Do You Want Your Car to Become More "Connected?"

[MICHAELSD]

Curious to gauge how many users want a truly connected car, as the dawn of the age of unlocking cars with a watch is upon us.

I simply cannot get around the fact that no level of encryption can make unlocking or otherwise controlling a car with a digital device impossible -- if you can unlock your car with your watch or phone, so could a tech-saavy thief and I do not foresee that changing anytime soon. Sure, manufacturers could push out immediate updates as soon as faults are discovered but that does not make me feel entirely secure. Yet again, if manufacturers used it as an opportunity to make car theft more difficult such as how Apple Pay does with credit card theft then I could warm up to the idea.

Does a connected car concern you? Would you give up potentially convenient features in the name of security?

 

[shinji]

Eh, the car is insured anyway. I'm not that worried about it.

 

[AustinIllini]

Eh, the car is insured anyway. I'm not that worried about it.

Agreed. There will be a day where the only reason you have insurance is for theft coverage. That day cannot come soon enough, honestly.

 

[samiwas]

Curious to gauge how many users want a truly connected car, as the dawn of the age of unlocking cars with a watch is upon us.

I simply cannot get around the fact that no level of encryption can make unlocking or otherwise controlling a car with a digital device impossible -- if you can unlock your car with your watch or phone, so could a tech-saavy thief and I do not foresee that changing anytime soon. Sure, manufacturers could push out immediate updates as soon as faults are discovered but that does not make me feel entirely secure. Yet again, if manufacturers used it as an opportunity to make car theft more difficult such as how Apple Pay does with credit card theft then I could warm up to the idea.

Does a connected car concern you? Would you give up potentially convenient features in the name of security?

I'm pretty sure there are a lot more criminals who know how to pick the lock and hotwire a car, than there are criminals who know how to break military-grade encryption and root through software code to steal a car. Your fear is entirely misplaced.

 

[MICHAELSD]

I'm pretty sure there are a lot more criminals who know how to pick the lock and hotwire a car, than there are criminals who know how to break military-grade encryption and root through software code to steal a car. Your fear is entirely misplaced.

It'd be more or less a group effort to hack the newer car software, as groups consistently release apps that make it easy for tech-savvy criminals to spoof a car's unlocking system.

 

[MICHAELSD]

Agreed. There will be a day where the only reason you have insurance is for theft coverage. That day cannot come soon enough, honestly.

The current system does seem so antiquated.

 

[Roller]

Agreed. There will be a day where the only reason you have insurance is for theft coverage. That day cannot come soon enough, honestly.

If by that you mean that the need for collision and liability insurance will disappear because cars will operate autonomously, I think that the day is long off. Even when self-driving cars are widely available, there will still be many conventional vehicles on the road, not to mention pedestrians and other hazards. So insurance for other than theft will still be needed.

 

[samiwas]

It'd be more or less a group effort to hack the newer car software, as groups consistently release apps that make it easy for tech-savvy criminals to spoof a car's unlocking system.

Right, but how many of them are there, vs. how many boys in the hood who can easily hotwire a car? I don't think that connected cars create any more of a theft scare than what we have currently.

Agreed. There will be a day where the only reason you have insurance is for theft coverage. That day cannot come soon enough, honestly.

I don't think that day is coming any time soon. The whole idea of autonomous cars just whizzing about their day, aware of every little thing that happens in a typical day of driving, just strikes me as nothing more than sci-fi. Will these cars really be able to determine that a kid is running into the street 10 feet ahead, that a biker has swerved into your lane, that there's a pothole or a tree branch in the road, that construction cones are blocking off an area? There's a lot of stuff going on in a typical day of driving, and I find it hard to believe that with millions of self-driving cars piling through the roads, that there won't be accidents. I highly doubt you'll be off the hook for damages.

 

[A.Goldberg]

I believe there was (or is) a problem with BMWs where thieves would break in, plug into the car's computer, disable the alarm, and start the car.

For me, having a car unlock with the touch of a button on an iWatch is pointless. My car already has hands free unlocking. As far as so I know a watch cannot fit a physical key incase my battery dies.

 

[Plymouthbreezer]

Heck no: More things to go wrong.

Give me low tech. I like roll down windows for that reason.

 

[AustinIllini]

I don't think that day is coming any time soon. The whole idea of autonomous cars just whizzing about their day, aware of every little thing that happens in a typical day of driving, just strikes me as nothing more than sci-fi. Will these cars really be able to determine that a kid is running into the street 10 feet ahead, that a biker has swerved into your lane, that there's a pothole or a tree branch in the road, that construction cones are blocking off an area? There's a lot of stuff going on in a typical day of driving, and I find it hard to believe that with millions of self-driving cars piling through the roads, that there won't be accidents. I highly doubt you'll be off the hook for damages.

This is short sighted. We live in an era where planes fly themselves. Automated cars are safer and better. I give it at most 15 years.

