round traffic jams and bad weather.
As far as hackers having there way with this system. I think people give hackers way more credit for brains then they really have. Pushing in bad data is way different than a denial of service attack. How often does your cellphone call the wrong number or give your voicemail to someone else. It happens, but almost never from a statistical point of view.
This sounds kind of like war driving except giving access to mobiles is exactly the point, seems easy enough. – by dmonkey
|Another Use (1:34pm EST Thu Dec 18 2003)
If cars are configured properly the system could be used to regulate speed or even stop cars entirely. Just think about it, your flying down the road and there are no cops in the area. The system reads that you are speeding and send out a signal and your car slows down to the speed limit. Or someone is trying to evade the police the patrolman pushes a button in is patrol car and the engine stops and the car slows to a complete stop. But then it may also stop every car in the area.
But if the state only wants to collect money from you it will only for the car to tell the system that your speeding along with the name and address of the owner and a ticket is sent in the mail.
Just think what Hackers would be able to do.
Welcome to the new age.
|Anouther use (3:20pm EST Thu Dec 18 2003)
RE:lazarus that could work if Microsoft dosent make tne OS. That would bring new meaning to car crash. – by NotME
|Flame-O-Meter Score: 10 (5:06pm EST Thu Dec 18 2003)
An amazing score for the Flame-O-Meter on a day when the kiddies are out of school. – by M@
|More for public safety? (8:55pm EST Thu Dec 18 2003)
Public safety was just allocated 50 MHz in the 4.0 GHz range, which is actually more than they have figured out how to use right now. Why would the FCC give this range to them as well? – by foob
|I meant 4.9 GHz, not 4.0 (8:57pm EST Thu Dec 18 2003)
Oops, excuse my typo please. – by foob
|Smart move (8:43am EST Fri Dec 19 2003)
300 billion spent each year due to traffic accidents. I look forward to having technology capable of making transportation safer. – by Zeke
|It would be a heck of a following distance (10:04pm EST Sun Dec 21 2003)
“it would also enable proximity alerts between automobiles”
When I use my GPS it is off by significant fractions of a mile. For instance, after my drive I'll download my trace (path followed) and overlay it on the map, and it shows that I drove off the paved surface up to a quarter of a mile in places (especially when the car goes behind the north side of a hill — I'm in the northern hemisphere). Even when it tells me the GPS is accurate to 22 feet (and some days it only gets as good as 70-100 feet), my position is consistently off by a 100 feet from waypoints that I set at intersection.
I just don't see how you could do relevant proximity alerts with that level of error. Moreover, it has to calculate not just proximity, but also the direction vectors. You shouldn't get a proximity alert because you are going 50 mph down a parkway and whipping past parked cars only 3 feet away.
Forgive me if I don't trade in my seeing-eye dog, Rex, for this system just yet. Rex hasn't gotten me in a traffic accident yet. – by Woody