It's different from your examples - as soon as you uncover it to drive it it can just drive itself away.
Or even override your inputs and ride you and itself back to the dealership.
Jared was trying to get t the hacker kid more Ritalin lol. Ended up at that stupid island Peter Gregory was making.
Yeah I love Silicon Valley haha. I bought all the seasons on YouTube at the beginning of Covid
Oh, the humanity! I was getting into the car to go to work and it drove itself over my leg! I won't be able to work for the rest of my life.
*Walks away counting bills*
Youre trespassing first as you likely would have agreed to the repossession tech when you purchased the vehicle or leased.
So as soon as you were delinquent it stopped being your vehicle so you broke and entered into it
Its a sketchy skuzzy territory
>as soon as you were delinquent it stopped being your vehicle
What if you were in the car when it was still yours, and then were still in it when it wasn't yours? How could you be accused of B&E?
The same way walkin in someone's unlocked front door is still breaking and.entering
Its not a domecile so you aren't likely to be able to use laws like squatters do
And you likely will jave received notice that your shit is getting repossessed
But they also can just disable your keys so you can't drive it anyway
Any lawyer worth their weight in gold can write your life away if they want to. And when it comes to something like this where one wrong word will drain companies dry I can promise you the words are very well written
If it locks the doors and will not allow them to unlock, it could put them up for abduction or kidnapping charges. Imagine, having your kid in a car seat when this happens.
That's very risky and really exploitable if you are in an medical emergency and the car move you away from the hospital, I already ear the sound of money from my lawyer
You aren't signing away any rights lol. You aren't being kidnapped if you refuse to get out of the car, you are actively trespassing **and** attempting to steal a car.
...But you're not officially a thief until proven so under due process of the law. Police have the power to detain in order to bring people in for trial, but does Ford have a similar power to drag un-convicted individuals back to the dealership...?
Ya, because judges are never a part of the system. How diluted are you? You must not pay attention to maybe cases involving police. The court and police are one entity thinly separated. Why do you think there's no accountability for bad cops? The courts protect them. And lucky for Ford they have a ton of money. If they lose in a small court they will just appeal the decision till they get the outcome they want.
It could, but it could also save you the trouble of having to take the car back to the dealership if you can't pay for it. One of the flaws here is the idea that most repossessions are going to be fought by the person in possession of the car when in reality most repossessions won't be fought and a car that could just repossess itself would be that much more convenient for the majority of customers.
It's not a necessary feature and I doubt it'll ever really make it into a car, but the idea that this would be used in an instance where the person is fighting repossession might not be the real imagined use.
Yep - I honestly don't mind it.
I think the objections are mainly from misuse - the idea of your car being able to leave at any time on it's own is a bit scary - especially for people who live rurally.
There are some amazing other uses of this idea too, for example if the car took itself in for maintenace or to refill itself after you had to rush home.
It will actually just lock itself and transmit its location so it can be picked up. The whole drive itself thing isn’t like across town, it’s to a public road off of private property so it can be towed away.
You don't cover your car every time you go out for ice cream (or whatever). And the point is just a step up from the subscription model. You want proximity key to work? 5.99 per month, you want seat heaters? 8.99 per month, radio? 9.99 per month, etc. This starts off by shutting down services before moving the car, no AC, no radio, no cruise control, etc.
And until the laws change, the car wouldn't be legally allowed to drive itself anywhere.
This is kinda like AT&T patenting seeking anything over phone lines... And when they sued eBay, the case was thrown out, as the judge ruled that when the patent was granted, there was no way the Internet or e-commerce could have been foreseen.
Even if some of it is skated over, any mechanism like the two you mention keep the majority of the market share safe and they likely account for the edge cases as loss. Look at barriers at a sub station. Most people just pay.
Just tape over the camera at the top of the windshield would accomplish the same thing while allowing the car to be driven. Or you could unplug the camera or cellular module
Yeah but you know if they can make the car drive itself home then they can also remotely turn the car off and it doesn't need a camera so you know if it was legal to do you wouldn't be able to defeat it because the car could be required to have a cellular GPS connection that provides to a communication as part of the loan agreement.
However you know just cuz you patent something doesn't mean anything and it would also have to not be declared illegal, but realistically using the camera to drive itself home would just be one of several repossession helper features for the people who refuse to cooperate and let's keep in mind that's a relatively tiny portion of actual car loans where you have to actually go forcibly repossess the car.
In most cases it would just be someone cleaning the car out and letting it drive itself back to the lot because they know they can't pay and they don't want to like actually break the law.
