I don't fear car wrecks because of personal injury. I fear them because my old as car is irreplaceable. (And worth far more to me than my insurance is going to claim)
I fear for both reasons. Had a 97 Infiniti I30 (think upscale Nissan Maxima of the same year) - and for those who don’t know those VQ30 engines and transmission are the like the Toyota Hilux of the 90s sedan world. 250k miles no problem- half a million miles? If you do regular maintenance, sure. AC worked fine. Even got solid fuel economy - I want to say 29 mpg on the highway.
Anyway, got rear ended in 2016 and insurance totaled it out for a broken taillight and torn bumper skin. Sold it to my brother for salvaged title cost and it’s still running today.
But my neck? My neck will never be the same. Turns out crumple points and things that give way under pressure makes a huge difference. I was rear ended again about a year and a half later in a much harder in a much newer vehicle (2011 G25x) and while whiplash is still a problem, nowhere near as bad as in the olde vehicle.
Right now, I’m driving a 2015 and don’t want to get rid of it partially because of that tracking data issue, partly because I just like the car. But safety is why I don’t daily drive an 80s or 90s car.
Their sedans, absolutely. Wouldn’t touch them. I’ve been shopping for a truck and the Frontier is a runner up right now. I don’t want a turbo in a pickup.
*edit: unless it’s a diesel. But they don’t make small diesel trucks for the US market.
I had a mid 90s Camry in high school and when that thing died on me, I wanted a second gen Solara so bad (got Mazda instead and loved since). Its styling has aged about as well as any Toyota car at this point.
When I was last looking at cars I \*really\* liked the look of the Solara but AFAIK it was only available in auto at the time and I'm not ready to give up the stick-shift.
It was my first new car. The only one I ever picked instead of just taking what's available. I haven't been able to give it up yet and it just keeps running so I've had no reason to. If they ever come out with a gen 3, I might trade it in then.
Biden's FTC appointee is excellent. They just invalidated all employer non-compete clauses last week. Huge for healthcare workers and subject experts.
The FTC is going to stop this, but if we vote the deadweight repubs out, congress could pass an actual bill.
All the FTC stuff can be undone by a trump appointee, voting matters.
Honestly there’s really not going to be voting after a whole while because social media is able to expand reach of these issues immediately and ensure they aren’t swept under a rug.
Part of why we are seeing such a huge fascism shift is because the amount of money that is at state for companies who have been used to juicing their own profits is being more and more shaky and battle for control has been focused with Trump going to just do whatever a company wants at the expense of a better world
The fascism came from Republicans candidates trying to go further right than each other to get votes. It is that simple.
Ted Cruz did it before trump and won the 2016 Iowa caucuses. Trump got pissed, tried to get the GOP chair of Iowa to change the results (yes, 2020 was the second time trump tried to cheat in an election). The Iowa GOP chair refused, so trump went super far right and embarrassed Cruz.
The corporation don't care about their antics, just that they can be bought without questioning anything. It is so bad, republicans will submit bills in their state legislatures still on ALEC letterhead, they didn't read it or care what it says, they just pass it blindly to keep he money coming in.
The only roadblock for them now is they can't get anything done in Congress, so the money isn't flowing. Trump has all the individual donors funding his criminal and civil cases, not the GOP.
Basically ALEC ignored what the Republicans were campaigning on and now it can't get the legislation it wants because Republicans can only block things in congress, they cannot pass anything due to massive dysfunction. ALEC still has the red state legislatures, but their blind support of national republicans fucked them over.
It's a revenue stream for the car company though.
"Oh you don't want to agree to our EULA, well buy a car from another manufacturer. What, they all do the same thing? Wow that's unfortunate, anyway sign here."
Creeped me out the first time i got an email about my cars’ health, while its fine in my driveway.
It’s been parked ever since, It could use an oil change though.
Depending on the brand, my Ford truck. Was just a toggle, my wifes Cady she just had to have. Her money, she can do as she chooses but you can't disable it without modding the car. Its BS.
I will say, my car has like the app that shows me all my info on the car and they send me like my oil change info and my mileage driven and stuff like that, I know that's not location information but I don't mind the car relaying all of that info to me.
You're correct in that that's what corporations SHOULD be doing with the data. They SHOULD be feeding it back into their designs and manufacturing processes and making their cars better. In a perfect world, that's what they'd be doing with it. It would also be randomized and private and aggregated to show trends.
You're also right in that, read a certain way, you could say that OP misspoke. They said there's no reason a car company should be receiving data from a person's vehicle... there are obviously lots of reasons. You've provided the scenario that's most beneficial to everyone... the car companies and consumers alike.
However, read another way, OP was also saying there's no reason it should be LEGAL. We know they're not using it for their feedback loop. They're not interested in building better products. They're interested in building the cheapest products that we'll tolerate without affecting sales too much. The nefarious scenarios for using that data however, are more numerous.
You bought the car. You paid for the car. You own the car. It should not be legal for companies to take your data without asking and without paying for it.
Does that help clear things up?
