>walk up to intersection >turn on little jammer device

what the hell are you even jamming? do you even know how self driving cars work retard?

ask yourself that same question

>>17103521
You can't jam internal communications on devices like cars without something that destroys the electronics, in which case you'll probably get the death sentence in a federal court. Fuck off retard.

>>17103521
>cop pulls you over
>finds jamming device
>you get arrested and sent to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for 10 years
>jamal gapes your anus every day because you are now his bitch

>>17103526
>>17103528
>b-but if you do that you'd go to jail
Doesn't mean it won't happen.

>>17103526
>discrete internal communications
>millennials in charge of car design
give it a few years and jamming wifi will crash cars

>>17103831
>LE MILLENIALS
bet you $20 this kid is a millenial

>>17103521
See ISO 62626 and 61508 for details of EMI protection and security hardening.

File: 14855024557.jpg (24KB, 408x288px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 408x288px

>>17103521
Jewish fantasies don't need to be good or even practicable ideas for them to be forced upon the goyim.

>>17103526
>can't blind cameras
>can't jam radar
>can't blind lidar
>can't brute force the navigation with brutal microwave energy
hurr durr

>>17103521
>implying you have a jammer powerful enough to do literally anything to other cars at 50 yards

>implying you could even buy a jammer

>implying you know how to make a jammer because you cant buy them

>implying you know anything about the programming used in self driving cars

>implying you have active 0-day exploits for many many different makes and models of self driving car

>implying that failsafes in the car wouldnt just apply the brakes

>implying the person behind the wheel would just sit there and allow their car to crash

>implying the cameras located at every major intersection wouldnt catch you doing it

>implying the cameras buissnesses put out front wouldnt catch you driving to and from the scene

>implying that any of this would ever be possible


>implying that an organization that isnt the NSA has the resources and personal and money to make somthing like this


>implying

>>17106580
>implying you've said anything objective

>>17103521
The failsafe would probably be to pull over and stop. Though even a 90% blind self driving car is probably still a better driver than most fags on the road ATM.

>>17106559
I feel like a microwave emitter strong enough to cook a nav system would also be strong enough to cook most eyeballs.