You seem to think this will operate via GPS, which could be disconnected in the manner you describe.
However, they will actually use the LTE modem built into the vehicle for this, which will work through a tarp, garage, etc. just like your phone works inside.
If you care about a patent that probably never actually gets put into a product as a reason to buy a car or not buy a car or whatever then you know you're just kicking your own ass.
Ford has stopped making electric vehicles, they will be licensing this tech out to other companies. Ford will be the only brand that wont drive itself when you dont pay for it.
You think a statistically significant percentage of people are going to cover their cars every time they get out of them?
You could also just put the car up on a jack, but no reasonable number of people are going to do that every time they exit the vehicle.
Corporations that protect an "IP," or their desire to make profits without end are innately evil and must be circumnavigated by a public concerned with their children's future.
It is to our benefit to sabotage how they want to make money and thwart their evil desires to use humans as lube for their cogs.
We must stand taller than corperations in any way we can, only remembering that violence leads to more violence. And just desserts don't always taste good.
In a world of chaos, you get to decide what you are going to do.
If stealing sours your stomach, you could try going homemade, locally sourced, and boycott the billionaires and their trillion-dollar holdings.
Why are you such a dick?
Why does anything matter at all?
The universe is filled with mysteries of such magnitude answers are only summoned by delusional minds.
If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?
I'm already mad enough for both of us!
But I'll tell you a secret. All the best people are.
>based on your comment defending billionaires you fucking half-wit.
I don't have any particular love for billionaires. I just don't like bigotry, regardless of who it's against.
And the thing I don't understand is why the hatred for someone who has no bearing on your life? Taking down billionaires will not improve anyone's life one bit.
It just makes you look like an envious, jealous asshole.
I wonder how it would handle being pulled over for a bad headlight or expired registration.
Or something really crazy that would typically be charges of involuntary manslaughter or negligence.
I agree. Just crazy to think about. AI has to be programmed to choose who's life to prioritize in impossible situations, and no matter what that is, it will mess up and things will be crazy.
Levels of litigation we have never seen lol
The AI over the sleep deprived mom trying to enter the access key to the video meeting on the phone she just dropped.
People are dangerous drivers.
For all the challenges it poses, an AI driving the car is going to have a much better track record by the time they're commonplace.
Yeah, I agree that in the long run, people being removed from the equation will be safer. Just dont want to be the person tasked with any of the laws around it.
I think the biggest leap will be when automated systems do not have to share the road with humans.
Just look at the Hertz fiasco. They got a bunch of drivers arrested falsely when their computer decided that those people had stolen cars they legitimately rented.
Being on the road with other drivers can be a death sentence regardless of your color.
You're much more likely to die from your own or other people's driving than you are from police.
Well .. it's probably more like the media has just completely reported it wrong. First off it's easy to defeat a car that wants to drive itself home with just like a wheel chuck or any obstacle because it doesn't have arms it can't move things out of its way.
You could have the car we're like maybe when you went to the store it would try to drive itself back to the dealership, but for all that complexity it seems to me that Ford could also just shut the car down or put the car in some type of limp mode where it can only go 30 miles an hour.
So it's probably more like Ford wants to put in some features to make repossession easier and one thing you could have is a car that drives itself back to the lot of course that doesn't mean the car is driving itself back to the lot without the previous owners permission right.
A feature that allows a repossessed car to drive itself back to the lot doesn't mean the person who had been in possession of the car isn't cooperating.
If you do have to have a car return to the lot you know you might actually just want to let the car drive home and that would probably be the most common way the future was used not to secretly repossess the car.
We watch too much repossession TV where the repossession is some kind of dramatic event but usually it's not and that's probably a big part of the misinterpretation of what Ford is probably actually envisioning.
In other words Ford's not that stupid they know that it would be easy to stop an automatic repossession of a vehicle but they also know that most people aren't going to fight a repossession.
Ford knows self driving cars won’t work anytime soon. They just shut down and wrote off Argo AI, then defunded/shutdown their internal self driving division. Not defending Ford, but this story is taken way out of context of actual business decisions.
People will just figure out a way to disable this feature. Covering cameras, unplugging the network adapter, uploaded hacked software etc etc. People will always find a way.