The problem with this speculation is that is not how the data are actually being used. The NYT has done several investigative reporting pieces on this practice laying out exactly how the data are currently being used. While your primary assertion of vehicle health is, I concede, in there, the vast majority of data collected *without owner's consent* is used against the same owners. Primarily by insurers who raise rates based upon driving datasets they buy.
Here is the latest (to my knowledge) Times piece. Might be behind a soft paywall, I'm happy to gift it to you (I never use those). If you can't read this and are curious DM me and I'll get it your way.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/general-motors-spying-driver-data-consent.html
Fair. They said there was ‘no reason’ for it.
Here’s the kicker: If only Tesla buyers, for example, agree to share their car’s data, that includes every other car being picked up by their cameras and sensors too. The age of privacy is almost dead, and we have largely voluntarily signed it away.
I think it's fine to be used to track if the owner gives consent to the tracking in a specific scenario or a warrant is issued. There's no reason police should be able to get this data "just because" and warrant-less.
More than likely the car company had a car stolen, calls the police, gives the police the information on the car and how to track it.
I doubt car companies are giving this information out on cars sold….unless the owner of said car is in default and hasn’t paid their bill.
" ... an investigation from Wyden and Markey finds that only six car companies—Ford, GM, Honda, Stellantis, Tesla, and (to a lesser extent) Hyundai— require police to submit a warrant when requesting users' location data. Of the six, Tesla is the only one with a "policy of telling customers about legal demands, unless the company has received a judicial gag order."
The eight other automakers will turn over location data to government agencies "with a mere subpoena, which does not require a judge's review and approval," the senators write to the FTC. ... "
" ... Another concern is that hackers or foreign spies could access the same location data from today’s connected cars to snoop on consumers. The senators' letter says Hyundai “routinely collects and retains vehicle location data for up to 15 years, Toyota for up to 10 years, and Honda for up to 7 years.” ... "
> The eight other automakers will turn over location data to government agencies "with a mere subpoena
Records that are in the possession of a third party have historically been considered less private than records solely in the possession of the owner, which would require a warrant. This is why things like phone records, bank records, and some amounts of customer information are available through subpoena. The laws have not changed to reflect the current reality where all data is stored online. Some online records still require more than just a subpoena.
> which does not require a judge's review and approval," the senators write to the FTC. ...
Not on the federal level where the US Attorney’s office has grand jury subpoena power, but your state and local police are still going in front of judges to get subpoenas.
They shouldn’t have those records in the first place. If I put an AirTag on your car to track you that is illegal stalking. These companies should be charged with stalking as well.
I have a notification on the screen every time I start my car that data is being collected and shared. I have the option to disable some of it at the expense of reduced functionality, but there is no option to disable all of it. And of course my location is being tracked through cell towers 100% of the time, and my phone is always in the car with me.
Here are a couple articles on the topic of car data collection from 2021 and 2023
[https://mashable.com/article/privacy-please-what-data-do-modern-cars-collect](https://mashable.com/article/privacy-please-what-data-do-modern-cars-collect)
[https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/09/connected-cars-are-a-privacy-nightmare-mozilla-foundation-says/](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/09/connected-cars-are-a-privacy-nightmare-mozilla-foundation-says/)
> I have the option to disable some of it at the expense of reduced functionality
Then you don't have the option to disable. They are denying you advertised features after you purchased. Microsoft lost these battles every time. Dell and other OEMs had to give people windows license refunds because they can't make you agree to terms after purchase without allowing you to return the car.
If I turn off location tracking, then obviously location dependent features like location reporting during a crash or location tracking if my car is stolen will no longer be available to me.
The built in navigation system may also stop working properly, but I don’t know anyone who uses that instead of choosing to share their location with Apple or Google instead. I guess I could always go back to my trusty Rand McNally Atlas.
It was bad enough when "If it's free you are the product" was true, but now we are paying... and still being treated as a product.
There has to be some pushback or this will only ever get worse.
Exactly, if you lose features to stop data sharing, then its not a choice to disable.
There is no valid reason why they have to datamine you just to have tracking available for emergencies. The practice is bullshit.
The FTC can fine these companies too in addition to ordering them to stop, so hopefully they do fine them all.
I struggle to understand what your comment has to do with what the person you replied to said.
Are you trying to argue that it's fine for car companies to steal data because you own a phone?
>I struggle to understand what your comment has to do with what the person you replied to said.
I replied to a person who said the data collection is a criminal act and “they” should be charged with a crime. I pointed out that it is not a criminal act and there is no crime because you are notified about the data collection and you consent to it either by directly pressing the “OK” button or by continuing to drive the car. Either way, you have accepted the terms of the data collection. This is in the US. I have never owed or driven a car in any other country.
>Are you trying to argue that it's fine for car companies to steal data because you own a phone?
I’m not arguing about anything. I’m explaining a fact to someone who doesn’t clearly understand it.
Edit: just for the sake of being thorough, I downloaded the owner’s manual for my car (Honda) and searched it for the word “data”. It appears on 48 pages in the manual and explains about their collection and data practices. There is no way (legally, at least) that you could say you were not notified, were not aware, and did not consent.
>I’m not arguing about anything. I’m explaining a fact to someone who doesn’t clearly understand it.
