Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is Hacking Cars a Thing of the Past?

Cliff posted more than 12 years ago | from the as-cars-become-more-like-computers dept.

Technology 748

PhotoGuy asks: "I went to install a remote car starter in our Honda last week, which used to be kind of an elegant hack (like a controlled hot-wiring of your car), only to find out that additional expensive parts and modules were required, due to the anti-theft system on the vehicle, where the car's computer would not let it start, unless it received the right code from the magnetic encoding on the key! In order to install a car starter, you have to actually put a spare key to the vehicle *in* the add-on module to let the car starter do it's thing. Yeah, that makes me more comfortable, leaving a key installed the remote car starter. That sucker went back to the store pretty quickly, that's way too much work, when a dealership can do it for me. Is the slight reduction in risk of theft of your vehicle, worth that much loss of freedom of choice and control?"

"Ever since electronic ignitions, and especially ones controlled by computers, it seems the "hackability" and user-maintainability of cars has been declining. Your neighborhood grease monkey can't do much to a modern car without a bunch of electronic gear interfacing to the car's computer. It's almost a little anti-competitive.

Carbeurators, and the other mechanical systems which were fairly standard and visible and self-evident, really seem to be the equivalent of "open source", while the new computer-based systems seem to be more closed and proprietary. I know in the early days of cars with computers, there were third party ROM upgrades for performance tweaking; I'm guessing that's falling by the wayside more and more, as these systems get more and more complex.

It almost seems like a Microsoft-like statement, to tell you they're doing all of this to reduce theft, while really they're doing it to ensure you are forced into coming back to their dealerships..."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

One hint (0)

SpanishInquisition (127269) | more than 12 years ago | (#2665991)

Don't drive a car running windows

Re:One hint (2, Funny)

redrouteone (528923) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666118)

Officer I dont know what happened, I was driveing down the road and my windsheild turned blue with a bunch of words on it. Then there was big dent on my fender, but no other cars were around.

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2665998)


FIRE JON KATZ. kthx hahahaha

open source cars (-1)

neal n bob (531011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666000)

that would be great - half the car companies would go out of business. And my mechanic would tell me to RTFM when my transmission dies!

First Post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666005)


woo (-1)

_Splat (22170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666007)


A better question (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666012)

Is a car's antitheft device even a deterrent to car theives? They can still bust in your window and take all your CDs and be out of there in a matter of seconds. Then you're still out the cost of new windows.

Re:A better question (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666211)

That person wouldn't exactly be a car thief, now, would he? He'd be a CD thief.

There isn't much that's going to deter busting out windows. Hell, if someone really really wanted to do it without getting busted, a pair of rubber gloves, a slingshot, and a rock would suffice. Then they wouldn't even have to be next to it, and the evidence left behind is negligible.

Car antitheft systems are designed to protect the car itself from physically being driven from one point to another without the owner's consent. Whether that be by immobilization or by making the car more attention getting (lights, horn, etc), its main purpose is to ensure the car stays in one spot.

Tow truck drivers, those are the guys you need to look out for.

Car Theft (1, Informative)

jeremiahstanley (473105) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666016)

Most good car theives would look for cars WITH alarms as they would be able to get some cash for that part too. I takes about ten seconds for someone to smash the window, rip out the alarm system/turn it off and hotwiring the car isn't that big of a deal as I've seen some really organized car theft in my time using a tow truck...

Their goal... (4, Informative)

smaug195 (535681) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666019)

Is to make more money for the dealers. I think that we are moving into many diffrent incompatible car computers that all are worked diffrently so a mechanic cant service more then 1 or 2 diffrent types. Bringing about the death of independent mechanics and the rise of the dealerships. Then again I could be paranoid.

Besides... (1)

itwerx (165526) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666215)

...I don't see how a spare key installed by the dealership is any more secure than one installed by the owner. :)

People Still Use Car Alarms? (4, Funny)

Zapaanese.Whore (315742) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666020)

Does anyone even use those things anymore?

I mean, let's face it, when you hear a car alarm go off, do you even *LOOK* in that direction? I know I don't.

And even if I saw someone with a jimmy, the hood up, wires sticking out and a .45 in his back pocket, would I do anything? Of course not. Why should I? It's not *MY* car.

All car alarms do now is annoy people.

Oh and give kids a something to throw snowballs at during winter ;)

- Z

Re:People Still Use Car Alarms? (4, Informative)

Nos. (179609) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666063)

Its not an alarm. Its an anti-theft device which is not the same thing. A lot (most?) new cars are coming with these now. I didn't know Hondas did, but GM and VW both have these "key readers" that will not allow the vehicle to start without receiving a (magnetic|electrical|???) signal from the key.

My car, a '99 Olds Alero, has the same thing. It's a nice feature, especially considering I live in the car theft capital of Canada (Regina). It can be a pain for things like car starters and getting extra keys made, but overall I like the idea.

Re:People Still Use Car Alarms? (1)

TobyWong (168498) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666114)

What else do you expect the kids to do with their free time out there? Wasn't there a movie a couple years ago with kurt russell called "escape from saskatchewan"? Err wait I'm thinking of something else. =P

My Car Alarm Idea... (2, Interesting)

idonotexist (450877) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666115)

ok, I've only shared this idea with friends and relatives, but I'll make it public now: a 'screaming car alarm.' Yes, a recorded scream of a woman would play should a car alarm be tripped. Now, that should get attention...

Re:My Car Alarm Idea... (1)

HCase (533294) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666170)

they have it. i've heard one. it was going off for a good while apparently before i even got into the area. people looked, saw it was a car, and walked off. all it did was annoy people more than a normal alarm because they thought something might actually be happening.

