Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Nor surprising ... (Score 4, Informative) 280

by boom1shot (#34783758) Attached to: New Cars Vulnerable To Wireless Theft
I guess it is possible, but it is human error; nothing else. I acquired certifications for 25+ sales people and finance managers at a dealership that sold 4 different manufacturer's lineups. It is possible to sync those keyfobs to two vehicles, as the keyfob itself is the actual authenticator to unlock the vehicle, in the communication between car and keyfob; and then car just authenticates that, "yes, you have sync'd me to this key before." Unlocking two cars with the same keyfob, regardless of whether or not it is a proximity fob with a continuous signal or a regular old push-button-to-unlock-fob, is only a matter of sync'ing both cars to that fob. It just means at some point in time, there was a cruddy mechanic who didn't decide to wipe the key because, "woops, I just sync'd this key to the wrong car... I wonder what I need to do." They leave the car to go ask someone, and then discover the key is still opening the car it belongs to. Works for them. Those keys didn't come from the OEM ready to open both cars. No way, no how.

Comment: Re:Nor surprising ... (Score 1) 280

by boom1shot (#34783210) Attached to: New Cars Vulnerable To Wireless Theft

Apparently my mother in law used to have a civic with keyless entry ... in a small town of <30,000 there was another Civic of the exact same color which used the same code.

They found out one time at the mall that they could each open the other's car.

I bet there's not nearly enough uniqueness and security in these things.

I think yo' momma [in law] is full of shit.

Comment: Re:Irrational Market Behavior (Score 1) 254

by boom1shot (#33207990) Attached to: Monkeys Exhibit the Same Economic Irrationality As Us
Firstly, I am no economist nor statistician. But, isn't there a fundamental difference between the logical statistics of a modeled economy (regardless of how accurately modeled it may be - which is the point I think you're really trying to drive home -- a fundamental flaw in this model) and the statistics of any individual factor or sector of the overall algorithm used?

What I'm saying is this: You cannot claim that because some unbeknown factor will cause irrationality within the market, that the market is now irrational. Rationale in marketing is implicitly based on the irrationality of our purchases - there are huge, successful companies that, when taken a step back and looked at with a grain of salt, do not represent any real form of reasoning. Marketing, in and of itself, as a huge factor in economics and "the market," is inherently irrational and meant to appeal to the senses.

No. We are talking about the rationality of the market itself, and not necessarily about just the individual actors.

This is where your argument falls apart. You are begging the question.

What hath Bob wrought?

Working...