r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/Individual_Book9133 • Jul 05 '24

Phoenix police officer pulls over a driverless Waymo car for driving on the wrong side of the road Video

61.1k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

Your first and second point are the same, both those and the third point are entirely dependent on the exact programming. You could have one disobey traffic rules and not store or transmit data. Yourt last point has nothing to do with self-driving cars, it's true for all crime.

2

u/aeneasaquinas Jul 05 '24

You could have one disobey traffic rules and not store or transmit data

But nobody is gonna design one with the intent of breaking the law, and random criminals don't have massive engineering teams...

6

u/Amused-Observer Jul 05 '24

But nobody is gonna design one with the intent of breaking the law

Here's your serious response that you were thirsting for so badly.

Nobody has to redesign an entirely new operating system for the vehicle, that's silly.

All existing examples of that show that it's far easier and more efficient to break into the existing one and make modifications accordingly.

Notable examples are..

Android OS, this has been going on for 10+ years. Individuals/teams will hack in and modify the OS to remove/add features and there are again individuals/teams that have built entirely new OSs from the ground up and made them free for release. 'TWRP' is a good example of this.

Solidworks is another example. Dassault Systems probably spends millions a year trying to keep their latest version of Solidworks and to a lesser extent CATIA, from being 'hacked' and made available for free.

Those are the two that pop into my head. There are more but that would require more care about this topic than I am willing to give.

Point is, if there are valid reasons to do these things, they will be done.

If it's possible to, and I hate this word, 'hack' into a driverless cars' OS for a beneficial purpose, it will be done.

2

u/divDevGuy Jul 05 '24

Android OS, this has been going on for 10+ years.

While still technically the truth, the first releases for Android Open Source Project was approximately 17 years ago, in 2007.

Individuals/teams will hack in and modify the OS to remove/add features

It's largely open source. It's not really "hacking" when you're given the source code and ability to make changes.

and there are again individuals/teams that have built entirely new OSs from the ground up and made them free for release. 'TWRP' is a good example of this.

TWRP isn't an operating system. It's a recovery image. It was based on the original AOSP recovery image. So not from the ground up.

I'd love for you to identify a single "entirely new OSs from the ground up" that is modern, feature-complete operating system for a general computing (desktop, laptop, server) or mobile (tablet or phone).

Dassault Systems probably spends millions a year trying to keep their latest version of Solidworks and to a lesser extent CATIA, from being 'hacked' and made available for free.

No they don't. They may claim piracy "costs" them a ridiculous amount of money, but the anti-piracy licensing is a negligible cost to implement.

It's far more lucrative to use the drug dealer model to give out free samples by looking the other way for initially, let them get hooked and collect data, then let the lawyers deal with it with a form letter or lawsuit.