Re:My Car Alarm Idea... (1)

czardonic (526710) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666227)

Didn't you parents or some teacher ever tell you the story of the boy who cried wolf? It doesn't matter what sound a car makes, after a few dozen of the false alarms that car alarms are so prone too, people will just tune them out. The only thing your plan would accomplish is the desensitization of people to the sound of an actual person in distress.

My Hobbies (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666021)

I like to slap JonKatz in the genitals with a whiffle bat.
I like to piss on Rob Malda's willing asshole
I like to shit on Cowboy Neal's fat folds.

Power-ups to the Karnaugh Maps!

other ignition technologies (4, Interesting)

SirSlud (67381) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666023)

well, I, for one, don't mind losing that kind of 'freedom and control' if it helps the deployment of ignition technologies to keep non-safe drivers out of cars: breathalizer, driver licence check, etc

to me, it is absolutely criminal that cars are not mandated to have at least some level of drunkdriving prevention. dunno if that would get in the way of alternative security systems, but if it does .. well, lets just say that the average human is a little too attached to their car in the first place :)

Re:other ignition technologies (2)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666048)

I guess you must be one of the people that will run an underground garage that will disable or bypass these systems, for the right price.

Never push for a law unless you think about the huge criminal market it might create.

Re:other ignition technologies (2)

SirSlud (67381) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666190)

sure, if you WANT to do something, you can. you always can

My theory is that a significant portion of drunk drivers only feel comfortable driving dunk when they are .. guess what .. drunk. So I would say, sure, underground garages might spring up, but if we found out that the vast majority of cases were people who get in their cars while they are drunk, but wouldn't feel morally comfy with getting such after-market illegal alterations done, then its very much worth it.

as always, it comes down to the numbers, but the drunk drivers I know wouldn't feel comfortable with using such services. basically, they just 'assume' when they are drunk that they arn't, hop in their car, and go ... because they can, and we still havn't reached the point where its easy to amass social support for not getting in a car after having one or two extra beers in that grey area that you can't 'feel', but numerically contributes to drunk driving.

Re:other ignition technologies (1, Troll)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666103)

I agree. I also think the car should have a computer in it that can monitor your speed against your GPS coordinates and the laws there. It should automatically issue you a ticket and withdraw the money from your bank account if you go over the speed limit. Maybe it could also monitor for change langes without signaling, running red lights, etc. and give the police the ability to remotely turn off your engine. If we had all this, the costs of law enforcement would be greatly reduced. The police could spend their time on solving crimes like murder, etc. instead of babysitting bad drivers.

Re:other ignition technologies (1)

SquierStrat (42516) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666156)

or you might get a ticket for speeding to the hospital with a dying man, and saving his life after someone attempted to murder him.

Re:other ignition technologies (1)

talesout (179672) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666220)

Or better yet have your engine turned off mid-flight and get stuck with a dead guy in the passenger seat.

Re:other ignition technologies (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666178)

Yes, let's stop a car remotely in the middle of a busy road and watch the bloody carnage that ensues from the pile-up. If you want that much control over how people behave on the road, make a push for greater use of public transportation, where such control is feasible. Otherwise, stay the hell out of my car.

Re:other ignition technologies (1)

slow_flight (518010) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666205)

If we had all this, the costs of buying a car would be greatly increased, while the costs of law enforcement would remain unchanged. Also, if you were the happy owner of this uber-car, you would pretty much want to be the sole operator, wouldn't you. Wouldn't want your checking account depleted just because your irresponsible whatever-in-law drives like a maniac, would you?

Average Human? (2) (84577) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666191)

Average American might be a bit more accurate. I wonder what percentage of humans own automobiles.

Your probably one of the Anti-Microsoft types too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666197)

You are probably one of the Anti-Microsoft types too. You probably think that they are evil for trying to control what on your desktop or server. But all the while you are more than happy to hand over all your freedom of movement with a smile to the government who Knows better how to live your life better than you do. Hmm, if information is supposed to be free then why can't I be free too? Just say no to Big Brother.

What the hell is this? (-1, Flamebait)

st|ng-x (190155) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666024)

Of all the worthwile stories that could have been posted, why bother with this drivel?

cliff (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666025)

cliff is a gay fatherfucker

LOL (1)

Old Wolf (56093) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666027)

What next? Take your SSL browser and server back to the shop because you can't telnet to them?

Make Microsoft give you a refund for adding virus protection to OE6 ?

Buy a new house because your old one had locks on the door?

You're comparing apples and oranges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666031)

Gimme a break, there is nothing requiring you to go back to the dealership for whatever "upgrade" you want, and you're the one who ordered the theft deterrant system, genius. If you'd rather go back to an abaccus so you can hack it, be my guest.

Re:You're comparing apples and oranges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666113)

hey "genius", lots of recent cars have this module from the factory. it's nothing to do with an alarm and it's not an option.

Re:You're comparing apples and oranges (1)

DonalGraeme (171589) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666152)

you're the one who ordered the theft deterrant system, genius

That may not be true. Many cars today come with the theft deterrant system built into the car. You don't get to have the car without it.

Car security (2, Interesting)

Starbreeze (209787) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666032)

Honestly, I think the security is worth it. No one pays attention to car alarms going off anymore. My brand spanking new 2002 Taurus won't start unless you use a special key from the dealership with the computer chip in it. While the car came with 2 keys, it will cost me $80 each for additional keys.

