• Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    This is why driverless cars are a bad idea, they assume that everything will work as intended and everyone will play by the rules.

    You need a human to make a snap decision in cases like these.

    I hope these men are arrested for sexual solicitation via coercion (could be tried as attempted rape in the right state), disrupting traffic, sexual harassment, public disturbance. Fuck em, or better yet, don’t fuck em, they’re unfuck worthy.

    What were these morons thinking? I’m sex positive as hell, I’m all for bringing back the free love of the 70’s and the LSD of the 60’s, but not like this, never anything like this… Hypothetically bro say you do get her number this way?

    The fuck happens next?

    “Hey remember me, I’m the dipshit who pressured you into giving me this number by trapping you in your car via exploitation of its safety features? So I’ll pick you up at 7 for a romantic candlelit dinner and afterwards we could go see a movi…” click “Hello? Damn, friendzoned again.”

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      58 minutes ago

      Let’s not go too far overboard. These guys are assholes who deserve some consequences. However the article didn’t include anything that looked like attempted rape, nothing violent, no direct threat of harm (indirect, maybe). Let’s try to be proportional here

  • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    12 hours ago

    There’s enough footage etc I guess for them to be identified and arrested, wonder if that’s happening

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Depending on where this happened this could be tried as sexual assault.

      Not something you want on your criminal record.

      • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Because that question was/is blatantly sexist.

        Or also put forth the idea that all men, and all would be men, are dangerous predators, for no other reason than being a man. And that’s dangerous thinking.

        • BambiDiego@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The question isn’t sexist, it’s emotionally driven, and dismissing it outright is narrow minded. That is what I think is dangerous.

          The truth is the question reveals that to most women asked the question, men are unpredictable, and women have to navigate the world that way.

          A bear is a bear, it’s always going to do what it does, and you can work around that. Leave it alone and it will leave you alone, even if you have to work hard to avoid it. If you disturb it, it will kill you. It’s predictable.

          Men on the other hand are very likely to respect women, maybe even work together. However, there is the small, small, SMALL chance that they will be a terrible person. They could attack, abuse, sexually assault, straight up rape, or even kill the woman; or they could do a disgusting combination of those.

          The true root of the question isn’t “do you think a random man is more dangerous than a wild animal?” Of course not.

          The real question being put on a social scale is “what’s more predictably dangerous, a random man, or a wild animal?” And the fact that women almost unanimously have the same answer should be commentary enough on how they have to live their lives.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I can see criminals easily exploiting this default behavior to stop the car and steal from those inside.

    Where’s a Johnny cab when you need it, it knows how to deal with criminals.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      My car isn’t driverless, but I as the driver have less control than ever before.

      It’s an EV, and it will not shift to drive or reverse if the charging cable is attached.

      Great for preventing me from destroying a charger. Terrible for getting away from someone trying to mug me.

      Far too much of the safety features these days assume an environment in which all harm is accidental. This comes at the cost of safety in environments where someone is trying to harm another person.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        55 minutes ago

        This is the seatbelt argument all over again. The safety features protect people in the majority of scenarios. While there may be scenarios where it does more harm than good, they are rare. You’re much safer with the safety feature.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        You don’t complain about having to open your door or start the engine when escaping a threat.

        Having to unplug a cable during a very specific, imagined threat seems like a niche problem.

        • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          The difference being that not being able to start the motor with the door open is only a problem if the driver was being attacked in a parking lot.

          It’s not too big of a leap to imagine a world where a person could immobilize a car at a red light with the plug cut off from a public charger. Wall up to a stopped car, open the hatch (maybe it needs a pry bar) and put the dummy plug in. Now the car is immobilized. Smash the driver side window and they’re in business.

          Sure, there are some safeguards that can be added like requiring a current to immobilize the vehicle, but it’s far from the simplest or safest answer. Car manufacturers need to stop putting in hard limits and just use alarms instead. I bought a new Subaru that has collision detection standard. The hedge next to my driveway was overgrown, but I drove right through it. The car sounded an alarm and flashed a bunch of lights, but it didn’t engage the brakes, I was able to blast through an obstacle that I knew was minor even though the car thought it was a threat. If a manufacturer feels compelled to add a safety system, it’s possible to do so without taking control away from the driver.

          • nef@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            43 minutes ago

            It’s not too big of a leap

            I think it is. I’d like to see at least one documented case of this happening before people start demanding that cars be able to move while plugged in. Plus, in the very scenario you describe, the car would still be able to move, no? Attaching a charger does nothing unless you’re changing to parked at every red light.

            The only time you’d need to drive away while charging is if the attacker walks up while you’re sitting in your parked car, or kindly decides to let you get in before doing anything.

            I can’t find a single instance of someone being unable to escape because of their charger, so maybe let’s worry about it if it ever becomes a problem.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            49 minutes ago

            How would they open the charge port door? I can still imagine it because I have a good imagination but it’s just not going to happen.

            Is someone really going to go through the trouble of carrying a cut off cable and a piece of electronics to open the charge port, and have time to walk up to the car click to open, wait for the door to open and insert the cable? There are faster and easier ways to immobilize a car, why would anyone make it so complicated?

            And that assumes that safety feature is still engaged when you’re already driving

            • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              36 minutes ago

              Pry bar to open the hatch, like I said.

              And yes, today people are walking around with angle grinders to chop off catalytic converters.

          • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            It’s not too big of a leap to imagine a world where a person could immobilize a car at a red light with the plug cut off from a public charger. Wall up to a stopped car, open the hatch (maybe it needs a pry bar) and put the dummy plug in.

            Sounds like a lot of hassle. If they want to immoblise a self driving car they just stand in front of it.

            Why carry a plug cut off from a public charger when you can just stab the tyres?

            Use the pry bar to smash the window and open the door. Not open the charging port.

            • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              33 minutes ago
              1. It’s about hitting electric cars, self driving or otherwise.

              2. Cars can still move with punctured tires, at least far enough that a would-be robber or carjacker could get dragged a good distance.

              3. You smash the window and open the door. Now the panicked driver is speeding away, leaving you high and dry or dragging you along.

              Being able to completely immobilize a vehicle while keeping it intact is a criminal’s wet dream. It’s incumbent on car manufacturers to consider that while implementing safety features.

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I doubt choosing to stick up a vehicle covered in cameras with someone who likely isn’t even carrying cash is anyone’s idea of a good payoff.

      • Wildly_Utilize@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        idk i think plenty of people carry expensive stuff on them

        what a thief could actually get for them is another matter but clearly that doesnt stop them from trying

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          48 minutes ago

          This is where you carry a window spike and smash and grab. Why make it so much more complicated?

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          The doors aren’t going to open from the outside, and authorities would be alerted immediately. Breaking the glass on a car window or holding people up at gun point… Yeah. Easier in the parking lot of any gas station, grocery store, neighborhood, Walmart, Mall, Jewelry store, movie theater. Wherever really. The people can get out of the car in an emergency just like any other car. Running someone down with a car is not the answer to many situations.