It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by WanDash
...The video shows about 4 seconds screen time. And if you say it is 250 feet. Puts him at about 75 MPH.
...Using this calculator. Put in 75 MPH and 110 feet show. Almost half the distance per second. He might have been going less?
You might wonder what this does to my admitted predisposition toward “Foul Play”…
we’re shooting in the dark. We see movement/s here and there…but when you try to take aim…the dark has swallowed them whole
Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
...based on at least these 2 witnesses, he must have been going like a Bat Out Of Hell. Which translates to FAST.
...there would have definitely been sufficient force to eject the engine/tranny.
...we...find the deck stacked in favor of No Foul, however, there is no Real concrete proof.
The 5 pieces of Concrete Evidence that are available are the 2 emails, a crashed car, a body, and the Pizzeria video.
...I would venture to wager that not being privy to what evidence is available to the police and coroner, oh, and Mercedes, I think we have done a damn good job of putting some of the pieces together.
...Maybe we can use some advice that my mother once gave me. . ..
If you are working on something that you can't see, close your eyes and it becomes more visible.
That is such a damn true statement. It really works. Maybe we can figure out how to apply that here.
...OR .. . .. .. ..
Originally posted by MindBodySpiritComplex
Hi there, if you are not already following Ron Brynaert @ronbryn on Twitter you may want to give a look. He is the guy that was trolling Hastings re Barrett Brown until he made that famous "get ready for your mind to be blown" remark. He does not have the answers either but he is asking a whole lot of very good questions!
Also have a look at my updated Hastings/Barrett Brown Timeline if you find the time - some very interesting tweets by Barrett re Booz Allen (Snowden's last employer)…
"There's quite a bit of misinformation on this topic on all sides.
...First, I don't see any particular reason to believe that this car crash (or any particular car crash) is due to cyber attack. Absent other evidence it doesn't pass the Occam's Razor test.
...Second...taking over a car's computer systems is not "easy". It's quite difficult to get working reliably and the research needs to be specialized to each individual platform targeted - a significant piece of work.
...Third, on the other hand, I think the debunkers are minimizing the potential for problems in this domain. There are in fact a whole bunch of digital channels that have the potential to reach internal buses (directly or indirectly) in modern vehicles, including not only tire pressure and cellular telematics, but also bluetooth, keyless entry, WiFi (in many models), digital FM, RDS, USB and CD media, charging (for electric cars,) aftermarket devices (e.g., the Progressive dongle), and so on (soon to be joined by DSRC) - many of which are wireless.
...Fourth, while our work is always prefaced with "in the lab" it is worth understanding that we're not talking about 'white lab coats up on a bench' here. We were able to demonstrate a remote takeover (i.e., absolutely no physical access) of an unmodified vehicle over a thousand miles away after which we were able to track the car, listen in to conversations, turn off the brakes, cause a skid, etc... basically reflash any unit. Any safeguards in place go out the window once you start running your own code on a given ECU.
...While I think I speak for our whole group when I say that we don't believe such attacks are imminent threats for any of us normal people...I also think its not something that is totally off in Sci-Fi land either.
...Moreover, the genie is out of the bottle and the number of groups now developing this expertise is just growing (e.g., Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek have a DEFCON talk coming up looking at infiltrating a different set of vehicles). This is why there is now real and significant work going on in the OEM community to harden their electronic systems.
...Do I think Michael Hastings was killed via hacking? Seems pretty unlikely to me. But I think the detractors may go too far in minimizing the problem here."
...among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected. In other words, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
...one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate.
“What kind of error could the driver commit, that would be consistent with the last moment/s and seconds of evidence?”4. If considering “Mechanical Failure” –
“What kind of failure would explain those last moments?”Have any assumptions (logical leaps) been made in the above?
Originally posted by matafuchs
Three random observations to think about...
1. Onstar type systems can shut off your car. Remotely at anytime. This means remote access which means you can access any Computer unit on the vehicle if needed. All you need is electricity to make a connection...
2. The US government can take off and land a drone from an aircraft carrier. This shows superior remote capability
3. Remote hacking is not new. you just need access to the wifi signal to enter the domain that person has such as a .....car?
The newer Mercedes cars also have something called AutoNet. It is basically wifi. All you need is wifi to access a computer so you can access a cars computer also. DARPA is not filled with idiots folks...
keep going down the rabbit hole and do not allow the distractors to stop you....
SDSU professor Morteza M. Mehrabadi, Professor and Interim Chair Areas of Specialization: Mechanics of Materials is reported to have carried out an analysis of the security camera footage we have all been privy to...and concluded that the Mercedes was travelling only 35 mph before/when hitting the palm tree
…you are evading the Simplest explanation and shot the thing in the foot on your way out the door.
…You have taken the simplest explanation and applied it to a Fractal completely over complicating it.