But then, I've never felt the need for a remote starter anyway. I've gotten used to walking outside in my pajamas in the winter to start the car so it can warm up while I get ready for work.

Re:Car security (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666089)

Call your dealer and ask the cost should you lose all your keys. Duplicating cost is small (if you call $80-$100 small), but often times the cost to start over with no keys can exceed several thousand dollars. Definitely worth the $80 to buy a spare for your safe deposit box.

Re:Car security! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666120)

Ah, so it's nice to know that you car is secure
with a fancy key required to start it, and yet
you leave the thing running in your driveway,
while you get ready for work!

There's some irony here somewhere, I'm sure.


Re:Car security (1)

Grelli (98061) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666221)

Well, first I'd need a car for this to hold true... BUT!

If I were to walk out to my car, in the morning, in my pajamas, to start it in winter, I might make it to the top of my driveway.

When it's 25-30 degrees celsius below 0, walking outside in pajamas isn't a good idea. I for one, when I can afford car insurance, will be getting a remote starter for exactly this reason.

Audi Performance and Racing (5, Informative)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666033)

APR [] has been able to do some amazing things with Audis and Volkswagens. I'd say car hacking is far from dead, you just need to be a lot smarter nowadays.

Besides, installing a remote car starter isn't my idea of a real hack. How is that any more of a "hack" than installing a new car radio? Obviously, you weren't able to bypass the security system, so you're not much of a hacker.

Re:Audi Performance and Racing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666104)

Note to ACs: I never read comments rated less than 1.

Oh NOOOO! Now I'm not going to be able to sleep at night.

reduction in theft (1)

Telastyn (206146) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666035)

I don't see how it's only a *slight* reduction in the chance of theft (assuming the magnetic key has sufficient resiliancy to brute forcing, yadda yadda). I mean after all, if you can't simply hotwire the puppy being the standard car hacker, what's the chances a similar black hat car hacker can (in the time needed to steal the car w/o getting caught)

You Should buy a Linux Car (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666039)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality', which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

Linus Torvalds is an anagram of SLIT ANUS OR VD 'L' , clearly referring to himself by the first initial.

Richard M Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of MANS CRAM THRILL AD.

Alan Cox is BARELY an anagram of ANAL COX which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe "The Cathedral and the Bizarre", [Buy At Amazon] is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for SECONDARY RIM and CORD IN MY ARSE. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called "Fetchmail", which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for "Felch Male" - a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'Felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male'.

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was ACTUALLY QUOTED on leftist commie propaganda site as saying the following:

RMS: "I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance," he says. "It's about being able to question conventional wisdom," he asserts. "I believe in love, but not monogamy," he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

Speaking about 'flaming', who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of Corrupting the Innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

"I've got a rare kidney disease," I told her. "I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?"


We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag'. IS THERE ANY MORE DOUBT? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux "Sauce Code", a "Gasbag" is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a distribution is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of CLAW ARSE, a reference to the homosexual practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for DARK AMEN and RAM NAKED, which is what they do.

Another 'distro', (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco', which is where homosexuals preyed on young boys in the 1970's), is Debian, an anagram of IN A BED, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. "Woody" is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis, glistening with precum. But far sicker is the phrase "Frozen Potato" that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual "Sauce Code", refers to the solo homosexual practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat is secret homo slang for the tip of a penis that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points'. These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously /anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no /opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit GAYNESS. For example, people are often told of the FAQ, but how many innocent heterosexual Windows users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking:

Faggot Anal Quest - the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags

Even the title 'Slashdot' originally referred to a homosexual practice. Slashdot of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan,

The editors of Slashdot also have homosexual names: "Hemos" is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from "Homos". But even more sickening is "Commander Taco" which sounds a bit like "Commode in Taco", filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement. (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these "Taco Commodes" have special "Salsa Sauce" (blood from a ruptured rectum) and "Cheese" (rancid flakes of penis discharge) toppings. AND to make it even worse, Slashdot runs on Apache!

The Apache server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual activity - as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world - patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. "Slash - Dot" is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers'.


What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to WARN them of the impending homo-calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. - mighty jebus, Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Source' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator.

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of 'Baywatch' until the very mention of Pamela Anderson causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism.

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested.

(Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?)

- double_h, Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: "Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.". And anyway, the PS2 sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board
now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too
c u in church - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a SIN in the eyes of the Catholic church. Clearly, the only god fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M - The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for EVERY man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by A Black Man. Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to "Pearl Necklace" for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. - phee, Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that PERL (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to "Pearl Monocle", "Pearl Nosering", and the ubiquitous "Pearl Enema".

One scary thing about Perl is that it contains hidden homosexual messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple - It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely. There are TWO COLONS NEXT TO EACH OTHER! As Larry "Balls to the" Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts - having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing', whereby two homosexual queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as "Parameter Passing".

And PHP stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. - Eimernase, Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I DO know that homosexual Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again.Yours, Cerberus. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code', for the sake of 'interoperability'. (The slang term they use for unconsensual intercourse - their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount', into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload', and needs to be 'rebooted'. (i.e. Kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by voting this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1 Underrated', as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation. Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened "Bender"???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1', then it will be archived FOREVER! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of "Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours", but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two', as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman.

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre - from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the FUCK?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos tend to be full of. Thank you again. - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you - Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck RIGHT off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD, which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain. You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL (Gay Penetration License, according to that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest faece-encrusted cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat, but that name is KNOWN to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control', which is a description of the homosexual practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Chips upgrade (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666045)

Using and aftermarket chip for an engine is stonger than ever. Those system aren't that complex, there's justed better than before. Nothing can justify using a carburator in today engine except for racing application, and ever, new electronic fully configurable racing system are available. Performance chips are affordable and easy to install. And your comparaison with software is valueless, it's simply not the simple thing, car electronic is evolution.

