, then to find an operating system you can exploit, do so without getting caught, and then drive the car into a crowd of people, and provide clear explanations of how this is so much easier than having a human drive into a crowd.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1, Interesting)
by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2016-08-26 15:07 (#1RQS7)
If you really think that chainsaws are as a big a potential danger as autonomous vehicles are, I have some wonderful seaside property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.There are lots of wooden bridges out there. A chainsaw will allow you to sabotage such a bridge very quickly, with no visual indication from above. If you do so shortly before the scheduled passenger train comes through, it could be a mass-casualty incident more serious than anything a car could do.
Re: Ummm... (Score: 1)
by hyper@pipedot.org on 2016-08-25 13:19 (#1RKTE)
Having had someone try to run me over with a car, and having driven through a few things in a car, I completely agree with this statement.
Cars are weapons. Shields. Armour. All in one!
Cars are weapons. Shields. Armour. All in one!