If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WFTV Orlando)   Nissan develops giant electric egg on wheels that eliminates reverse (with pic)   (wftv.com) divider line 168
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

32267 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Sep 2005 at 5:55 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-09-30 06:56:53 PM
geometer

>>Well that would make parallel parking a lot easier and quicker.
Actually, that would make it perpendicular parking.


You don't have your license do you...


KittyLitterCrunchyYummy: The range wouldn't need to be very big either so passing cars or even hack0rs in floors above wouldn't be able to touch it without extremely difficult effort.

The range of the cars transmitter has nothing to do with the range of a hack0rs transmitter. If someone wanted to send a signal from floors above, as long as their transmitter is strong enough to reach, that's all that matters to the cars receiver on the steering end (barring other means of security.)
 
2005-09-30 06:56:57 PM
rbuzby

"You guys are nuts. That is the best golf cart ever."

AHHHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Classic! New keyboard,etc

/sucky golfer
 
2005-09-30 06:59:37 PM
So if you get in an accident in this thing, can you make an omelette?
 
2005-09-30 07:02:13 PM
Instead of trying to engineer insanely complex ways for people to parallel park or back up easier, how about people just LEARN TO FARKING DRIVE
 
2005-09-30 07:04:37 PM
Eggs are actually very strong in certain types of collisions. Ever try to break one from the end?
 
2005-09-30 07:04:44 PM
Immaculate_Misconception:

They've been controlling planes with the same 'fly-by-wire' technology for over a decade, and it's proven to be FAR more reliable than mechanical systems.

Except if the electricity fails. Fly-by-wire in airplanes almost always has backup hydraulics. But this isn't "fly by wire". It's "fly by wireless". How long before someone does a signal-capture and jamms the frequency?
 
2005-09-30 07:12:33 PM
Krode

You don't have your license do you...

...have to talk slower to Canadians? Why yes, I do. Oh, you're Canadian? Sorry. FIND AN AMERICAN AND HAVE THEM READ MY POST TO YOU.

Hoser
 
2005-09-30 07:12:51 PM
Hehe, now with 360 swivel action so you can face diretly towards the people you flip the bird at.
 
2005-09-30 07:19:07 PM
geometer: FIND AN AMERICAN AND HAVE THEM READ MY POST TO YOU.

I don't think many Americans would get it. Especially those who haven't had math above the high school level. Good bait though.
 
2005-09-30 07:21:57 PM
The range of the cars transmitter has nothing to do with the range of a hack0rs transmitter. If someone wanted to send a signal from floors above, as long as their transmitter is strong enough to reach, that's all that matters to the cars receiver on the steering end (barring other means of security.)

and how would the hackors several floors above get the ID of the transmitter the cars control receiver will accept? You can send signals all day long but if they don't have the right ID code or such, the receiver will ignore them. Now if the transmittors in the car had long range, it'd be easy for hackors to intercept those signlas, get the ID then use it to send bogus commands.... thus the short range signal requirements = security bonus
 
2005-09-30 07:22:03 PM
OrionStyles

...have to talk slower to Canadians? Why yes, I do. Oh, you're Canadian? Sorry. FIND AN AMERICAN AND HAVE THEM READ MY POST TO YOU.


Krode's post was goofy (doesn't he know what "perpendicular" means?) but why do you have to make this a national insult? Instead of insulting one person for making a foolish post, you have to insult a whole farking country?

Jerkass.
 
2005-09-30 07:29:16 PM
krode:

The range of the cars transmitter has nothing to do with the range of a hack0rs transmitter. If someone wanted to send a signal from floors above, as long as their transmitter is strong enough to reach, that's all that matters to the cars receiver on the steering end (barring other means of security.)

True enough, but I don't think the danger here is that a hacker would be able to gain control of the car. A 256-bit public/private key is virtually unbreakable and a manufacturer could easily go much higher than that at the ranges and packet size. Heck, they probably would use licensed freqs that are coded to a specific car, strong transmitter, propriatary encryption, and actually hacking would be impossible.

The concern would be that it could be easily jammed if the user knew the freq and had a strong transmitter.
 
2005-09-30 07:30:03 PM
I know what perpendicular means. And regardless of the geometric definition, parking in a row (like along the street facing the same direction) is called parallel parking, not perpendicular.

Especially since perpendicular refers to facing at a 90 degree angle to something, I can't think of anywhere you'd park like that. Unless you're an idiot... hence my reference to your drivers license.
 