Expensive Car Parts Needed (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666046)

Really the only thing you need from the key is the VATS chip off of it. You really don't need a functioning key to make things work. Electric current goes through the chip, and if the car doesn't receive the correct change in current, the car doesn't start. Requiring a key with VATS doesn't do much for the professional car theif or the theif with access to a dealership with a corrupt car parts guy (imagine that).


Does anyone know (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666053)

when K5 will be back? I can't take this crap anymore.

Lowered insurance vs. Hackable cars (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666059)

Honda's always rank in the top 10 of the "Worlds' most stolen cars" list. As such, insurance prices reflect this fact. A magnetic key scheme does well to lower insurance and potentially prevent your car from getting stolen.

I guess that's not an issue, though, for racer boys who like to put $10,000 of hop-ups into a $15,000 Honda.

When Hacking Included a Hacksaw... (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666062)

Anyone else remember when one could adjust the carburetor, adjust the spark gap, bolt on a different carb, or connect more speakers to the radio?

Now there's a computer running the fuel injection, firing the spark, there's no carb to fiddle with...and if you try to do something to the radio you're likely to trip an antitheft device and make it quit working.

Re:When Hacking Included a Hacksaw... (2)

Qeyser (6788) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666171)

I absolutely agree here. There was a time when doing your own basic car maintentance was pretty easy to figure out on your own. Every car worked in pretty much the same way, and if you had even a little help you could do your own basic engine, heating/cooling and electrical work.

Anything you couldn't do in your driveway you could do in a pay-per-day gararge with rented tools.

Do those even exist anymore? I've read about them but I've never seen even one (in my short life = )


Honda Hacking (1)

SmackDown (246562) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666065)

So, you want to hack your honda's computer? Try Apex'i [] Actually, you can just bypass it, and do all sorts of fun stuff like control your VTEC lobes, throw a turbo on there and control wastegates, do custom ignition. The best thing is, a grease monkey with some computer experience can easily do this. All you need to do is find someone with a dyno who will let you use it.

No loss of freedom. (2)

Xzzy (111297) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666068)

It's your car. You can do what you want with it. If you don't wanna put out the effort to hack in the features you want with a level of security that you want, that's not the manufacturer's fault, it's your fault for being lazy. ;)

Your alternative option is to buy a car thirty years old (air cooled VW's come highly reccomended) and just set up a servo to short circuit the wires you need short circuited, and presto, instant remote start.

Just don't leave the car in gear when to go to bed at night; use the emergency brake. ;)

It depends on your car..... (1)

MrWinkey (454317) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666069)

I drive an 89 Dodge Shelby and it is VERY Hackable so to speak. There are user groups out there for all of the 82-93 dodges who will help you do most anything from custom reprogramming of the ECU to reverse engineering the ECU chip to total race engine mods. The newer Dodge Neons are the same way. Totally moddable. With a few PC attachments and custom serial cables you can make you can even reprogram your own ECU. Part of the problem is that Honda has never been very Mod friendly due to it's reliability. For some strange reason people love to mod those cars up. My dad told me something a long time ago. You can make a fast car slow but it will cost you 2x as much, so why do that when you can make a fast car faster?

Re:It depends on your car..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666132)

Hondas are a lot more reliable than any dodge you can find, saying anything else just prove you don't know what you're talking about.

Response: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666075)

You are a fucking whiner, and probably a communist to boot. Nobody is keeping you from making your own, supremely hackable car, are they?

Yeah, i'm pretty pissed off too... (4, Funny)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666078)

I tried installing NetBSD on my car last week, only to find out the transmission in my Yugo is undocumented, and they won't tell me how to bootstrap the thing without having me sign an NDA first.

It's a shame, it really is.

hey now! (0)

p01 (195828) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666080)

dont forget to use the "CLUB"!
those thing works...

This just means you *REALLY* hack the car (2)

Christopher Bibbs (14) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666081)

Anything that is drop in simple (like a remote car starter package) isn't a hack. Working around this "feature" is hacking the car. I only assume that the author never considering hooking up the car to a serial line and starting to investigate the I/O.

I've hacked my motorcycles to make things work contrary to the original design on many occasions. Removing parts I didn't want that sucked way power, adding new circuits for auxillary devices, splice here, chop there, etc. Here's the important part, when I've asked other people, the typical response was "Gee, I've never done that." so we figured it out. Wanna know how long it took for someone to figure out that a '96 Kawasaki KLR hand guard could be fit onto a Suzuki SV650 with just a bit of machining? Now that was a hacker at work!

Cliff is a boring fag (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666086)

He has anal sex with chrisd because they swing both ways. Both ways of Hemos' floppy 3 centimetre cock. Power-ups to the Karnaugh maps!

Nail on the Head (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666090)

You hit it my friend! Since when does a dealer want to faciltiate you *not* having to take the car back to them for sservice?

Remember the service light deal with BMW? Only a BMW dealer had the module to turn the service light off, regardless of how well you'd had the vehicle maintained outside the dealership. It's all about control!

"Loss of freedom and control" (4, Insightful)

Skyshadow (508) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666091)

How on earth do you lose freedom here? You're still free to go buy a car that doesn't use this sort of antitheft system -- get a Kia or something. I don't recall seeing legislation requiring you to go buy a Honda.

