The fragility of car computers revealed.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Doug on 24 May 2010 06:48 On 24 May, 10:01, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > > >> The other thing to consider is the major difference between dedicated > >> embedded computers and generic PCs. PCs mostly crash due to user error, > >> primarily in the installation (often unintentional) of poor-quality > >> software. With embedded systems, that's not an option - when did your > >> washing machine, fridge or freeview box last crash? > > Freeview boxes quite often. > > Really? If so, then I suspect it's an aged one that's experiencing > hardware issues. > Yes everything becomes aged with time, including car computers. You never can tell when they might pack up. At least with a Freeview box it doesn't happen when you are doing 70 or more on a motorway. > > > I don't waste energy with a washing machine > > Hands up who's surprised? <looks around> Nope, don't see any hands. > > > and my little fridge is not computer controlled. > > Then it'll be ancient and hugely inefficient. > No its quite recent and efficient and only needs a thermostat and not a computer. I take it yours is much more lavish and therefore less environmentally friendly. > > > Anyway, embeded might still malfunction due to hardware or power supply > > faults, etc., leaving the driver no longer in control. > > No, leaving the driver with a mechanical fail-safe. > You wish. In case you hadn't noticed yet, or didn't want to notice more likely, some Toyota faults have been attributed to car computer problems. -- UK Radical Campaigns. http://www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Doug on 24 May 2010 06:49 On 24 May, 11:37, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > > >> A car computer doesn't fail or crash and leave the driver with no > >> control. > > How do you know? Source? > > Because it's a requirement of type approval that the systems must "fail > safe" - there must be a purely physical/mechanical connection that > ensures that the vehicle can still be steered, and there must be two > separate hydraulic circuits that ensure that the vehicle can still be > braked. > Again, source? > > Even if the vehicle's battery fell out of the bottom, you could still > steer and brake. > Source? -- UK Radical Campaigns. http://www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Adrian on 24 May 2010 06:50 Doug <jagmad(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> >> The other thing to consider is the major difference between >> >> dedicated embedded computers and generic PCs. PCs mostly crash due >> >> to user error, primarily in the installation (often unintentional) >> >> of poor-quality software. With embedded systems, that's not an >> >> option - when did your washing machine, fridge or freeview box last >> >> crash? >> > Freeview boxes quite often. >> Really? If so, then I suspect it's an aged one that's experiencing >> hardware issues. > Yes everything becomes aged with time, including car computers. You > never can tell when they might pack up. At least with a Freeview box it > doesn't happen when you are doing 70 or more on a motorway. Of course, that ignores (what a surprise...) the very different standards of hardware build quality for a controller intended for a 10-20yr service life in a hostile environment and a disposable bit of cheap consumer tat. Anyway, even if it does, you'll just glide gently to a halt safely on the hard shoulder. >> > and my little fridge is not computer controlled. >> Then it'll be ancient and hugely inefficient. > No its quite recent and efficient and only needs a thermostat and not a > computer. Then it will most certainly have embedded control electronics.
From: Adrian on 24 May 2010 06:57 Doug <jagmad(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> >> A car computer doesn't fail or crash and leave the driver with no >> >> control. >> > How do you know? Source? >> Because it's a requirement of type approval that the systems must "fail >> safe" - there must be a purely physical/mechanical connection that >> ensures that the vehicle can still be steered, and there must be two >> separate hydraulic circuits that ensure that the vehicle can still be >> braked. > Again, source? >> Even if the vehicle's battery fell out of the bottom, you could still >> steer and brake. > Source? Construction & Use regs. They're not online in their entirety, though.
From: Man at B&Q on 24 May 2010 08:58
On May 23, 6:06 pm, "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "Ian Dalziel" <iandalz...(a)lineone.net> wrote in message > > news:ulniv5t11kqgmgsv5tvkdrlj29udoi4156(a)4ax.com... > > > On Sun, 23 May 2010 17:00:12 +0100, "Brimstone" > > <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >>"Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message > >>news:09a95adb-36a8-4e27-bd2b-80603cd37720(a)q8g2000vbm.googlegroups.com.... > >>> On 23 May, 15:26, Bod <bodro...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> Doug wrote: > >>>> > On 23 May, 09:49, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > >>>> >> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message > > >>>> >>news:8add536f-2520-4b07-8034-97f341e2f969(a)z33g2000vbb.googlegroups..com... > > >>>> >>> On 21 May, 09:59, boltar2...(a)boltar.world wrote: > >>>> >>>> On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:54:07 +0100 > >>>> >>>> Conor <co...(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> >>>>>>> "The computer systems used to control modern cars are very > >>>> >>>>>>> vulnerable > >>>> >>>>>>> to attack, say experts. > >>>> >>>>> And just how do they get access to it, Doug? > >>>> >>>> Doug seems to forget that his bicycle is vulnerable to a large > >>>> >>>> stick > >>>> >>>> in > >>>> >>>> the wheel spokes. Beware of those nasty trees doug! > >>>> >>> Unlike the defective car driver though the cyclist would be > >>>> >>> unlikely > >>>> >>> to inure anyone but himself. > >>>> >> Most car accidents don't injure anyone - they are just minor bumps. > >>>> >> Unlike > >>>> >> most bicycle accidents where people tend to injure hands and knees. > > >>>> > They are not euphemistic 'accidents' they are 'crashes'. Car crashes > >>>> > are far more dangerous than bicycle crashes and kill very many mmore > >>>> > people. > > >>>> Change the record Doug. > > >>> OK how about getting back to the thread title? Have you ever > >>> experienced a computer crash? If so, can you imagine what might happen > >>> with a computer which controls speed and braking, etc? > > >>No computer controls braking and if one controlling speed fails then the > >>car > >>will stop. > > >>Happy now? > > > But what about the etc? > > "There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are > known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't > know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we > don't know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information > together, and we then say well that's basically what we see as the > situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And > each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns. " > > With thanks to D Rumsfeld, former US Secretary of Defencehttp://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s020606g.htm He Who Knows Not, And Knows Not, That He Knows Not, is A Fool - shun Him. He Who Knows Not, And Knows That, He Knows Not, is a child - Teach Him. He Who Knows, But Knows Not, That He Knows, Is Asleep - Awake Him, He Who Knows, And Knows That, He Knows, Is Wise - Follow Him. MBQ |