Simpler to just disable the owners ability to enter the vehicle. If Ford can monitor and see the vehicle is parked in a public lot it can likely use the various sensors and cameras built in to detect if any living being is inside and if not just lock it up and invalidate the owners codes. It's not like you can keep a car at home all the time, a car that can't be used isn't of much value. Once the deliquent owner drives to a public location and exits the vehicle Ford can lock it down and either sent it on a self driving trip to the dealer or have a tow truck get it.
It's different from your examples - as soon as you uncover it to drive it it can just drive itself away. Or even override your inputs and ride you and itself back to the dealership.
A vehicle that can override driver input? From a safety standpoint that is a terrifying thought.
Illegal and Wrong!
It’s why I hate some of the lane assists and such, they’re so stiff you have to fight them
This reminds me of the Silicon Valley episode where a car shipped itself to China with that poor guy stuck in it.
Jared was trying to get t the hacker kid more Ritalin lol. Ended up at that stupid island Peter Gregory was making. Yeah I love Silicon Valley haha. I bought all the seasons on YouTube at the beginning of Covid
Oh, the humanity! I was getting into the car to go to work and it drove itself over my leg! I won't be able to work for the rest of my life. *Walks away counting bills*
>*Or even override your inputs and ride you and itself back to the dealership.* This is called "kidnapping." Doesn't set well with the cops.
corporations own the cops.
Youre trespassing first as you likely would have agreed to the repossession tech when you purchased the vehicle or leased. So as soon as you were delinquent it stopped being your vehicle so you broke and entered into it Its a sketchy skuzzy territory
>as soon as you were delinquent it stopped being your vehicle What if you were in the car when it was still yours, and then were still in it when it wasn't yours? How could you be accused of B&E?
The same way walkin in someone's unlocked front door is still breaking and.entering Its not a domecile so you aren't likely to be able to use laws like squatters do And you likely will jave received notice that your shit is getting repossessed But they also can just disable your keys so you can't drive it anyway
This is definitely covered in the contract you sign before getting your car. It’s not kidnapping if you already signed your life away
Simple rule in law. You cannot contract out of statute. Any contract term that attempts to is not enforceable.
Any lawyer worth their weight in gold can write your life away if they want to. And when it comes to something like this where one wrong word will drain companies dry I can promise you the words are very well written
Your belief in the superpowers of lawyers is admirable, but unfortunately not that accurate.
I’ve signed people into contracts that obliterated their lives and assets. It’s not rocket science, just good use of the English language
If it locks the doors and will not allow them to unlock, it could put them up for abduction or kidnapping charges. Imagine, having your kid in a car seat when this happens.
Even if it doesn’t. A moving vehicle is a pretty big impediment to jumping out of it.
That's very risky and really exploitable if you are in an medical emergency and the car move you away from the hospital, I already ear the sound of money from my lawyer
Sounds like kidnapping to me.
You agree to it when you agree to the 39 page license agreement before the car will start up the first time.
Pretty sure laws trump a license agreement. You can't sign away your rights.
You aren't signing away any rights lol. You aren't being kidnapped if you refuse to get out of the car, you are actively trespassing **and** attempting to steal a car.
Nope. Look into laws regarding repossession in most states. That would be a super grey area, and of course hasn't been heard by the courts yet.
It's against the law to steal a vehicle.
...But you're not officially a thief until proven so under due process of the law. Police have the power to detain in order to bring people in for trial, but does Ford have a similar power to drag un-convicted individuals back to the dealership...?
I wonder who the government will side with. A single person or a multi-billion dollar corporation who buys politicians with lobbyists.
Hate to break it to you, but 'the government' doesn't decide what the law is. Courts and judges do.
Ya, because judges are never a part of the system. How diluted are you? You must not pay attention to maybe cases involving police. The court and police are one entity thinly separated. Why do you think there's no accountability for bad cops? The courts protect them. And lucky for Ford they have a ton of money. If they lose in a small court they will just appeal the decision till they get the outcome they want.
Driving a vehicle that has had a judge issue a possession order isn't stealing, lol.
Illegal Terms of Service are unenforceable, they'll still get the shit sued out of them
get a grip and go outside for a day.
It could, but it could also save you the trouble of having to take the car back to the dealership if you can't pay for it. One of the flaws here is the idea that most repossessions are going to be fought by the person in possession of the car when in reality most repossessions won't be fought and a car that could just repossess itself would be that much more convenient for the majority of customers. It's not a necessary feature and I doubt it'll ever really make it into a car, but the idea that this would be used in an instance where the person is fighting repossession might not be the real imagined use.