2005-09-30 07:34:02 PM
KittyLitterCrunchyYummy: thus the short range signal requirements = security bonus

But then you run the risk of incendental interference causing the component to stop working properly. You know, like power lines, other wireless signals on a harmonious freq, etc. No, there is a very real power threshold for an application like that and a sufficiently sensitive spectrum analyzer could probably pick it up at a reasonable distance.

Now, if they used frequency hopping on some sort of specialized algorithm, they could minimize the risk but not eliminate it. All you'd need would be a sufficiently large sample of the wireless signals to know the range and jamming becomes practical.

It a moot point anyway. The thing is never going to hit the road and the NTSB would probably never allow a "drive-by-wireless" system to be implemented, but it's cool technology.
 
2005-09-30 07:36:19 PM
krode:

I know what perpendicular means. And regardless of the geometric definition, parking in a row (like along the street facing the same direction) is called parallel parking, not perpendicular.

But if you could turn your wheels 90% so that they faced toward the curb then you'd drive in perpendicular to the curb and thus it'd be perpendicular parking for you.. :P
 
2005-09-30 07:37:22 PM
This car will come in very handy the next time I'm caught driving the wrong way down a one-way street.
 
2005-09-30 07:37:50 PM
Just because it's wireless doesn't mean its RF. It could be optical, mechanical, or use some sort of ESP or negative bazonga energy waves. Your car has wireless steering now, it has a mechanical linkage.
/pedantic
 
2005-09-30 07:38:45 PM
krode: I know what perpendicular means. And regardless of the geometric definition, parking in a row (like along the street facing the same direction) is called parallel parking, not perpendicular.

By that definition, every parking space in every parking lot in the world represents "parallel parking". I mean, the cars are parallel to each other, right?

Especially since perpendicular refers to facing at a 90 degree angle to something, I can't think of anywhere you'd park like that. Unless you're an idiot... hence my reference to your drivers license.

Here's a hint - if the tires rotate 90 degrees, they are then __________ to the body of the car.
 
2005-09-30 07:38:52 PM
geometer: ...have to talk slower to Canadians? Why yes, I do. Oh, you're Canadian? Sorry. FIND AN AMERICAN AND HAVE THEM READ MY POST TO YOU.

As a Canadian, I take no offense from this post, mainly because it works against itself. Anyone dumb enough to make such a post surely cannot insult another person's (let alone an entire country's) intelligence.
 
2005-09-30 07:39:15 PM
scooby111

Well, maybe, if you want to get symantic about it, only because of the direction you are travelling, not the way you are parking :)
 
2005-09-30 07:39:40 PM
KittyLitterCrunchyYummy

and how would the hackors several floors above get the ID of the transmitter the cars control receiver will accept?

That's easy. They would use the same technology my sisters neighbor uses to change the channel on her TV and haxors use to open stranger's garage doors, it's call production lazyness.

You see, when a car is made, a key and lock is randomly selected. The amount of keys they choose from is actually pretty low. This is true for physical and electronic keys. The key for YOUR car can start at least one other car in a normal mall parking lot.

Now for wireless signals within a car, make a jammer with a compact flash and USB. That memory stores the signal controls for a few thousand cars (all collected nationwide by people with too much time on their hands). Then just JAM them all at once. Hell, just jam the frequency range that they controls use, that's limited by the FCC.

It can be done. Easily.
 
2005-09-30 07:42:01 PM
said it, will say it twice...submitted w/ a much better headline.

/submitted w/ a much better headline
 
2005-09-30 07:42:05 PM
anyway, this car is a concept, it won't be made for probably a lot more reasons then the drive-by-wireless and the rotating cab. People realy should learn to drive, not make cars that drive for them as a solution.

It's why I think all driving tests should be done with manual transmissions.
 
2005-09-30 07:45:05 PM
 
2005-09-30 07:46:40 PM
scifarker, FlatEarthSociety


I kind of hate to admit it but, on the new car front, I'm of interested in driving the Saturn (!?) Sky:

--------------------------

it is related to a Lotus Elise, although the engine is in the wrong place. how bad could it posibly be?


It's actually the sister to the Vauxhall Vx220. Which, FlatEarthSociety, You are correct in mentioning Lotus since it has one of their engines (which is a toyota engine), but it is not in the Lotus direct bloodline. Instead, it's Vauxhall...which I think is Holden....ugh, I waste too much brain space on cars.

oh and about the "egg"....Nissans blow.

/worked at a Nissan dealer for 3 years.
//Parts and Service.
///They would be no where with out the original Z.
 
2005-09-30 07:46:53 PM
Ha

 
2005-09-30 07:48:29 PM
How does this eliminate reverse? Seems to me that even if you rotate the driver, a different gear is going to be required to drive the car in the opposite direction.

