It Costs $60 Dollars to Hack Your Car [for TechDrive]

It Costs $60 Dollars to Hack Your Car

on April 2, 2015 at 4:39 pm

The CANtact is a Raspberry Pi like computer for hacking cars. 

It’s no surprise that as cars become high tech, they also become easier to hack. This is a reality we’ve come to accept as our world gets digitized. However this doesn’t mean that there aren’t ways to prevent hacks. The CANtact’s aim is primarily to strengthen Automobile Manufacturers focus on hack prevention.

cantact

The CANtact

Eric Evenchick has created the CANtact in efforts to raise awareness to the public and major car companies about just how easily you can hack a car. By attaching the $60 credit card sized computer to your laptop and the other to a network port under the car’s dashboard the user gains access to the CAN bus which is a collection of connected computers that control everything from the automatic windows, windshield wipers to even the brakes.

What for?

The gadget isn’t intended for any malicious conduct even though it’s remarkably affordable and easy to use. Evenchick’s intentions are to create an open source product that will inspire users to play with the user friendly interface and create hobbyist who are encouraged to expose and help fix a car’s vulnerabilities.car-hacking-4

Even the software is open sourced and easy to use, automated to do much of the work on it’s own. Using Unified Diagnostic Services (CAN protocol that mechanics use to communicate with Electronic Control Units) programmers can write directions with Python’s coding language. Although not much coding exist quite yet for this system, Evenchick is excited to see how providing a platform for young hobbyist can encourage not only preventative hacking tests but codes that could change the way we interact with our cars all together.

But why?

Evenchick’s was inspired by researchers Miller and Valasek’s findings that cars internal dashboards lacked serious protection. Their demonstrations led to Massachusetts’ senator Edward Markey demanding answers from major car companies about the security holes in their systems and ultimately revealing that out of 20 well known automobile companies, only 7 used third party security auditors for their vehicles and even those can be compromised.

$RAUZ6MD

The CANtact could potentially be a product that would strengthen the security for cars by educating the public on the inner workings of CAN bus systems.

You can purchase a CANtact at http://cantact.io/ for $59.95, USB and OBD-II cables not included.

http://techdrive.co/It-Costs-60-Dollars-to-hack-your-car

Advertisements

How Drivers Will Have to Rethink Their Jobs [for TechDrive.co]

With the world of automobiles getting more aware of itself, it’s become imperative that at some point, the thousands of drivers using driving as a job will have to rethink the way they make themselves valuable to their employers. It’s easy to consider the endless possible negative scenarios that could be born from the era of driverless cars, but if we chose to be active in the transition, I believe, and you should too, that there could be many positives. Self driving cars could open up possibilities we perhaps haven’t even thought of. I could hear the exasperation leaving the mouths of many Americans as they read the next line.

What if I told you, there will be a time when families only have one car?

One car that took the kids to school in the morning then came back and drove Mom to work. What if the car could take your teenager to the local Starbucks to meet up with their friends while you grocery shopped and you knew it would show up in time to pick you up and take you home?  In fact there’s professionals who believe that people won’t own cars at all, but instead will use taxi services as a main source of transportation.

And what does this mean for society?

A world with fewer cars would lower pollution levels. It could free up traffic jams and provide people with extra time to do things they might not have time to do while driving. Like catch up on the book they’ve been waiting to read or prepare themselves for the days work. Although I’ve exhausted this page with questions already, I’ll ask the most important one.

Why couldn’t we still have drivers?

Uber is a really successful startup that if you haven’t heard about by now, you’ve probably been living under a rock. It’s the new generation’s taxi. I’ve spent a significant amount of time in Uber and there’s been plenty of drivers who have developed really neat ways of standing out. A really nice lady the other day had caramel apple lollipops in her cup holder for her guests. Some have water bottles or are adamant about getting you to choose your own tunes and this is the answer to driverless cars.

I asked a few Uber drivers about what they thought on the subject and received various answers. Most responded in the same way. A mixture of mild grief that they would possibly lose Uber as a source of income and acceptance that this is where they saw the world heading.

One driver, Steve replied, “The only chauffeured cars that will stick around might be high-end ones. Where the driver is more than just a driver, but a sort of concierge who caters to the riders every whim. That’s something a driverless car can’t do.”