 

[MICHAELSD]

Intel outlining all the systems in a modern car that can be hacked:

 

[macquariumguy]

No way. I like my car the way it is, 3 pedals, a shifter, and a steering wheel and not a lot else.

 

[garirry]

Only if it's going to work like those wireless keys thingies that you need to just tap your car with a finger and it will automatically search for those devices. If I have to open an app, establish a connection, and deal with problems like dead battery, etc. then it's a NO.

 

[AustinIllini]

No way. I like my car the way it is, 3 pedals, a shifter, and a steering wheel and not a lot else.

So, the problem is, you're a bad driver relative to a computer.

No offense, but you're human, and therefore not a good driver.

 

[garirry]

So, the problem is, you're a bad driver relative to a computer.

No offense, but you're human, and therefore not a good driver.

Uh, what? Are you talking about self-driving cars or what?

 

[AustinIllini]

Uh, what? Are you talking about self-driving cars or what?

Indeed. The problem is, people drive cars and people are the danger on the road.

 

[garirry]

Indeed. The problem is, people drive cars and people are the danger on the road.

I believe that the solution to that is either make being able to drive cars yourself a privilege, or send people who can't drive properly (60% of people on the road) to hell and take their license away.

 

[Mousse]

Heck no: More things to go wrong.

Give me low tech. I like roll down windows for that reason.

All I want in my car is power steering and power brakes (maybe ABS, not a big deal for me) and rear wheel drive. No traction control, no engine governor, no computer assisted anything--that stuff just hobbles a good driver and make bad drivers take unnecessary risk. Plus all that tech adds weight. No thanks.

Indeed. The problem is, people drive cars and people are the danger on the road.

Bad drivers are the danger. The solution is stricter licensing requirements AND stiffer penalties for road rage a--hat drivers. The driving test in the US is ridiculously easy. The hardest part is the parallel parking and they give you 6-8 feet of wiggle room with work with. A half competent driver could parallel park just backing in.

 

[yg17]

Bad drivers are the danger. The solution is stricter licensing requirements AND stiffer penalties for road rage a--hat drivers. The driving test in the US is ridiculously easy. The hardest part is the parallel parking and they give you 6-8 feet of wiggle room with work with. A half competent driver could parallel park just backing in.

Not to mention **** like texting and driving is still perfectly legal in several jurisdictions in the US.

The idea of self driving cars is nice and all, but some stricter distracted driving laws, better enforcement, and like you said, better training can go a long way towards making our roads safer. But that won't happen because freedom. And I won't say anything more on the subject to avoid this getting sent to PRSI

 

[samiwas]

This is short sighted. We live in an era where planes fly themselves. Automated cars are safer and better. I give it at most 15 years.

I'm not saying a car can't drive itself, I'm saying that thousands of cars will not be as successful as you might think in bustling metropolises speeding past each other and around us and everything else with mere feet to spare. This is a completely different scenario than airplanes which have dedicated clear airspace without obstacles, with many fewer routes, stay thousands of feet apart, with two pilots able to take over and an entire fleet of air traffic controllers (upwards of 15,000 people) to keep an eye on things and help keep everything in order. The two are barely comparable.

Automated cars on dedicated lanes of certain roads: yes, except for the cost. Self-driving cars mingling on the normal city roads with everything else? I'm not seeing it any time soon, certainly not ubiquitous in 15 years.

 

[shinji]

Self-driving cars will cut down on accidents, not create more. A computer can't be drunk, fatigued, etc. Even with more complicated driving tasks like when a lane is closed and cars need to merge because they could communicate "I'm letting you go" with each other much better than people are able to.

 

[macquariumguy]

So, the problem is, you're a bad driver relative to a computer.

No offense, but you're human, and therefore not a good driver.

I don't care, and I'm old enough that I'm likely to be driving myself in my primitive old sports car as long as I want.

 

[maflynn]

Not really, I'm not interested in having it more connected. Just look at what happened to Jeep, The SUV was shown to be hacked. I really don't want to deal, worry or even think about my vehicle getting hacked. Its just something I use to get from point A to point B.

 

[heehee]

I'm not saying a car can't drive itself, I'm saying that thousands of cars will not be as successful as you might think in bustling metropolises speeding past each other and around us and everything else with mere feet to spare. This is a completely different scenario than airplanes which have dedicated clear airspace without obstacles, with many fewer routes, stay thousands of feet apart, with two pilots able to take over and an entire fleet of air traffic controllers (upwards of 15,000 people) to keep an eye on things and help keep everything in order. The two are barely comparable.

Automated cars on dedicated lanes of certain roads: yes, except for the cost. Self-driving cars mingling on the normal city roads with everything else? I'm not seeing it any time soon, certainly not ubiquitous in 15 years.

Google has logged in over 1 million driverless miles.