/if i sit backwards and drive my car in reverse, i'm still driving in reverse
 
2005-09-30 07:51:06 PM
nugz4lunch: How does this eliminate reverse? Seems to me that even if you rotate the driver, a different gear is going to be required to drive the car in the opposite direction.

It's electric. There are many ways to overcome this with an electric car, they don't use gearing similar to a combustion engine car.
 
2005-09-30 07:57:05 PM
You see, when a car is made, a key and lock is randomly selected. The amount of keys they choose from is actually pretty low. This is true for physical and electronic keys. The key for YOUR car can start at least one other car in a normal mall parking lot.

Yeah, this is all true, however you still missed the important part. Look up how network cards work and the internet. Every single card has a unique hardware based address (or MAC as we geeks call it) that usually looks like geek code: FF:04:E5:90:BA:7D or such. Using something similar to this MAC, the car controls can be set to only accept signals originating from that specific controller. heck, if they wanted to get fancy it could use a rotating key sequence based off that MAC address, the point is, it is likely to be a lot harder to hack than you think and is definitely not something a lazy/armchair hacker could hope to pull off by following a few webpages and building a device in his mom's basement. =)
 
2005-09-30 07:59:27 PM
nugz4lunch

How does this eliminate reverse? Seems to me that even if you rotate the driver, a different gear is going to be required to drive the car in the opposite direction.

I suspect this car doesn't use gears, not in the way most people understand them anyhow. I'm willing to bet, this car has either an generator and/or batteries, instead of an normal car engine. Each tire is on an electric motor and to make the tire move in the other direction the current direction is reversed. In terms of efficency, I'm willing to bet, this type of design can (though probabally isn't now) be FAR superior to current car design, with all it's moving parts.
 
2005-09-30 08:01:47 PM
Oh, and yeah, good call Scooby111, jamming it the way you describe would be a tad bit easier to accomplish. Hrmm, there's gotta be way around that too though, it's too late ona Friday for me to think of it if it does exist. heh. They'd still make swell golf carts as somebody pointed out above.
 
2005-09-30 08:02:14 PM
Not only can you easily determine what MAC addresses another card is using, it's easy to spoof.

Address blocking != security
 
433 [TotalFark]
2005-09-30 08:03:26 PM
Krode, I've said it before, and it looks like I'll have to say it again. You're an asshole.

But the great thing is, when you're an asshole, the whole world knows you're an asshole. So hopefully, no one will have to call you out again. Ever.
 
2005-09-30 08:04:07 PM
If it can roll a nice katamari in Spain, I'm buying it!
 
2005-09-30 08:04:41 PM
Strobe, how can you tell the MAC of a car controller that only broadcasts it's MAC a few inches or so? Distance is key here, not address blocking.
 
2005-09-30 08:09:21 PM
krode: Well, maybe, if you want to get symantic about it, only because of the direction you are travelling, not the way you are parking :)

What does anti-virus protection have to do with the discussion? And isn't the direction you're travelling the major component of the way you are parking?
 
2005-09-30 08:12:34 PM
KittyLitterCrunchyYummy

I understand how the intarweb works. The question is NOT how to make a specific car right, it's how using wirelss (even encrypted) in cars is VERY insecure. You don't need the MAC address of your wireless card to completely stop your web browsing. You just need a radio jammer, it would probabally help to know which channel it's on, but I'm willing to bet if have enough power, you just need to know the frequency. Drive the S/N so far down, that the receiver can't read a real signal. It doesn't matter if it's encrypted.

Now, with cars. The frequency range is going to be the same for all models. If they use encryption, I'm sure just like with keys and car door openers, they will use a limited number of keys. With encryption keys that you can make random car turn left, which is good enough (done via spamming the shiat of the known keys).

Lets say they are using hardware specific addressing and you want hack a specific car, lets say someone you want to hurt, you run some tests. The hardware addresses are going to be in a limited range, in most likelihood, to represent a specific model and perhaps year. Spam their car till you turn on the headlights or whatnot. It won't be easy, but it will be possible. Once you get their car to do one desired action, you can now make them crash remotely.

Wireless is NEVER secure. In most likelihood, someone won't be able to specificly target your car, but some asshole could crash cars at random merely by jamming them.
 
2005-09-30 08:13:36 PM
Talk about a solution looking for a problem...
 
2005-09-30 08:19:41 PM
Turn the roof the other way...et voila!!!!



No toxic emissions either, unless Fred hits a rock and farts.
 
2005-09-30 08:21:19 PM
It's not reverse... it's the other forward.