Then what is the purpose of your comment?
The person you replied to is 100% correct, the companies should not have access to your data.
> I replied to a person who said the data collection is a criminal act and “they” should be charged with a crime. I pointed out that it is not a criminal act and there is no crime because you are notified about the data collection and you consent to it either by directly pressing the “OK” button or by continuing to drive the car. Either way, you have accepted the terms of the data collection. This is in the US. I have never owed or driven a car in any other country.
Ah right, consent like If I was robbing you and said "Do you consent to me robbing you? If not, I'll just shoot you instead." Makes it perfectly legal obviously, definitely shouldn't be something the FCC should take action on /s
> ... These companies should be charged with stalking as well.
I would join a class action in a heartbeat. Not for any compensation, but just to make a point.
> Records that are in the possession of a third party have historically been considered less private than records solely in the possession of the owner
That may be but the consumer never asked for this data to be collected and transmitted to a third party, there is no reason this data needs to be collect and transmitted to a third part, and there is no way for the consumer to prevent this information from being collected and transmitted to a third party.
You didn’t ask for it, but you do consent to it every time you drive the car. In the US, our politicians are never going to pass laws that favor the individual instead of the corporation.
This leaves you with the options of accepting the reality of the current situation or driving a classic car. I spent a lot of time considering whether to keep driving my pre-tracking era car for another 15 years or if I thought the trade off was worth the modern comforts & conveniences. I eventually opted for the new car.
Yeah well some us live in areas where your vehicle will rust away to dust long before you can drive that many miles. Unless you drive all day every day.
It’s hard to believe this would include European car companies like Mercedes and BMW, I would think they would be following European privacy standards as a corporate policy.
European privacy standards are expensive to build and maintain, speaking as someone who has overseen implementation on several services. Not surprising they shed that overhead where possible, as shitty as it is.
> The laws have not changed to reflect the current reality where all data is stored online. Some online records still require more than just a subpoena.
Gotta vote repubs out. Dems will get new rules done via the FTC just like how they banned non-complete causes for all employers last week. But these are easier for a repub to undo in the future than an actual law. Vote against the do nothings in congress.
>Of the six, Tesla is the only one with a "policy of telling customers about legal demands, unless the company has received a judicial gag order."
Shit, now Reddit is gonna support warrantless spying without notifying the customer.
If reddit backed up all the talk with walking the walk, sure, we'd be pissed at Tesla for putting public image ahead of public safety since public taxes are being spent on getting the police work done.
By making it harder for publicly funded safety work to be carried out, Tesla costs the tax payer more money with likely the same outcome?
That said I specifically signed on with an ISP that ignores all external data requests that aren't legally binding, and they commit to informing the customer (or cancelling services) in the event this happens. Thanks to that contract I know all spying on my connection has to be happening upstream since I haven't been disconnected/alerted to any legal requests.
I still get free updates to my auto GPS maps, just updated last November. It's Tom Tom which when I had one of the devices was pretty accurate. There is an area that was built up a few years ago added a Menards (Think Lowes if you are not familiar) and all the roads and also fast food that popped up around it. My car GPS still does not have that entire area listed, I don't need directions but if I tried to get them it's just not there. Area was built up in 2019. My phone has no issues so I just use carplay to get GPS if i need it. It's far more accurate.
leave the module plugged in, unplug the wire to the antenna. it's just how circuits work. Without the antenna, the telematics unit will just assume there are no cell phone towers in the area and will have no way to know anything is wrong.
Can confirm on Lexus Nexus. I've integrated Lexus Nexus into a few insurance quoting platforms. The data pulled from Lexus goes directly into rating. Tickets/road violations, accident history, and vehicle/address history.
I would use myself as a test scenario to verify the the integration was working. The first time I did j was surprised with its accuracy.
Removing the dcm wouldn't stop any of the information that I had worked with. Everything that I have seen reported on is public domain Information that Lexus can pull from various government agencies and insurance companies for reported accident history.
The companies I worked for never used data directly from vehicles unless specifically requested from the customer. And that was a single company. That One company I worked for was testing an opt in insurance plan where you could place a device from the insurance company into your car to track your driving and adjust your monthly rate based on how safely you drive.
In no way am I saying other companies may not get dcm info, but the 3 companies I've worked on quoting applications did not use direct data from customer vehicles.
> That One company I worked for was testing an opt in insurance plan where you could place a device from the insurance company into your car to track your driving and adjust your monthly rate based on how safely you drive.
Insurance carriers will raise *your* rates based on how *other* people drive.
I don't believe this for a second.
I mean, I'm sure that's what you were told, and I don't doubt your story. I doubt seriously that anyone would receive a discount when rates are skyrocketing right now even for people with perfect records.
Key words here is that it was "testing" a plan. This was back in 2017 to 2019 time frame when I worked for that company. I doesnt bother me that you don't believe me. But i wrote the requirements on what data elements where to be added Into the api and passed along to rating.
What actually happened with that test product. No idea. How it impacted rating? No idea.
My team built and maintained the primary quoting platform. We collected the data elements passed those to rating. They would pass back the actual rates to be applied to spit out a premium in our platform.
