Because the did it on public road, intentionally causing him to lose control of the vehicle.

Bunch of idiots if you ask me, no better than the clueless people you see talking on their cellphones distracted. A 1 ton vehicle is deadly in the wrong situation.

Like many other people mentioned, there's many ways to demonstrate this is a safe, controlled manner rather than out in the wild.

At least now they'll face charges of reckless driving, rather than unauthorized access to the vin+gps+etc of various vehicles.

....... ... .... ....

> These guys are elite, their demo was badass, and I've done stupider things on I-40 for no reason.

"Elite," seriously? Is it 1995? Is the movie "Hackers" some type of inspiration to you? I'm almost surprised you didn't go all l33t speak.

They endangered people's lives. It is as simple as that. If you too endanger people's lives "for no reason" on I-40 I hope they get you too.

"You're doomed!" I'm imagining these clowns giving each other high-fives and teabagging their laptop as a traffic pile-up ensues.

Jeep and uConnect have endangered people's lives – likely an order of magnitude more people. If it's as simple as that, do you support criminal charges for them too? Because playing in traffic almost seems more intelligent than hooking hundreds of thousands of multi-ton vehicles up to the internet.

They demonstrated that hackers can take lives using a laptop and a cell phone. And they displayed their own picture on the dashboard screen while doing it.

Yes, elite. I'm not bringing it back; they already did.

They could have demonstrated that in a closed parking lot, and not a real highway.

There are perfectly good test tracks out there, that'll let you screw around to your heart's content. Hell, drive around a walmart parking lot at 3am if you have to. Doing this on public roads? Sorry, you need to follow the laws like the rest of us.

I agree that a third party calling the police might be overkill but "these guys are elite, their demo was badass" has to be the worst possible justification.

In the past, researchers in other fields cared more about "badass" than the basic empathy a dog can demonstrate.

That's why every research lab has an ethical review board.

Scientists failing to care about social consequences is nothing groundbreaking.

Make sure you watch the video, i missed it the first time through.

I had missed it, too, thanks.

Okay, okay, I'll admit that they could have done it on an open stretch of road... Which is what I had pictured.

So, I apologize.

I thought about this thread during my drive home. I thought about hacking my own car's systems while driving...

I immediately realized: no WAY. No, no, no. What if I accidentally BRICK the thing, while driving?

Remember that model of car that lost steering and braking when the ignition key fell out due to a manufacturing defect? What if the Jeep would lose steering when bricked?

It is morally unforgivable to even try to change the radio station while a human is sitting in the "brick" if said brick is moving at 70mph. Especially since the software is known to be faulty.

"Known to be faulty" does bring us back to the manufacturer. I think that much of the anger directed at the hackers should be directed back at the manufacturer.

That being said... Back to the original topic of this particular comment: I apologize. Thanks HN for making me think a little harder.