Drivers would most likely still be needed in cars to be able to hit the emergency button in case of any malfunctions. They’ll need to be well skilled with car maintenance, able to replace tires and quickly fix issues and like with all businesses their focus will turn to great customer service. How can they make the experience unique and enjoyable? They’ll chat with you about the area you’re exploring or maybe set a relaxing mood to allow you to enjoy the ride. Drivers who evolve into a useful tool will ultimately survive.

Whether we realize it or not, we’re losing a sense of human touch. We’re being surrounded by media and living in code. As our lives entwine with the digital we’ll long for a sense of self. We’ll need a warm expression and we’ll realize just how important having a person behind the wheel or maybe even sitting with us will make a huge difference in our day. I urge Uber and Lyft to consider using their drivers in newer more productive ways that could improve the service as opposed to going completely driverless and I’m completely positive there will be companies that utilize the driver in newer more creative ways.

So drivers don’t lose faith. I ask, that instead, we get more creative. We find reasons to add value to our work, and to utilize our new tools to reinvent the world we live in.

original posting:

http://techdrive.co/how-drivers-will-have-to-rethink-their-jobs

American Media: Fear and Ratings

American Media: Fear and Ratings

Television relies heavily on it’s viewers; without ratings it’s business does not thrive. Marilyn Boemer, an author for the Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic media writes, “ Up to 40% of a stations annual revenue may come from the news stations operations. One additional rating point can mean up to $1 Million annually for a major market station.” (89). This can mean a significant amount of a channel’s ratings relies heavily on the amount of people attentive to the content presented on the News broadcasts. Arguably, the American News blurs the line of what is informative and what is a scheme to provoke fear and an array of other emotions to create a broader more emerged audience.

It was recently that this concept struck the minds of moviegoers with a compelling film by the title Nightcrawler. A St. Andrews student articulately discusses this in the online review. “Produced in a time of real life examples of phone hacking scandals and opaque ethics, the movie is a thematic statement about the degradation of media ethics.” In the film the character played by Jake Gyllenhaal, is a “nightcrawler”, a man who sells freelance footage of crimes, accidents and other trauma to news stations. Now, although films can be over-dramatizations, it’s still significantly powerful in suggesting the following. News broadcasts fear to provoke an emotional investment into their programming.

“In 1993, Dateline NBC, weathered a storm of controversy after broadcasting a story about allegedly fire prone gas  tanks in General motor trucks. On the program, tests for the trucks had been rigged to ensure that they would explode.”    (Sharpe, 1) As reported, Dateline’s pressure for ratings had pushed them to a questionable moral limit. Sharpe addresses   the scandal by discussing the crews stress to present something exciting for viewers in order to keep ratings up and secure their employment. “It is clear that pressure to succeed can push reporters and producers past the point of honest reporting” (1.). NBC issued apologies, fired reporters and the President at the time, Michael Gartner, resigned.

The News does more than just rig stories for ratings, but incepts a paranoia in it’s audience that will overcome them with obsessive revisits for more answers.

The mass media play an important role in the construction of criminality and the criminal justice system. The public’s perception of victims, criminals, deviants, and law enforcement officials is largely determined by their portrayal in the mass media. Research indicates that the majority of public knowledge about crime and justice is derived from the media (Roberts and Doob, 1990; Surette, 1998). Therefore, it is imperative to examine the effects that the mass media have  on attitudes toward crime and justice. (Habermas, 106)

As viewers develop ideas painted for them by the media, their worlds become surrounded by negative stigmas created to make them fear often racially offensive stereotypes of criminals.

They become more likely to stay inside and watch the news with the intentions of staying informed and avoiding the dangers that lurk behind their doors.

It isn’t a popular idea, and a controversial theory for sure, that people are more likely to be satisfied watching a station that emphasizes criminals as a specific demographic, which in most cases can be a young, black or Mexican man who dresses “urban” or “thuggish”. In fact for the first time recently, society has decided to fight back against these stereotypes. Currently in Ferguson, Missouri, people have taken to the streets to protest against cop cruelty. This has become a matter of whether or not it is right that cops can kill an innocent young black man because his demographic is what’s considered “dangerous”. This is the same as another series of events that occurred in Florida, where a young boy by the name of Trayvon Martin was gunned down by a man who said he was protecting himself. The news stations kept the story in favor of  George Zimmerman at first, presenting pictures of Trayvon that could make him look like a troublemaker, but over time it became prevalent that the people did not agree. That people were on the side of Martin, and the stations followed suit, shifting the story towards Zimmerman’s terrible mistake, and eventually a story of racist murder.