Jesus, this is on the level of whining that you can't use the windshield wipers from your old car (which were brand new!) on a new car you just bought.

Re:"Loss of freedom and control" (1)

los furtive (232491) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666187)

Here here!

Re:"Loss of freedom and control" (1)

Arandir (19206) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666206)

Maybe they're too used to complaining that [insert MS product here] gives them no freedom, that they automatically assume that any little inconvenience is Anti-Freedom Subjugation By The Man.

Huh? (2)

Junta (36770) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666093)

Why do you want a remote control starter in the first place? This isn't even a case of lazniess, you *have* to sit in the car in order to do anything useful with it. And you say you feel uncomfortable about leaving a key in your unit in order to make it functional, but if they are already in your car and that far anyway, what would they need your *key* for? Starting the car? Well, if they are that far in they would have hot-wired if you didn't have a system in place.

Besdies, a remote control car starter just sounds like a *really* bad idea. No benefit, all kinds of possible security breaches. You want to make your car easier to steal for no good reason?

I'll admit that the fancy electronics are pushing out the really small-scale mechanics, but it is by no means microsoft tactics. They want to improve cars, make them harder to steal, more convenient and efficient. Yes, you may have a bit more proprietary stuff in each car, but I'll wager that even if the accessories are produced by a single company now, in the future other companies will have the circuitry for the different models just like they do forconventional parts.

This is one of the most oddball ideas I've seen on Slashdot.

Re:Huh? (2)

mblase (200735) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666116)

Besdies, a remote control car starter just sounds like a *really* bad idea. No benefit, all kinds of possible security breaches. You want to make your car easier to steal for no good reason?

Well, the usual reasons include: You want to warm your car up on a cold morning before you get into it. You want to air-condition your car cooler on a hot day before you get into it. You want to know where your car is in a crowded shopping mall parking lot.

These remote-starter devices have been around for many many years for good reasons, you know.

Re:Huh? (2)

sandidge (150265) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666195)

Or you're in the mafia or IRA and want to make sure there isn't a bomb hooked into your ignition system. ;)

Remote car start (1)

Mu*puppy (464254) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666134)

For all your one-man bank robbing needs! ;)

Your mind is like a parachute: if it doesn't work, you're screwed.

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

Natasha (31280) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666139)

I don't know where you live, but where I am (Montana) we have below zero winters. Having a remote starter means I can start the car before I'm dressed and have it warmed up by the time I'm ready to go.

Seems logical to me... (2)

mblase (200735) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666097)

If you want to protect your car from being started without a key, you need to make sure the key is physically there. Hence, no remote-starting. The way around this would seem to be buying the car with a remote-starter and anti-theft, or else buying one without both and then installing technology to do both.

I don't see why this means "hacking your car" is a thing of the past. It just means you need an anti-theft device that's more compatible.

An interesting combination (1)

PK_ERTW (538588) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666099)

Hmmm... You are looking for an interesting combination here... a remote starter combined with security for your car. I had no problem putting a remote starter in my car ('85 van), spend $80 at Canadian Tire, and less than an hour of work, but security wasn't a big concern for me.

What I think is if you want one of these devices, you are taking a security risk from the start. Me and a friend quite easily designed a garage door openor once that would scroll through the 1024 possible signals of a popular brand. I wonder if it would be very hard to design a starter remote to do a similar thing. Me-thinks no.

I guess a final question, is if your car is that new, what do you need a remote starter for? Any new car I've been in warms up very fast, and the windows defog right away. It is only us in old cars that really need one. And we arn't as worried about security.

"Where are we going... and why are we in this handbasket"

Re:An interesting combination (1)

jargoone (166102) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666210)

Me and a friend quite easily designed a garage door openor once that would scroll through the 1024 possible signals of a popular brand. I wonder if it would be very hard to design a starter remote to do a similar thing. Me-thinks no.

Me-thinks you are wrong. Did you do that neat scrolling trick back in '85 also? Because back then, they were still using those types of controllers.

Nowadays, we have our fancy flying cars, and to start them remotely, we have rolling-code transmitters. You can't brute-force them or "listen" and play back the code. Modern garage door openers do the same sort of thing. Dip switches are a thing of the past.

Ask Slashdot - Is technology passing me by? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666102)

Dear Cliff,
Am I getting old?
It just seems there is all this new fangled gubbins, and I feel a bit past it. You never had computers in cars in my days, oh no.
Is it just me, or was it better in the 90s?

GM vs Open Source (1)

JoeGrind (324053) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666105)

Conspiracy theorists start your engines!

If it's that big a problem for you buy an older car. Pass on all of the bells and whistles that computers bring to a car in exchange for the ability to remotely start the car, if that's what's truly important to you. Or better yet, find your local grease monkey, go to a scrap yard and build your car from scrap. You still have the choice.

The user maintainability of cars (1)

corran__horn (178058) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666106)

I personally drive a 1982 Chevy Impala, a boat. The great thing is that I can actually fix most problems--it failed its safety inspection recently due to some rather old parts, and I spent about 15hrs replacing all of the parts, which saved me $700-$200=$500, but it also took two weekends. You can actually do work on it, but it takes time.

Most people don't want to do this though, so as cars become more electronics based it helps the shops for all the people who can't/won't fix their own car. The other part is akin to the "windows" phenomenon-people don't care about quality, only that is gets the job done eventually. Cars now are designed to get the dealer the most profits, and forcing you to go in to get things fixed is a great way to do it.

spare key (5, Informative)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666109)

The chip in the key is required to trigger the anti-theft system, but the key itself isn't needed. You could cut the metal tongue off the key, rendering it useless for actually turning the starter, while the chip would still work.