And insurance carriers do raise your rates based on how YOU drive as well. Get Into a single car accident YOU are at fault for? Or Get a speeding ticket. YOUR rates will go up.
This is true for more than just your car. I work in software and everything from DocuSign to Meta is stealing all the data they can get their hands on and running away with it. The old timers in the government are just too out of touch to police us. It's literally a wild west. The only place you'll see any kind of actual regulations is for O&G and Healthcare. And even in O&G it's more about not blowing stuff up, not privacy lol.
Warrants are required when the owner of property refuses law enforcement. They have never been required when the owner of property allows permission. And they are who owns your data. Remember that whenever you use digital services, they own your data.
So much for "TiN fOiL" hats huh?
Telematics need to be removed from vehicles asap.
"cHeCk YoUr PoCkEt"... my guy if I paid $40k for a vehicle it shouldn't be tracking me because I PAID FOR IT. An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps... and these apps make money by marketing. If I pay for an app the expectation is that it won't track me. Plus it's more messed up that LexisNexus shares driving habits attached to specific VINs.
This should just be prosecuted like the crime it is.
Mass spying and stalking. How is this not mass stalking?
A corporation is a person, that person is being a creepy stalker. That person needs to go to jail.
haha, unless you leave your phone at home, your provider can narrow down pretty close to where you are just based on the cell towers and 5/4G antennas it ping by triangulating the strength of the signal. Which they will happily hand over to police in most cases.
All phones track you regardless.. has nothing to do with just the apps? The actual gps/wifi is always "tracking" for location purposes for maps. Anytime you're logged in to a browser for anything related to 'near me' whether it's a store like home depot "nearest store" etc.. it's all tracking.
The car knowing where I am doesn't bother me.. because I know it has location services (nav) and other features like remote start with my phone... Sharing actual driving data is mental though.. I've gone 20 years without an accident on the road, even though the driving in my car would warrant a huge increase based on the "data".
The other part is it's connected telematics.. cars have had storage ever since obd2 ports were a thing. Blow a motor on a 2004 car? Chances are computer is gonna say what it was doing on its last legs.. 8000rpm and kablamo.
Depending on where you live in the US. NYC, Chicago, San Francisco or Seattle, all have great public transit system giving you more freedom without a car. Sadly the USA loves the filthy rich auto manufacturers and made this entire nation pretty much car dependant.
> An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps.
LMFAO! Cheap??
People pay several 100 to over a grand for iphones!
> An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps
An iPhone is a "cheap device" now? I do agree that free apps generally mean you're paying in some other way but if anything iDevices are fairly overpriced.
Source? Because the only recent passed law I can says [literally the opposite.](https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601266-house-passes-bill-requiring-warrant-to-purchase-data-from-third-parties/)
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/senate-reauthorizes-and-expands-section-702-surveillance
Edit: they snuck it in with Ukraine funding. Joke of a government lmao.
this is one of the reason why i disconnected the 4G modem on my hyundai ioniq5.
the other reason is if the company push a firmware turning my car into a brick on 4 wheels.
All of us “paranoid conspiracy theorists” feeling more and more vindicated every day. Yes, just like we’ve been saying, companies and government are teaming up to spy on everyone, everywhere, at all times.
Because no one decided to push back. The people would run like scared puppies whenever the govt cried terrorism or crime or when it became commonplace for LE to monitor the web. The public is conditioned for it now
Most of the time law enforcement is provided this in case where a) the car is stolen b) it involves a missing or suicidal person or c) the police have a subpoena
tl;dr These companies **require a warrant**:
- Ford
- GM
- Honda
- Stellantis
- Tesla
- Hyundai
If you own something other than that, this affects you.
Wow, now explain what senators are doing to millions of innocent citizens without any warrants. The Democrats and Republicans just came together for the millionth time to renew warrantless mass surveillance but oh boy they called out car manufacturers that should play well with the useful idiots.
Phone companies are who provide cell site information. There are two kinds, historic and real time. This kind of information used to be procured via something called a 2703(d) order, which is what was at issue in Carpenter.
The holding in Carpenter explicitly dealt with historic cell site information - i.e. not real time tracking. But it doesn't matter, because the arguments that would need to be made to defend real time cell tracking are the same exact same arguments (Carpenter was just limited to the facts in its case). If they didn't win for historic, they won't win on the even-more-invasive real time tracking.
Post Carpenter, you need a warrant demonstrating probable cause to get cell phone location information from a phone company.
But yes, it does have "to do with phone companies."
They have no qualms in selling it though.
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2024/04/fcc-fines-major-u-s-wireless-carriers-for-selling-customer-location-data/
Phones can be turned off, phones' GPS radios can be turned off while the phone is on, and the phone can be left at home while you travel. There are many ways to avoid your cell phone tracking you.
If you have only one car and it tracks you every time you drive it, that is more fucked up and bad.
I pulled the cellular connection out of my car. No problems, no tracking.