/stoned car designers should not watch anime
 
2005-09-30 08:27:14 PM
Renowned transvestite sexologist

Great post, actually. I never really claimed it'd be totally secure, anyone knows that's not possibly with today's technology, but it *is* secure enough from the lazy/armchair hackers. But like you said, without additional steps, it's pretty vulnerable as is. Well, as we assume it is, without knowing the technical details of the car we're merely guessing. it could have a simple contact under the bottom that while not a continuous metal connection, it would remain always in contact and that would transmit the signals. that'd still be considered wireless, right? Or maybe you could sheild the receiver so it could only accept signals from a very limited area, but again, with high enough power transmittor you could still jam it, but at that point, it'd be pretty bleedin obvious who was doing it because they'd be lugging around a ton of equipment, heh. but with a pure wireless controller as in computer stuff goes? yeah, i'd never drive one now. unless it was a golf cart... maybe.
 
2005-09-30 08:28:44 PM
They totaly ripped me off!

Here is a link to a float I designed for the Circus last year.

http://www.ringling.com/135star/

(sorry for the crappy picture)

That thing the clown is standing in can rotate 180 degrees while tooling along at 5mph. Our only pukers blamed the cotton candy. Not me.
 
2005-09-30 08:34:13 PM
Looks like a mini popemobile.
 
2005-09-30 08:48:23 PM
KittyLitterCrunchyYummy

Using the insecurities of wireless controls in a car to do something bad won't be for the faint of heart. We won't have to phear script kiddies. Problem is, these days, there are more than enough people who understand technology, that someone WILL kill using that knowledge. The fun part of all of this, it will be near to impossible to prove they did it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Even if they manufactor goes though the trouble of using a ranodmly generated public key system, using a random salt. I'm willing to be first gen machines, won't truely have a random key. Making a "random" object in a computer is a pain in ass, hence my assumption that manufactorers will use a "random enough" (that is a stock of keys, preselected) key with some form of salt added. Hitting the right key/salt combo for a specific car, will be unrealisitic. Hitting the right key/salt for a random car, isn't. One person sending a few thousand signals every second, while riding down a major interstate, would eventually making a random car do something unintended.
 
2005-09-30 08:48:46 PM
All of you ponying up the reliability of aircraft fly-by-wire systems, you're comparing apples to oranges.

What's the typical inspection schedule on your typical commercial aircraft? Down once a month for a day or two, then once a year for a week, then once every five years for a month? Planes spend like 15% of their time being looked at by a mechanic if nothing is wrong.

Sure, fixing a plane will take many times longer than your car. And most commercial planes spend more time in the air than your car does on the road.. But even if it's half as often it'll be unacceptable to the public. I don't want to spend two days a month, every month, at the dealership.

And what happens when they're sold secondary market and no longer checked by the dealer? Well, they no longer get their service. No one in their right mind buys a used car knowing it'll be "broken down" twice a month and have to be serviced out of pocket. They buy it and ignore the service.
 
2005-09-30 08:54:40 PM
If this were available in Canada, it would be all of 15 minutes before someone decided to see whether they could rotate the cab 360 degrees while driving at 140km/h on the 401...

In the UK, it's simple: If you can't reverse park and reverse around corners, you fail your driving test. Which is quite possibly a ruse to let driving instructors keep female students longer. Ooops! Did I really say THAT?
 
xia
2005-09-30 09:07:36 PM
Renowned transvestite sexologist

Hrmm, excellent food for thought there. Though you got me thinking about the random thing. Couldn't a computer simply use current time as a base for generating a random number? An over simple example would be counting number of milliseconds from a random date until now() then use that as the seed to generate a random number. Even if the clock was reset this should always generate a truely random number relative to that computer instance. In a car, you could even tie in the odometer reading, while possible to figure out with gps and a ton of effort for specific cars, a random car's odometer would be nearly impossible. Could also setup a rotating frequency on the wireless set at random intervals as well, but that'd drive cost and complexity way for a less than significant increase of security. hrmmm... now i'm glad i don't do security for a living these days.
 
2005-09-30 09:21:33 PM

Why wireless? It's not like slip rings haven't been around for at least a hundred years.

After all, I used to have a vehicle which also could turn the passengers all the way around in a circle while keeping electrical signals going between the hull and turret. It was called a tank. I think a lot of people may have heard of them.

 
2005-09-30 09:23:38 PM
talldarknstinky: or negative bazonga energy waves
Dude, subscribe me to your newsletter at once!
 
2005-09-30 09:25:58 PM
Wow! Now I can get a vanity plate for my Hummer that says, "EGGBEATER"!

/After my P enlargement operation, of course.
 
Displayed 50 of 168 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report