As the generations shift, and more people become less reliant on mainstream television, people start to develop stronger opinions on how they feel about news broadcasting; about the system’s portrayal of the people and it’s ability to skew stories into emotional appeals that create feeling that aren’t backed by information, but led by fear.

The Responsibility of Technology

                                                  The Responsibility of Technology

           Imagine entering a taxi. You do not have to state your destination because it was already entered via your phone, and it does not matter if you have a card or cash because you will pay with a fingerprint. Most noticeably it is not necessary to have a driver. The car drives on its own. These are all forms of tech presently existing, and a future that is a couple years away tops. The tech industry is growing rapidly, and threatening the american workforce, allowing major power companies to avoid paying for labor, removing social properties from everyday life and making our world much less secure.

The American workforce has been in danger and it increases as tech advances. Many jobs have already been taken over by software or machines, often those jobs that created the middle class and has resulted in a large wealth gap. Assistants and accountants who dealt with numbers all day, have been slowly replaced with spreadsheet programs. Automated manufacturing in which robots stand at assembly lines building devices instead of people who can’t keep up with the efficiency and low cost of the machines. Wasilly Leontief, a prized economist, states:

“The role of humans as the most important factor of production is bound to diminish in the same way that the role of horses in agricultural production was first diminished and then eliminated by the introduction of tractors.” (par. 9)
In all areas of labor and data crunching, automation has taken over, leaving the technological age as a strong reminisce of the industrialized era’s destruction of farming, only this time, possibly worse.
The undesirable truth is that using computers is far cheaper than paying for workers. In many ways replacing our workforce with robots is not much different than creating factories to take over farms, and outsourcing to lower labor costs.

     The Sydney Morning Herald, a online news source published an article about the suffering economy and Apple. The tech giant has possibly neglected responsibility to it’s founding country. Aditya Chakrabortty writes:

      Apple is a byword of everyday sleekness. Yet there is another way of viewing the company. Focus instead on the way it does business, and all those iPhones, iPods and iPads aren’t just exemplars of design and user-friendliness: they are devices that destroy western jobs. And they do so needlessly, because if the California-based giant manufactured its goods in America rather than China, it could still make profits that would be the envy of every other US business. (par. 3)

      Apple is one of the biggest tech companies in the world. It has products that are dominating in every continent, and it originates in the state of California. However, the unemployment rate has been higher in America recently than it has been since the great depression. Apple is a huge resource, and beneficiary for the U.S. but it loses all of the benefits because Apple would much rather pay $0.14 an hour to chinese workers. In much the same lights Amazon recently expressed that it wanted to replace much of it’s workers with robots. (Lobosco p.1)  This may seem like a revolutionary advancement for Amazon, but it’s devastating to the workforce. Robots require maintenance and building, but compare that to an hourly rate for workers and a robot is far cheaper than a human employee. Robots have no need to eat, or feed their families. They won’t require transportation to and from work or new clothes to come to work in. Amazon has vocally stated that using machines could free up time for workers, creating a world where people could do other things, and let the machines do what they don’t want to. This portrait of a dystopian future is poorly fleshed out. Without jobs, it’ll be impossible for anyone to do anything let alone survive.

      Prime examples of how technology has taken over jobs are as such; Assembly line workers are a liability and require training for each task, while assembly lines that use robots can program robots to perform different tasks without much effort, and are less time consuming to replace. Grocery stores have reduced the cost of labor by investing in self checkout machines, which require only one employee to monitor eight registers. Many delivery companies have started testing drone deliveries. Drones can deliver goods much faster and avoid any traffic delays, making the delivery man inefficient. Netflix provides a service that has not only eliminated movie rental stores completely but has endangered cable companies as well.  Uber, a quickly rising startup uses an application to summon a driver who can provide a ride much like a taxi. This service has drastically affected the work of taxi drivers by stealing much of their revenue. However, even Uber drivers, though short lived, will be in danger of losing work soon.