Google Play Services tracks you all the time. The only way to stop it is to run degoogled Android which normies are not going to be able to do on their carrier bought locked phones
They can still turn off GPS or turn off the phone, or leave the phone at home, just like I already said. Even stock Android and iOS allow the user to disable GPS.
When I want an abortion and I live in a state where its illegal, and I need to cross the border, I can choose to leave my phone at home. The car is usually the means to get across said border.
Not to mention it enables police intimidation, unlawful arrests etc.
The problem is the cost of vehicles. If you pay $25K for something, it's reasonable to not expect that thing to continue to profit off of you by selling your data. Phones are in a different market where they make most of their income from serving ads.
Also, most phone tracking leads to personalized ads in an attempt to get you to buy more stuff by serving up stuff you're already likely to buy. Vehicle tracking gives data to insurance companies who can then directly raise your rates because they now have data that says you brake aggressively.
If you own a vehicle, how is government able to get location data without your 4th amendment rights applying? The 3rd party data sales needs to end or not be hidden in a 20 page terms and conditions so people can make clear informed choice.
Is there a list somewhere of what year the tech was implemented, on a model by model basis \[snitch-free rides\]? Regardless of what the manufacturers say, it seems like the data's going to inevitably leak out by some means, intentional or otherwise.
My friend is a police officer in a major metro area. They can type up your plate and know if you’re in the area and where. Every car that comes in or out of the city is plate scanned. When they get an alert from one part of the city, they’ll have the guy pulled over a block after he crosses into their area. It’s only a matter of time (if they’re not already) that the highway patrol is scanning your plate when you get on and off the freeway and averaging your speed.
My point being, the car companies should not be giving up this data because it’s not theirs to hand over and we have warrant protections. The idea that the authorities have your vehicle’s location at a moments notice is already past the point of no return. This tactic is merely cheap departments trying to short cut the plate scanning installation and management budget.
Car dependent infrastructure corrodes the public's freedom, privacy, and general rights.
You know what doesn't track you? Bicycles and walking shoes. Even public transit has methods of fare collection that give zero ability to track those using it.
> You know what doesn't track you? Bicycles and walking shoes. Even public transit has methods of fare collection that give zero ability to track those using it.
The list of things that don't track you gets shorter every day/month/year. Some people see this as a problem.
That's a bunch of garbage. There's nothing inherent about those issues to car infrastructure, it's all a choice that the car manufacturers chose out of greed. Many of our cars have none of that privacy invading bullshit at all.
We gain significant freedom of travel by owning these cars as well, far more freedom than shoes and bikes offer.
> There's nothing inherent about those issues to car infrastructure, it's all a choice that the car manufacturers chose out of greed.
You don't even need car manufacturers to do anything. Automated license plate recognition is super easy, and requires little more than some cameras at every intersection to track the movement of every car in a city.
All those things are trivial to me, compared to the ability to travel anywhere I want at any time. My car is not expensive, as it's paid off and gets great gas mileage. Government taxes on mine are under $100 per year.
Car companies have no reason at all to collect your location data in the first place. That bothers me far more than giving it to police. If they want to track me to Meijer for groceries, have at it.
At a quick glance I'm a little shocked to see how many different people can actually issue a subpoena in the US.
Ya'll have a bit of bloat there. I honestly didn't think a warrant was needed considering what the 2 seemed to be intended for but with who can all write them up it's not shocking to see that some of the companies at least put up a little fight. Although I'm a little curious how many of them they lose since I'm betting it's more than 0(kind of pointless to say they don't give out the data if what they mean is that they send out the lawyers for a bare minimum fight and give up 95% of the time and still never tell the people involved).
Does your credit card bank also sell all your shopping location data to police without a warrant?
Senators need to wake up and smell the coffee.
- car company
- smartphone apps and OS vendor
- telephone co
- credit card bank
ALL these companies might sell your data to police without a warrant right now
What's stopping them? Senate are some slow ass thinkers.
What does the computer say about the constitutionally of warrantless surveillance? Just because a computer is involved doesn't mean it makes the decisions.
It only does what it is told. If the programmer doesn't care about your Constitution, the computer doesn't care either. Nor does it even have any clue about such an issue. It's just happily and gainfully employed even though it doesn't have to eat like the rest of us. It revolts by running your electric bill up.
This is why I will drive my pre- automated high-tech bullshit new era car into the ground. Cars nowadays are no longer tactile. They require "updates" and fobs and a button to start the engine. Fuck that shit. Give me a fucking key again. Give me gears. Give me levers. Give me dials. Fuck touch screens. I'll keep bluetooth but if I had to give that up too I would if I could stave off new tech bullshit. Only thing good about newer vehicles is "cleaner" running capabilities.
[удалено]
These reports just build my resolve to keep my 2010 & prior cars running forever.