You would, of course, be essentially disabling that part of the anti-theft system, but thieves now have ways around it anyway. If the key profile is identical to pre-chipped versions, it would also mean you could run your car with a non-chipped key, which is a lot easier to fit on your keychain.

Evolution (5, Insightful) (152591) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666127)

As the once proud owner of a 1966 Mustang, I remember what it was like to mod the hell out of my car. Now my wife has a Civic and I have a 4Runner (hey, we live in the mountains, so 4WD is a MUST on at least one vehicle). Modern cars are a LOT quiter, ride better, get better fuel economy, and are better for the environment. Equivalent sized (outside dimentions) vehicles actually have MORE room inside them now, more luxuries (all but the cheapest cars now have power windows/locks/disc brakes/etc, are much safer, etc, etc.

All of this comes at a price. You now nearly need to be a rocket scientist (or at least an automotive engineer) to work on them, but IMO, the price is worthwhile. Meanwhile, my 5.0L V8 '66 Mustang used to get about 16 MPG and had about 220HP, yet you can buy a 4-cylinder Subaru WRX with 225HP (Turbo) which gets ~27MPG, and will let you walk away in a crash.

Yes, cars have gotten harder to work on, but they've also gotten safer, lighter, less polluting, and more luxurious. If you want to tinker with your vehicle, buy a 2-door Civic and mod it up, or buy a classic to restore like I did. Or get a kit, and build it from scratch.

Car thieves have it all wrong.... (5, Insightful)

Restil (31903) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666130)

I mean.. why break into cars, hotwire them, and drive them off. The smart thief would save up and get himself a tow truck. The ONLY person who would pay any attention at all is the owner. The alarm could be going off and nobody would give it a second glance. Chances are good, nobody would ever even get a plate #. You could steal the car in plain sight, and never hear a peep about it.

No antitheft system in the world will help against a dedicated theif. The most effective system would probably be to just remove the distributor cap, or a kludge to disconnect the battery easily. No car thief is gonna spend time under the hood finding out why the car won't start. Of course, you get bit on convienence issues. But you'll never have to concern yourself with car theft.


Step back and think about it. (5, Informative)

karmaflux (148909) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666138)

I think that comparing fuel-injection to closed-source programming is a bit ridiculous. So it's not as easy to work on as a carburetor -- you can still buy a book and learn to work on your fuel injectors. Automobile engines have grown more complicated over time. All technology does. Honda's decision that fuel-injection is more efficient than carburetion does not indicate they are trying to force you out from under your hood.

As for third-party ROM upgrades, these things are falling by the wayside because, among other reasons, most onboard computers use EEPROMS now, and when most people monkey with their engines they just wind up wrecking the timing and trashing the performance anyway.

And there's not reason to compare everything you dislike to Microsoft. That radio keylock is a Honda option, nobody forced you to buy it, nobody is keeping you from removing that option from your car, and so on. A little time with a pair of diags and a soldering iron will remove the problem forever.

As for leaving a spare key installed, what makes you think that's less secure than installing a remote starter? I built a little gadget not six months ago. It's a lot of fun. I go into a mall parking lot and press a button. A couple of 555 timers start cranking... and a few seconds later so do all the tricked-out imports in the parking lot. Granted, I still can't get in the vehicles, but I sure can start 'em up.

In conclusion, if you want to play with your engine, or your ignition system, or whatever, buy a car you know how to work on. If you buy a 2002 model and can't figure out how to monkey with it, don't blame the auto manufacturer for knowing more about cars than you.

Solution (1)

Captoo (103399) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666142)

Sounds to me like you need a brown '78 station wagon. Not only is it completely hackable, but you won't need any kind of theft deterrent!

Unfortunately, so. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666143)

Once upon a time, I could fix my own car. Hell, I spent four years in the Air Farce [] , fixing jets, my grandfather was a mechanic, as was my dad (Navy [] , not Air Force). As it stands, I can't fix my wife's Chevy Malibu; how does one fine-tune the timing on a distributor-less ignition system? You don't. You take it to the dealer, cough up a bundle, and have them fix it. We just coughed up a pile of $$$ to get the alternator replaced; I couldn't figure out how to troubleshoot the blasted thing.

I was able to do most of the work on my 1988 Honda CRX, and dad and I pretty much rebuilt my 1978 Mercury Grand Marquis (hmmm, 1978, 1988, now a 1998; interesting).

What I would love to see is a car which is simple enough that the average shade tree mechanic can fix everything. Unfortunately, I wonder if the car manufacturers make piles of money off "factory certification" for the mechanics, much like MS makes money of MCSE certification. It wouldn't be the first time a company has subsidized losses on an item with money made on repairs.

I was going to give my $0.02 worth, but it ended up being a dime.

Sometimes more (2)

bluGill (862) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666145)

Most of the old car work was thing like points, and carberators. Both are gone, replaced by something that is not only more reliable, but easier to controll. A good hacker can replace the comptuer on his car with something tuned to his likeing, and has more information doing it. Old cars never had O2 sensors to help you figgure out what the right mixture setting on the carbrator, new cars have that sensor, and the ability to change things in REAL TIME for the best mixture. (for some definition of best understanding the emissions/proformance/milage trade off)

Sure it is more work, but then turning a screw on the carb wasn't a hack it was just easy to do, and needed to be done often enough that everyone could do it. Today there are no screws to turn so the real work is a real hack.