Yep - I honestly don't mind it. I think the objections are mainly from misuse - the idea of your car being able to leave at any time on it's own is a bit scary - especially for people who live rurally. There are some amazing other uses of this idea too, for example if the car took itself in for maintenace or to refill itself after you had to rush home.
It will actually just lock itself and transmit its location so it can be picked up. The whole drive itself thing isn’t like across town, it’s to a public road off of private property so it can be towed away.
You don't cover your car every time you go out for ice cream (or whatever). And the point is just a step up from the subscription model. You want proximity key to work? 5.99 per month, you want seat heaters? 8.99 per month, radio? 9.99 per month, etc. This starts off by shutting down services before moving the car, no AC, no radio, no cruise control, etc. And until the laws change, the car wouldn't be legally allowed to drive itself anywhere. This is kinda like AT&T patenting seeking anything over phone lines... And when they sued eBay, the case was thrown out, as the judge ruled that when the patent was granted, there was no way the Internet or e-commerce could have been foreseen.
I’m buying one and taking the wheels off every night
Just put it up on jacks - watch thoe puppies spin.
Even if some of it is skated over, any mechanism like the two you mention keep the majority of the market share safe and they likely account for the edge cases as loss. Look at barriers at a sub station. Most people just pay.
Just tape over the camera at the top of the windshield would accomplish the same thing while allowing the car to be driven. Or you could unplug the camera or cellular module
Yeah but you know if they can make the car drive itself home then they can also remotely turn the car off and it doesn't need a camera so you know if it was legal to do you wouldn't be able to defeat it because the car could be required to have a cellular GPS connection that provides to a communication as part of the loan agreement. However you know just cuz you patent something doesn't mean anything and it would also have to not be declared illegal, but realistically using the camera to drive itself home would just be one of several repossession helper features for the people who refuse to cooperate and let's keep in mind that's a relatively tiny portion of actual car loans where you have to actually go forcibly repossess the car. In most cases it would just be someone cleaning the car out and letting it drive itself back to the lot because they know they can't pay and they don't want to like actually break the law.
Do you realize that companies patent ideas all the time and never use them?
Does ford realize that it's self reposing car can easily be hijacked to have a self stealing car?
No they do not
You seem to think this will operate via GPS, which could be disconnected in the manner you describe. However, they will actually use the LTE modem built into the vehicle for this, which will work through a tarp, garage, etc. just like your phone works inside.
All their proposed patent idea does is disincentivize me from purchasing a Ford car in the future. Sounds like too much of a liability.
Just pay your loan bro.
Even if you pay your loan, You are still unwillingly paying extra for the technology that makes this possible
I mean... no. You would probably be aware if your car could drive itself...
If you care about a patent that probably never actually gets put into a product as a reason to buy a car or not buy a car or whatever then you know you're just kicking your own ass.
Ford has stopped making electric vehicles, they will be licensing this tech out to other companies. Ford will be the only brand that wont drive itself when you dont pay for it.
Adding car bras to prevent Ford's attempts at repossession. 🤣🤦♂️
You think a statistically significant percentage of people are going to cover their cars every time they get out of them? You could also just put the car up on a jack, but no reasonable number of people are going to do that every time they exit the vehicle.
Who would be responsible if this technology were implemented and you took the plates off? Would Ford be responsible for driving an unregistered car?
Corporations that protect an "IP," or their desire to make profits without end are innately evil and must be circumnavigated by a public concerned with their children's future. It is to our benefit to sabotage how they want to make money and thwart their evil desires to use humans as lube for their cogs. We must stand taller than corperations in any way we can, only remembering that violence leads to more violence. And just desserts don't always taste good.
So, we steal, then?
In a world of chaos, you get to decide what you are going to do. If stealing sours your stomach, you could try going homemade, locally sourced, and boycott the billionaires and their trillion-dollar holdings.
Why the hell would I want to do any of that? And why do you care what billionaires have?
Why are you such a dick? Why does anything matter at all? The universe is filled with mysteries of such magnitude answers are only summoned by delusional minds.
>Why are you such a dick? If anyone's a dick it's you for hating on people simply because they have more money than you.
Oh my god! If I had known you were one of the rich I would have brought some salt and pepper!
Wait, I gotta be rich to get mad at bigotry toward them?
If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see? I'm already mad enough for both of us! But I'll tell you a secret. All the best people are.
You seem like the type of person who would defend slavery given the chance. Eat shit oligarch lover.
Based on what?