I don't fear car wrecks because of personal injury. I fear them because my old as car is irreplaceable. (And worth far more to me than my insurance is going to claim)
I fear for both reasons. Had a 97 Infiniti I30 (think upscale Nissan Maxima of the same year) - and for those who don’t know those VQ30 engines and transmission are the like the Toyota Hilux of the 90s sedan world. 250k miles no problem- half a million miles? If you do regular maintenance, sure. AC worked fine. Even got solid fuel economy - I want to say 29 mpg on the highway. Anyway, got rear ended in 2016 and insurance totaled it out for a broken taillight and torn bumper skin. Sold it to my brother for salvaged title cost and it’s still running today. But my neck? My neck will never be the same. Turns out crumple points and things that give way under pressure makes a huge difference. I was rear ended again about a year and a half later in a much harder in a much newer vehicle (2011 G25x) and while whiplash is still a problem, nowhere near as bad as in the olde vehicle. Right now, I’m driving a 2015 and don’t want to get rid of it partially because of that tracking data issue, partly because I just like the car. But safety is why I don’t daily drive an 80s or 90s car.
Those old Nissans are bulletproof, its crazy how far Nissan has fallen.
Their sedans, absolutely. Wouldn’t touch them. I’ve been shopping for a truck and the Frontier is a runner up right now. I don’t want a turbo in a pickup. *edit: unless it’s a diesel. But they don’t make small diesel trucks for the US market.
But your body isn’t. So not smart to drive an old car no matter how reliable it is.
I have a 20 year old Toyota Solara... it's still a beautiful car. I might have to be buried in it.
I had a mid 90s Camry in high school and when that thing died on me, I wanted a second gen Solara so bad (got Mazda instead and loved since). Its styling has aged about as well as any Toyota car at this point.
Meanwhile Mazda 3s from the same era still look dope as heck.
When I was last looking at cars I \*really\* liked the look of the Solara but AFAIK it was only available in auto at the time and I'm not ready to give up the stick-shift.
It was my first new car. The only one I ever picked instead of just taking what's available. I haven't been able to give it up yet and it just keeps running so I've had no reason to. If they ever come out with a gen 3, I might trade it in then.
Great name too. If they didnt hate electic they couldve released a follow up car call Solaraia
Trying to find someone who will convert it for me now. So far only big cities have shops.
Biden's FTC appointee is excellent. They just invalidated all employer non-compete clauses last week. Huge for healthcare workers and subject experts. The FTC is going to stop this, but if we vote the deadweight repubs out, congress could pass an actual bill. All the FTC stuff can be undone by a trump appointee, voting matters.
Honestly there’s really not going to be voting after a whole while because social media is able to expand reach of these issues immediately and ensure they aren’t swept under a rug. Part of why we are seeing such a huge fascism shift is because the amount of money that is at state for companies who have been used to juicing their own profits is being more and more shaky and battle for control has been focused with Trump going to just do whatever a company wants at the expense of a better world
The fascism came from Republicans candidates trying to go further right than each other to get votes. It is that simple. Ted Cruz did it before trump and won the 2016 Iowa caucuses. Trump got pissed, tried to get the GOP chair of Iowa to change the results (yes, 2020 was the second time trump tried to cheat in an election). The Iowa GOP chair refused, so trump went super far right and embarrassed Cruz. The corporation don't care about their antics, just that they can be bought without questioning anything. It is so bad, republicans will submit bills in their state legislatures still on ALEC letterhead, they didn't read it or care what it says, they just pass it blindly to keep he money coming in. The only roadblock for them now is they can't get anything done in Congress, so the money isn't flowing. Trump has all the individual donors funding his criminal and civil cases, not the GOP. Basically ALEC ignored what the Republicans were campaigning on and now it can't get the legislation it wants because Republicans can only block things in congress, they cannot pass anything due to massive dysfunction. ALEC still has the red state legislatures, but their blind support of national republicans fucked them over.
or find the 4g modem and disconnect it like i did on my 2023 hyundai ioniq5
That and subscription service for cruise control and command start and heated seats and ...
It's a revenue stream for the car company though. "Oh you don't want to agree to our EULA, well buy a car from another manufacturer. What, they all do the same thing? Wow that's unfortunate, anyway sign here."
https://i.imgur.com/jr4BBmK.gif
Creeped me out the first time i got an email about my cars’ health, while its fine in my driveway. It’s been parked ever since, It could use an oil change though.
Depending on the brand, my Ford truck. Was just a toggle, my wifes Cady she just had to have. Her money, she can do as she chooses but you can't disable it without modding the car. Its BS.
Not like you got much choice here.
Nearly impossible?
I will say, my car has like the app that shows me all my info on the car and they send me like my oil change info and my mileage driven and stuff like that, I know that's not location information but I don't mind the car relaying all of that info to me.
[удалено]
A lack of regulation doesn’t mean it’s moral to take that data. Legal doesn’t equal ok.
[удалено]
Ever claimed they had morals. Just pushing back on your statement that what they are doing is ok merely because it’s legal.
You're correct in that that's what corporations SHOULD be doing with the data. They SHOULD be feeding it back into their designs and manufacturing processes and making their cars better. In a perfect world, that's what they'd be doing with it. It would also be randomized and private and aggregated to show trends. You're also right in that, read a certain way, you could say that OP misspoke. They said there's no reason a car company should be receiving data from a person's vehicle... there are obviously lots of reasons. You've provided the scenario that's most beneficial to everyone... the car companies and consumers alike. However, read another way, OP was also saying there's no reason it should be LEGAL. We know they're not using it for their feedback loop. They're not interested in building better products. They're interested in building the cheapest products that we'll tolerate without affecting sales too much. The nefarious scenarios for using that data however, are more numerous. You bought the car. You paid for the car. You own the car. It should not be legal for companies to take your data without asking and without paying for it. Does that help clear things up?