Similar Article in Sunday's Boston Globe (2, Informative)

IgnorantKnucklehead (324494) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666148)

There was an article about this topic in the Boston Sunday Globe this week [] . But the author of the article doesn't necessarily cry over the recently announced demise of cars like the Camaro and the Firebird. In order to get another 50 horsepower out of one of those beasts meant "boring out the cylinders, tinkering with valves, changing pistons ... a greasy, lengthy job." With the new "tuner cars" all you've got to do is drop in a $500 tuner chip.

GeekMobile (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666149)

look at the geek group's [] website and look for their geekmobile

I've experienced this for a while. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666150)

I was working for my fathers trucking company a couple years back and we noticed the same thing when we worked on older trucks vs new trucks. The engines had increasingly smaller parts, that were more liable to get gunked up and/or damaged. Unlike alot of the older trucks the parts were not repairable nor were they interchangable. On an old Cummins engine you could (with slight) modification switch out the water pump with another brand or repair it by hand with not much more than an Acetlyne (sp?) torch and a hammer. But on a more modern engine you HAD to buy replacement parts specifically.

This simple concept of replacing everything when it breaks instead of fixing it is becoming more and more common everyday in all types of industry that once required a great deal of technical prowess and ingenuity. Kind of like being dependant on an IDE to write code, you never learn what to do when you can't just replace it.

I can state for a fact that old time mechanics were true Hackers (note the capitalization.) These men didn't just simply spend their evenings on their duff at a nice clean desk typing away at their little keyboards. They got their hands dirty and cut and smashed. I'll never forget the way my fathers hands look after 40 years of fixing things. Think about the non-computer Hackers who've gotten us here through the years so we can do what we truly love without having to break our knuckles in the process.

Fiber Optics (1)

MaxPower2000 (541696) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666157)

when my dad got out of college [] and was hired by dupont [] , where he continues to work today, his first project was to replace the entire electrical accessory system in a car with fiber optics. turn signals, headlights and things of that sort.

i guess the idea turned out to be not as useful as thought because he was moved to management soon thereafter (isn't that the story with all engineers?) and has been there since and i have yet to see a fiber optic car.

why not leave the key in the car?? (2) (142825) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666158)

Why not leave the key in the car?

Is it that much more of a security risk as having a remote starter for the car? Having a remote starter for a car always seemed to me as an security risk in itself. Why is it needed? It is not as though the car will park itself for you and pick you up at the door.

Oh good lord! (1, Insightful)

talesout (179672) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666159)

What? Couldn't you find something about computers to bitch about today?

Seriously, how is this reducing your freedom? You still have the freedom to buy an older car, or even modify your newer car to use the older engines and transmissions. The bottom line is that a lot of the modern computerized gimmicks in cars are there to increase performance, and mileage. Some minor things are done to increase security. But I really don't see how requiring the proper code to be administered (in this case with the key in the automatic starter) is restricting your freedom. And how is the little addon that requires a key in it "that much more work"? You make it sound as if that one extra little thing is a world ending situation, while the entire project would have been a yawn without that.

Yes, cars are becoming less hackable. But, in case you haven't noticed, so is damn near everything else around us nowadays. Things get more and more complex, with more and more specialized parts, and eventually it becomes less "hackable" by the common man. When the internal combustion engine was invented it was a fairly simple device. But progress has lead to changes that are vast improvements over the original. One of those improvements is a computer that controls all sorts of aspects of the engines performance. Is that really a bad thing?

Seriously, not everything is out to get you. Just calm down and take a rational look at it. That, or go back to bitching about Microsoft. (Oh, never mind. I see you managed to fit that into an article on cars anyway. Hey, wait a minute! Since when was Slashdot a site for car jockeys?)

Now, this is hacking cars.. (3, Informative)

cmowire (254489) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666161)

Now, this is hacking cars [] .. ;)

Hackable vehicles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666165)

You want hackable vehicles? Look at the contortions people put Harley Davidson's through. Or how about all of the weird things people feel compelled to do with VW's.
All old-school metal hacking, in the truest sense of the word. Add some basic sensors(head temp, oil temp and pressure, rpm, etc), an aftermarket fuel injection system, and tie in an embedded linux system to the network to grab info and present it in a cool way.
Presto. A vehicle that is fit to your exact specifications, and lets you tweak ignition parameters on the fly.

taking this a little too far (2, Insightful)

the right sock (160156) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666167)

Computers making modern cars un-hackable? That's a bit far-fetched. For just about any car there's dozens of custom mods for them that can be installed by any mechanic. There are still 3rd-party performance chips you can put in. You can still change just about everything in a car, the only thing different is that it's a little harder to do. You can go get all the computers that a dealer uses and do all the tweaks yourself. Yeah it's more expensive, but so are cars and so are the parts inside them.
And I wouldn't go around comparing cars from the past to open-source and modern cars to microsoft - that's essentially saying open-source software, though infinitely hackable, is inefficient, outdated, and insecure. Drawing a parellel between Microsoft (closed-source) and modern cars would in effect say MS software is clean, efficient, secure, and performs well out of the box.
If modern cars are less "hackable" than older cars, why are there thousands of custom shops dotting the country, hooking up modern cars? Why are there still car shows for people to show off their mods (some of which leaving the original car nearly unrecognizable)?
Cars aren't getting less hackable, you just have to do it differently than before.

