5 ms·

(author) Yeah, as I understand it my car (a 2016 Hyundai) represents the low end of security. My original statement in the post was more intended to mean "why i

by mkaic 4y ago

(author) Yeah, as I understand it my car (a 2016 Hyundai) represents the low end of security. My original statement in the post was more intended to mean "why isn't this better regulated in 2016"

silisili 4y ago
Hyundais and Kias are notorious for how easy they are to steal, even as recently as last year. Unsure if they've finally done anything about it now that they're well known for it.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Yes, they’ve finally made immobilizers standard like most other automakers.
  - silisili 4y ago
    That's good. I really also hope they shook up their designs at the same time. I probably still wouldn't buy a new one for a few years. I'd imagine thieves either don't know this, or do but can't tell model years apart clearly. Meaning there's a good chance your car may be broken into still, just not driven off with.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      I wouldn’t worry about this situation in particular. Most thieves still just want to steal stuff out of your car which is still easy no matter what you drive.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
kube-system 4y ago
I mean, pretty much every other consumer product has even worse locks. In the physical security world, locks are really only a deterrent on their own. There will always be some exploit that’s the lowest hanging fruit for thieves. Cars are pretty dang expensive already, and in terms of benefit to society, there’s probably a lot more bang for the buck in requiring safety features that protect human life before we start worrying about property.
mikestew 4y ago
(a 2016 Hyundai) Amateurs. They could have just used a USB cable instead of hacking at it with a screwdriver like animals: https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-thieves-are-stealing-hyundais-and-kias-with-just-a-usb-cable https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-thieves-are-stealing-hyund...
kenhwang 4y ago
> "why isn't this better regulated in 2016" Ignition immobilizers have been required in Germany/UK/other European countries since the 90s and Australia/Canada in the 2000s. It's just the US that has that regulation gap, probably because the US market in the 90s sorta self-regulated to include it on everything so mandating it's requirement after the fact might've felt silly. I guess the moral of the story here is there's always a corporation willing to break norms for profit.
- mkaic 4y ago
  The US lacking basic regulation that Europe has had for decades sadly does not surprise me in the least. There are a lot of things I love about living in the States, but this kind of thing is not one of them.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    US resident visiting the EU at the moment. It’s indeed enjoyable to be in the highly-regulated EU in many ways. I think it makes their typical crowded city more practically livable than the equivalent in the US. But I also like being back in the states where the government doesn’t seem to meddle with daily life quite as much. Collectively, the EU is probably better, especially in crowded cities. Individually, it’s not so clear.
    - whatshisface 4y ago
      I don't understand what it would mean for life to be better for the collective but for none of the individuals, what is it that you are expressing?
      - sokoloff 4y ago
        As two examples: it could easily be collectively more convenient if individuals had fewer rights and less privacy. The US right to free speech is inconvenient at times for the collective. (I have no interest in hearing pro-Nazi speech. I have even less interest in living under a government with the power to ban that speech or other unpopular speech.) When I lived in Germany, I had to register my address with the local government and update it quickly if I moved. In the US, I can move without reporting it to the local government. I’m sure there’s some collective benefit to the local police having a fairly accurate record of where everyone is regularly sleeping. Individually, I’m not interested in being obligated to share that information. I believe the US approach is better, but I acknowledge that’s in large part because I was raised/indoctrinated to believe that.

by mkaic 4y ago

(author) Yeah, as I understand it my car (a 2016 Hyundai) represents the low end of security. My original statement in the post was more intended to mean "why isn't this better regulated in 2016"

silisili 4y ago

Hyundais and Kias are notorious for how easy they are to steal, even as recently as last year. Unsure if they've finally done anything about it now that they're well known for it.

kube-system 4y ago
Yes, they’ve finally made immobilizers standard like most other automakers.
- silisili 4y ago
  That's good. I really also hope they shook up their designs at the same time. I probably still wouldn't buy a new one for a few years. I'd imagine thieves either don't know this, or do but can't tell model years apart clearly. Meaning there's a good chance your car may be broken into still, just not driven off with.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    I wouldn’t worry about this situation in particular. Most thieves still just want to steal stuff out of your car which is still easy no matter what you drive.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]

kube-system 4y ago

I mean, pretty much every other consumer product has even worse locks. In the physical security world, locks are really only a deterrent on their own. There will always be some exploit that’s the lowest hanging fruit for thieves. Cars are pretty dang expensive already, and in terms of benefit to society, there’s probably a lot more bang for the buck in requiring safety features that protect human life before we start worrying about property.

mikestew 4y ago

(a 2016 Hyundai) Amateurs. They could have just used a USB cable instead of hacking at it with a screwdriver like animals: https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-thieves-are-stealing-hyundais-and-kias-with-just-a-usb-cable https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-thieves-are-stealing-hyund...

kenhwang 4y ago

> "why isn't this better regulated in 2016" Ignition immobilizers have been required in Germany/UK/other European countries since the 90s and Australia/Canada in the 2000s. It's just the US that has that regulation gap, probably because the US market in the 90s sorta self-regulated to include it on everything so mandating it's requirement after the fact might've felt silly. I guess the moral of the story here is there's always a corporation willing to break norms for profit.

mkaic 4y ago
The US lacking basic regulation that Europe has had for decades sadly does not surprise me in the least. There are a lot of things I love about living in the States, but this kind of thing is not one of them.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  US resident visiting the EU at the moment. It’s indeed enjoyable to be in the highly-regulated EU in many ways. I think it makes their typical crowded city more practically livable than the equivalent in the US. But I also like being back in the states where the government doesn’t seem to meddle with daily life quite as much. Collectively, the EU is probably better, especially in crowded cities. Individually, it’s not so clear.
  - whatshisface 4y ago
    I don't understand what it would mean for life to be better for the collective but for none of the individuals, what is it that you are expressing?
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      As two examples: it could easily be collectively more convenient if individuals had fewer rights and less privacy. The US right to free speech is inconvenient at times for the collective. (I have no interest in hearing pro-Nazi speech. I have even less interest in living under a government with the power to ban that speech or other unpopular speech.) When I lived in Germany, I had to register my address with the local government and update it quickly if I moved. In the US, I can move without reporting it to the local government. I’m sure there’s some collective benefit to the local police having a fairly accurate record of where everyone is regularly sleeping. Individually, I’m not interested in being obligated to share that information. I believe the US approach is better, but I acknowledge that’s in large part because I was raised/indoctrinated to believe that.