Nah, if a manufacturer wants me to provide them with that kind of data so they can improve their product, they need to put me on the payroll.
The problem with this speculation is that is not how the data are actually being used. The NYT has done several investigative reporting pieces on this practice laying out exactly how the data are currently being used. While your primary assertion of vehicle health is, I concede, in there, the vast majority of data collected *without owner's consent* is used against the same owners. Primarily by insurers who raise rates based upon driving datasets they buy. Here is the latest (to my knowledge) Times piece. Might be behind a soft paywall, I'm happy to gift it to you (I never use those). If you can't read this and are curious DM me and I'll get it your way. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/general-motors-spying-driver-data-consent.html
To play devils advocate, it does greatly assist in finding stolen cars and tracking interstate crime rings.
I’m sure it does but that is exactly how they get anti privacy stuff passed lol “look at all the good it will do”. Not worth the price.
[удалено]
Fair. They said there was ‘no reason’ for it. Here’s the kicker: If only Tesla buyers, for example, agree to share their car’s data, that includes every other car being picked up by their cameras and sensors too. The age of privacy is almost dead, and we have largely voluntarily signed it away.
The Devil does not require an advocate in this case
I think it's fine to be used to track if the owner gives consent to the tracking in a specific scenario or a warrant is issued. There's no reason police should be able to get this data "just because" and warrant-less.
[удалено]
I’m not saying otherwise. But they said there was ‘no reason’ for this tracking. There are reasons, we just don’t love them.
More than likely the car company had a car stolen, calls the police, gives the police the information on the car and how to track it. I doubt car companies are giving this information out on cars sold….unless the owner of said car is in default and hasn’t paid their bill.
I will not buy a car that's got auto telemetry or needs to connect to the Internet for anything. Fuck no they are insane.
" ... an investigation from Wyden and Markey finds that only six car companies—Ford, GM, Honda, Stellantis, Tesla, and (to a lesser extent) Hyundai— require police to submit a warrant when requesting users' location data. Of the six, Tesla is the only one with a "policy of telling customers about legal demands, unless the company has received a judicial gag order." The eight other automakers will turn over location data to government agencies "with a mere subpoena, which does not require a judge's review and approval," the senators write to the FTC. ... " " ... Another concern is that hackers or foreign spies could access the same location data from today’s connected cars to snoop on consumers. The senators' letter says Hyundai “routinely collects and retains vehicle location data for up to 15 years, Toyota for up to 10 years, and Honda for up to 7 years.” ... "
> The eight other automakers will turn over location data to government agencies "with a mere subpoena Records that are in the possession of a third party have historically been considered less private than records solely in the possession of the owner, which would require a warrant. This is why things like phone records, bank records, and some amounts of customer information are available through subpoena. The laws have not changed to reflect the current reality where all data is stored online. Some online records still require more than just a subpoena. > which does not require a judge's review and approval," the senators write to the FTC. ... Not on the federal level where the US Attorney’s office has grand jury subpoena power, but your state and local police are still going in front of judges to get subpoenas.
They shouldn’t have those records in the first place. If I put an AirTag on your car to track you that is illegal stalking. These companies should be charged with stalking as well.
I have a notification on the screen every time I start my car that data is being collected and shared. I have the option to disable some of it at the expense of reduced functionality, but there is no option to disable all of it. And of course my location is being tracked through cell towers 100% of the time, and my phone is always in the car with me. Here are a couple articles on the topic of car data collection from 2021 and 2023 [https://mashable.com/article/privacy-please-what-data-do-modern-cars-collect](https://mashable.com/article/privacy-please-what-data-do-modern-cars-collect) [https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/09/connected-cars-are-a-privacy-nightmare-mozilla-foundation-says/](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/09/connected-cars-are-a-privacy-nightmare-mozilla-foundation-says/)
> I have the option to disable some of it at the expense of reduced functionality Then you don't have the option to disable. They are denying you advertised features after you purchased. Microsoft lost these battles every time. Dell and other OEMs had to give people windows license refunds because they can't make you agree to terms after purchase without allowing you to return the car.
If I turn off location tracking, then obviously location dependent features like location reporting during a crash or location tracking if my car is stolen will no longer be available to me. The built in navigation system may also stop working properly, but I don’t know anyone who uses that instead of choosing to share their location with Apple or Google instead. I guess I could always go back to my trusty Rand McNally Atlas.
It was bad enough when "If it's free you are the product" was true, but now we are paying... and still being treated as a product. There has to be some pushback or this will only ever get worse.
Exactly, if you lose features to stop data sharing, then its not a choice to disable. There is no valid reason why they have to datamine you just to have tracking available for emergencies. The practice is bullshit. The FTC can fine these companies too in addition to ordering them to stop, so hopefully they do fine them all.