Spare Key (1)

ruvreve (216004) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666168)

I don't understand why you are worried about leaving a spare key hidden in the car somewhere? Assuming that it isn't placed in an easily accessible place you shouldn't have any problems with 'thieves' getting control of the spare key. Any thief that wants your car will use a more or less sophisticated way of starting your car. An example would be grabbing the signal that the remote starter uses and just reproducing it when you are not around. The dealership will also have to install either a module or 'spare key' to allow the remote starter to work.

read Sport Compact Car and see for yourself (2)

mr.ska (208224) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666172)

On one hand, you're right. Cars are getting more complex, and your average Joe Blow Monkeywrench can't take his set of Snap On crescent wrenches and play with his car very easily anymore.

On the other hand, the aftermarket is keeping up with the electronicification of cars quite well, from what I've read. Yes, there are a lot of electronics in cars, but that simply means you either work with them or around them now.

In your case, you couldn't install a remote starter because of your antitheft system. So? Perhaps you should choose a different system (if available) that won't interfere with $50 off-the-shelf Pepboys remote starting systems. Yes, you didn't have to make this choice before. Yes, before you could do it all yourself. Well, welcome to the future.

What it really boils down to is that it is still possible to hack your car (as you put it), but the effort and price associated with doing so has increased. That's all. Basing your assumption purely on your own single experience is hardly scientific.

I recommend that you pick up an issue of Sport Compact Car [] sometime, and see what they're doing. They're not exactly the remote-starter types, but they are doing just about everything under the sun imaginable to everyday vehicles, including full standalone engine management. Yes, it's expensive, but it's most certainly a very cool hack.

It is a friggin' car! (1)

spdemac (537862) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666174)

We are talking about a friggin' car here folks! Loss of freedom! Give me a break. We have far more pressing things to be concerned with then your freedom to "hack" um, install after market parts in a Honda. Buy a car from a company that does not use this system. After all it is not like you are short of choices in automobiles. Hey maybe you should get a bike or walk instead.

What ever happened to... (1)

checkyoulater (246565) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666181)

Block Heaters? Don't all cars still have these things in them? Who needs a remote starter when the engine block is already warm enough?

Plug it in, and forget about it until the morning.

Disagree (2)

jayfoo2 (170671) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666182)

"It almost seems like a Microsoft-like statement, to tell you they're doing all of this to reduce theft, while really they're doing it to ensure you are forced into coming back to their dealerships..."

I disagree. A feature that requires the key to be present to start the car is useful to almost every end user. It can help keep your car from being stolen. It is true that it inconvieniences a small percentage of users who want to fiddle but overall it is a positve thing.

On the other hand Microsoft (and lots of other companies) tend to add features that are not good for the user. One example of this is the XP authentication nightmare. Another (non MS example) is the SDMI. How about DVD region coding. These are all 'features' that make the product less useful.

I think that's an important difference. It's the difference between a feature you don't like and a feature that no one likes.

Car Hacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666201)

I don't know what you mean by saying cars aren't hackable anymore. There are plenty of aftermarket chips, and mods, especially for hondas! Circut Diagrams for many of the cars are available out there, which would assist you in adding anything you wanted. And for non electrical hacking, that hasn't changed much. The procedure of putting on a new intake or exhaust manifold is much the same. And having a mig welder helps alot for making pieces fit that shouldn't!

Security???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666202)

There's no security concerns with a remote starter. You start the car remotely but to do anything with it the key must be in the contact. Press the gas, engine stop, Press brake, same thing. The worst someone can do to you is starting the car and let it runs, whooooooo, that's scary.

When it's -40 outside you like your remote starter.

The Aircooled VW community bleeds for you (2, Interesting)

jafac (1449) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666207)

Yup, lessee. Car running a little sluggish? Pop the hood, spin that old 10mm box-end, twist the distributor clockwise a few degrees, now I'm humming right along. Oops, getting a little hot - turn a screw on the carb - now I'm running so rich I can smell the gasoline in the exhuast.

I drive past the smog-check stations and scoff.

There has to be a reason why lots of people don't mind putting the time and effort into maintaining 40 year old econoboxes.

Maybe because everything that's been offered since then has been lacking.

This is just the begining... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2666214)

Scott McNealy has predicted time and time again about the power of Java and whatnot in cars-- eventually the ability to have a bidding war between gas stations on street corners so you can get the cheapest deal for petrol in your car. Imagine the systems for that and imagine the possibilities and things you can control and change. You just happen to have a car with its own electronic hacks which make yours more difficult.

A good friend of mine has an S2000 coupe which he's hardwiring his own HUD into, direct off the ODB2 settings. Pretty amazing stuff.

On the flip-side you have things like a radio which can play MP3s [] installed in a 1958 Corvette [] .

Just like the advent of front wheel drive has changed the addage of 'no replacement for displacement' (the ability to turbo the piss out of your Mitsubishi and have it smoke a brand new 'vette) as the electronics grow and change the hacks to your car will grow and change.

Huh? (2)

CaseyB (1105) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666218)

It's almost a little anti-competitive.

That stupid little quote caps off the dumbest story I've seen on /. in MONTHS. He's so deep in his own ignorance that he figured the only way to save his silly little rant was to add a "your rights online" buzzphrase. "Honda is just like *Microsoft!*".

This dumbass is upset because a key is required to start the car. Uh, brainiac: that's the whole PURPOSE of keys. Honda is finally doing keys RIGHT, and you're bitching about it.

Cut the key in half (1)

0tim0 (181143) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666222)

Not that it's really what your asking, but if you're afraid of leaving the key in your car, just cut the 'key' part off. The electrontic thing is in the black plastic part of the key that's really more of a handle.


cut key? (1)

ender-iii (161623) | more than 12 years ago | (#2666223)

The key has to be there, but it doesn't have to be cut, does it? Just leave an uncut key there for it to sense, and whatever.....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>