RockItGuyDC

RockItGuyDC t1_itraqv5 wrote

Thanks for your insight. That would make sense to me, and perhaps then they simply sent that data many multiples of times in that short span to add up to the petabytes they're quoting. Or maybe they simply sent a tone over each of the channels and used that as a proof of concept that they could have sent those petabytes.

In any case, I'm still curious about what information actually was transmitted.

1

RockItGuyDC t1_itprxw0 wrote

>I'm sad that redditors in this sub seem to not understand even a little what this article is saying,

First, fuck off with your condescending tone. Fuck right off with it.

Second, what did they transmit from point A to point B? If it's actual data, then in order to confirm that what you think you sent from point A to point B is what actually got sent, without appreciable loss, you would need to check the data. Via a checksum or something. I'm asking how that's done.

If they didn't do that, then I don't see how one can claim any data was sent. It sounds to me like they sent noise at that point.

2

RockItGuyDC t1_is82z33 wrote

Pulling the number out of my ass, but even when there's a recall I think it would be a miracle if 75% of the vehicles affected actually get the issue fixed. That's how there are still millions of vehicles in the road with either this or a host of other issues.

20