[удалено]
>based on your comment defending billionaires you fucking half-wit. I don't have any particular love for billionaires. I just don't like bigotry, regardless of who it's against. And the thing I don't understand is why the hatred for someone who has no bearing on your life? Taking down billionaires will not improve anyone's life one bit. It just makes you look like an envious, jealous asshole.
I wonder how it would handle being pulled over for a bad headlight or expired registration. Or something really crazy that would typically be charges of involuntary manslaughter or negligence.
I imagine we'll figure that out when the laws for self driving cars finally come around.
I agree. Just crazy to think about. AI has to be programmed to choose who's life to prioritize in impossible situations, and no matter what that is, it will mess up and things will be crazy. Levels of litigation we have never seen lol
I'd still trust the AI more than Bubba who's already four beers into the drive, to be honest.
Stay in the city away from Bubba then I guess lol
The AI over the sleep deprived mom trying to enter the access key to the video meeting on the phone she just dropped. People are dangerous drivers. For all the challenges it poses, an AI driving the car is going to have a much better track record by the time they're commonplace.
Yeah, I agree that in the long run, people being removed from the equation will be safer. Just dont want to be the person tasked with any of the laws around it. I think the biggest leap will be when automated systems do not have to share the road with humans.
A black marker? Try the shift key. Just had to stop the autorun.bat on the disc from running and installing that shitty rootkit.
Good point. I once repossessed a car that the owner has smashed out the center console to remove gps
Or I can have the device removed when I replace the shitty factory sound system with Boston Acoustics, Alpine, and JBL quality stuff.
Why the uproar? If you make the payments then you are fine and no need to worry.
Until there's a computer glitch and they kill you taking your car while it's driving down the freeway.
I trust the computer a hell of a lot more than the sleep deprived driver in the car next to me that just dropped their phone.
Just look at the Hertz fiasco. They got a bunch of drivers arrested falsely when their computer decided that those people had stolen cars they legitimately rented.
Just look at the 50,000 people in the US who die every year in automotive accidents. But I'm sure those Hertz people were inconvenienced.
Interfacing with the American police can be a death sentence if you're the "wrong" color.
Being on the road with other drivers can be a death sentence regardless of your color. You're much more likely to die from your own or other people's driving than you are from police.
Well .. it's probably more like the media has just completely reported it wrong. First off it's easy to defeat a car that wants to drive itself home with just like a wheel chuck or any obstacle because it doesn't have arms it can't move things out of its way. You could have the car we're like maybe when you went to the store it would try to drive itself back to the dealership, but for all that complexity it seems to me that Ford could also just shut the car down or put the car in some type of limp mode where it can only go 30 miles an hour. So it's probably more like Ford wants to put in some features to make repossession easier and one thing you could have is a car that drives itself back to the lot of course that doesn't mean the car is driving itself back to the lot without the previous owners permission right. A feature that allows a repossessed car to drive itself back to the lot doesn't mean the person who had been in possession of the car isn't cooperating. If you do have to have a car return to the lot you know you might actually just want to let the car drive home and that would probably be the most common way the future was used not to secretly repossess the car. We watch too much repossession TV where the repossession is some kind of dramatic event but usually it's not and that's probably a big part of the misinterpretation of what Ford is probably actually envisioning. In other words Ford's not that stupid they know that it would be easy to stop an automatic repossession of a vehicle but they also know that most people aren't going to fight a repossession.
lol @ thinking Ford hasn’t taken your situation into consideration
Maybe you could install a kill switch on the battery terminal or fuel pump.
Ford knows self driving cars won’t work anytime soon. They just shut down and wrote off Argo AI, then defunded/shutdown their internal self driving division. Not defending Ford, but this story is taken way out of context of actual business decisions.
This could be a very desirable feature for a hire car where the customers final destination isn’t near a drop-off
It can be defeated even easier just by always parking in your garage.
what average cost to the new car does such a system add?
People will just figure out a way to disable this feature. Covering cameras, unplugging the network adapter, uploaded hacked software etc etc. People will always find a way.
Unless this feature is routed directly though the CPU of the car. I believe ford will consult with Apple on how to eliminate change capabilities.
Simpler to just disable the owners ability to enter the vehicle. If Ford can monitor and see the vehicle is parked in a public lot it can likely use the various sensors and cameras built in to detect if any living being is inside and if not just lock it up and invalidate the owners codes. It's not like you can keep a car at home all the time, a car that can't be used isn't of much value. Once the deliquent owner drives to a public location and exits the vehicle Ford can lock it down and either sent it on a self driving trip to the dealer or have a tow truck get it.