      Google recently started testing self driving cars for cities. These cars use sensors and a camera to determine where the lines in the road, and the cars around it are. It drives without any need for someone behind the wheel. Google has stated that the use of self driving cars would make the streets safer. Exemplifying that humans are the cause of accidents 95% of the time, due to physical or emotional distraction, intoxication, or simply poor decisions. (Ulanoff, par.5) What google has neglected to mention is how this may affect lives of drivers of taxis, rigs that carry supplies across the country, and bus or train drivers.

       If you’ve ever worked a job that required social interaction you might have witnessed the next scenario. You’re attempting to communicate with someone but they’re distracted by their device. Perhaps they’ve received a text message, or they are swiping away at possibilities on dating apps such as Tinder. They’re contemplating a response but can’t seem to find the words, so instead send a GIF. ( a 3 second soundless video) that expresses in a snippet, what they are feeling. Their response from the person on the other side is an emoji ( a small illustration of a facial expression or symbol). Meanwhile, you have asked the standard, “How may I assist you,” numerous times and have received zero feedback from your techno-lost peer. This is common today. The over stimulation of people by their gadgets has reduced the ability to socialize. We result in wordless babel, sending each other pictures that only suggest an idea of what we may be wanting to say, all in all making socializing more of a detective game than a connection. (Depaula, Pg1) Jobs that require human interaction, social services, or psychological connection are the only ones that machines can’t take from humans and yet it seems that even that is at risk. As people start to interact differently, they connect seldomly and their ability to suggest advice is substituted with artificial intelligence. “Hey, Siri” may become the words we use while phoning for assistance instead of having an employed assistant who can run errands for us.

       The much more daunting area however, is the realization that security is sacrificed as technology advances. Celebrities sued Apple for the holes in it’s security after multiple private photos were stolen from their Cloud Storages. (Moscaritolo, Pg1) Google has even been forced in several companies to stop providing people’s information at their request, and the President is banned from using iPhone because it isn’t secure enough to protect the President from important details being released. (Musil, pg.1)

     As we shift towards technology we sacrifice privacy. Jobs aren’t only being taken by machines but at risk because vital information is so easily leaked. Target recently endured a large lawsuit, being hacked and leaving many of it’s customers at risk while information from credit cards was stolen. The CEO of Target,  Gregg Steinhafel, lost his job after 35 years with the company because of the breach, but also because the company suffered from online shopping and delivery convenience.(ABCnews pg.1) As society switches from a dependence on physical real estate to comparing costs of products in store with products on Amazon, or Ebay, the store begins to suffer. After the breach, Steinhafel caved under the pressure of a falling company.

      The constant changing of the world because of the tech industry is evident as to why major tech industries continue to dip their hands into many areas of business as a form of security. Facebook, which started as a social network, recently bought the Oculus Rift, a advanced product in virtual reality, and even bought out What’s App, an instant messaging application very popular worldwide, to eliminate competition with it’s Messenger app. Google which originally began as a search browser, has invested in mobile phone and tablet technology, computers, tv boxes, robotics, car systems, smart home automation, and of course, self driving cars.

     Ultimately, there lies the question that should be asked much more often. Does the control these tech giant companies have on the world because of how significantly their products change our way of living create a responsibility to it’s consumers? Apple and Google have the ability to change our lives completely, and so far it hasn’t been entirely for the better, but it can be. These companies reflect a power that is so great, it is impossible not to insinuate great responsibility. With how much these companies make in all the areas they invest in, it wouldn’t be far fetched to imagine them providing simple well paid and beneficial jobs for people. If Apple built it’s products in the U.S. not only would it be contributing immensely to the economy but it would provide work for many americans. If Google created jobs that could be replacements for the ones losing jobs to it’s services then it could be more beneficial than conflicting.

      Technology is a mere tool provided to make  your life easier, but shouldn’t replace People. People are important, because you can provide an emotional and wise response to your work. These are the jobs we need. These are the companies that need to be started up. A future where technology doesn’t eliminate the need for social human workers, or cripple the sense of security but instead elevates the workforce by providing a more successful, less time consuming workforce. Now reimagine the future. You’re exiting the taxi and entering a building that has censored doors which open as you approach them. You’re greeted by a woman who asks about your ride and offers you a drink. This is your job. You work less hours a day but make more than what a typical person would a decade before. This is because the amount of work that one person would do is now divided and shared by three, while technology is used as a tool, to help us do our jobs better.

Sources:

      Chakrabortty, Aditya. “Apple and the Folly of Outsourced Manufacturing.” The Sydney Morning Herald. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.

 

     DePaula, Rogerio. “A New Era in Human Computer Interaction: The Challenges of Technology as a Social Proxy.” (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

 

     Lobosco, Katie. “Army of Robots to Invade Amazon Warehouses.”CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 22 May 2014. Web. 05 Oct. 2014.

 

    Moscaritolo, Angela. “Google Threatened With $100M Lawsuit Over Nude Celeb Pics.” Pcmag.com. N.p., n.d. Web.

 

     Musil, Steven. “President Obama Says He Can’t Use IPhone for ‘security Reasons’ – CNET.” CNET. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2014.

 

    Newton, Asey. “I Took a Ride in Google’s Self-driving Car.” The Verge. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.

 

    Rifkin, Jeremy. “New Technology and the End of Jobs.” New Technology and the End of Jobs. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.

 

    “Target CEO Loses Job After Security Breach.” ABC News. ABC News Network, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2014.

 

     Ulanoff, Lance. “Google Unveils Self-Driving Car Prototype.” Mashable. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2014.

Success for a Minimum Wage Job

Success for a Minimum Wage Job:
The Societal Damage of Considering Minimum Wage Jobs a Failure

When you walk out your door, there’s a string of systems put in place to help the world around you function. These functions are run for the people, by the people. Most importantly these functions will fail our entire societal system if they just suddenly disappeared. These pillars, to a bigger whole are absolutely essential for the well being of the rest of our system. What am I talking about, you ask? I’m talking about minimum wage jobs and how they affect the world. When growing up, it’s rare that you hear a child ecstatically exclaim that they want to be a waitress. No young boy dreams of being a pro valet driver. These jobs are socially frowned upon, and although we will all most likely have to participate in a minimum wage job at some point in our lives, it’s definitely not a place we like to think of being for the rest of our lives. So here’s my point: Just because the pay at a minimum wage job isn’t necessarily great doesn’t mean that these jobs don’t hold a high level of importance in our lives, and shouldn’t be treated as such. More often than not, employees treat minimum wage jobs with a lack of professionalism, employers use excessive tactics that fail to motivate workers, and consumers take minimum wage workers for granted.

In the fall of 2010, I got my first job for a minimum wage of $9.00 an hour. Living in Los Angeles and working in Hollywood, this barely got me through the week, and if it wasn’t for school loans, I wouldn’t have made it. I worked retail at a Forever 21 on the boulevard, and boy did I hate it. The pay was terrible, my hours were difficult, my bosses cared very little about me as an individual and customers took advantage of me. I would make a measly $200-$300 dollars a check, which I spent 100 of just on public transportation to get to work. Occasionally I would also get scolded for not “following dress code”, meaning we we’re required to wear clothing from the store. So I would spend a portion of my checks buying clothing for work. On a “special occasion” during the release of a new line of clothing for the store, I was asked to go home about a half hour into my shift because my shoes weren’t nice enough for the event. All this for a job where stuck up woman would make me carry their bags and follow them around the store while they picked out clothes was definitely not worth it. This drove me to become very miserable and uninspired during my work hours. That on top of times when I would get scheduled during classes, my bosses would forget or ignore my requests for time off, or wouldn’t consider, “I need to study for a test coming up” as an acceptable excuse of absence, led to my first and only firing from a job. I’ll admit though, I was extremely happy to pick up my last check.

This seems like just a really bad job, but I would go on to work at three other places after this that shared some of these serious issues, or some others not unique to a minimum wage job. with pay that makes a very small dent in a person’s life, it becomes harder to encourage employees to care about their jobs. Especially when minimum wage workers tend to be some of the most labor intensive jobs in the country. Take waiters for example; without a doubt, waiters and waitresses spend a significant amount  of time on their feet, under a large amount of stress and treated pretty poorly. It’s as if people forget what it’s like to work a crappy job.