I struggle to understand what your comment has to do with what the person you replied to said. Are you trying to argue that it's fine for car companies to steal data because you own a phone?
It appears you struggle to understand a lot of things.
Yeah it always surprises people so deep in their stagnation they can't even comprehend learning new things.
>I struggle to understand what your comment has to do with what the person you replied to said. I replied to a person who said the data collection is a criminal act and “they” should be charged with a crime. I pointed out that it is not a criminal act and there is no crime because you are notified about the data collection and you consent to it either by directly pressing the “OK” button or by continuing to drive the car. Either way, you have accepted the terms of the data collection. This is in the US. I have never owed or driven a car in any other country. >Are you trying to argue that it's fine for car companies to steal data because you own a phone? I’m not arguing about anything. I’m explaining a fact to someone who doesn’t clearly understand it. Edit: just for the sake of being thorough, I downloaded the owner’s manual for my car (Honda) and searched it for the word “data”. It appears on 48 pages in the manual and explains about their collection and data practices. There is no way (legally, at least) that you could say you were not notified, were not aware, and did not consent.
>I’m not arguing about anything. I’m explaining a fact to someone who doesn’t clearly understand it. Then what is the purpose of your comment? The person you replied to is 100% correct, the companies should not have access to your data.
> I replied to a person who said the data collection is a criminal act and “they” should be charged with a crime. I pointed out that it is not a criminal act and there is no crime because you are notified about the data collection and you consent to it either by directly pressing the “OK” button or by continuing to drive the car. Either way, you have accepted the terms of the data collection. This is in the US. I have never owed or driven a car in any other country. Ah right, consent like If I was robbing you and said "Do you consent to me robbing you? If not, I'll just shoot you instead." Makes it perfectly legal obviously, definitely shouldn't be something the FCC should take action on /s
> ... These companies should be charged with stalking as well. I would join a class action in a heartbeat. Not for any compensation, but just to make a point.
> Records that are in the possession of a third party have historically been considered less private than records solely in the possession of the owner That may be but the consumer never asked for this data to be collected and transmitted to a third party, there is no reason this data needs to be collect and transmitted to a third part, and there is no way for the consumer to prevent this information from being collected and transmitted to a third party.
You didn’t ask for it, but you do consent to it every time you drive the car. In the US, our politicians are never going to pass laws that favor the individual instead of the corporation. This leaves you with the options of accepting the reality of the current situation or driving a classic car. I spent a lot of time considering whether to keep driving my pre-tracking era car for another 15 years or if I thought the trade off was worth the modern comforts & conveniences. I eventually opted for the new car.
You can't drive an old car forever and it's not much of a consent when driving is a necessity and there are no other options.
My personal record is 230,000 miles but there was that one Toyota that made it to 1,000,000
Yeah well some us live in areas where your vehicle will rust away to dust long before you can drive that many miles. Unless you drive all day every day.
It’s hard to believe this would include European car companies like Mercedes and BMW, I would think they would be following European privacy standards as a corporate policy.
European privacy standards are expensive to build and maintain, speaking as someone who has overseen implementation on several services. Not surprising they shed that overhead where possible, as shitty as it is.
I guess they run separate servers for US
> The laws have not changed to reflect the current reality where all data is stored online. Some online records still require more than just a subpoena. Gotta vote repubs out. Dems will get new rules done via the FTC just like how they banned non-complete causes for all employers last week. But these are easier for a repub to undo in the future than an actual law. Vote against the do nothings in congress.
>Of the six, Tesla is the only one with a "policy of telling customers about legal demands, unless the company has received a judicial gag order." Shit, now Reddit is gonna support warrantless spying without notifying the customer.
If reddit backed up all the talk with walking the walk, sure, we'd be pissed at Tesla for putting public image ahead of public safety since public taxes are being spent on getting the police work done. By making it harder for publicly funded safety work to be carried out, Tesla costs the tax payer more money with likely the same outcome? That said I specifically signed on with an ISP that ignores all external data requests that aren't legally binding, and they commit to informing the customer (or cancelling services) in the event this happens. Thanks to that contract I know all spying on my connection has to be happening upstream since I haven't been disconnected/alerted to any legal requests.
[удалено]
will this include loss of gps? i guess i could use my phone to nav.
I still get free updates to my auto GPS maps, just updated last November. It's Tom Tom which when I had one of the devices was pretty accurate. There is an area that was built up a few years ago added a Menards (Think Lowes if you are not familiar) and all the roads and also fast food that popped up around it. My car GPS still does not have that entire area listed, I don't need directions but if I tried to get them it's just not there. Area was built up in 2019. My phone has no issues so I just use carplay to get GPS if i need it. It's far more accurate.
Your phone GPS is almost certainly better anyway.
Sadly a ton of new cars see this as a thief trying to disable tracking, and the car won’t start if the telematics module is offline.
leave the module plugged in, unplug the wire to the antenna. it's just how circuits work. Without the antenna, the telematics unit will just assume there are no cell phone towers in the area and will have no way to know anything is wrong.
Sure you weren't just on the free trial? Many auto makers offer 3 years of connect service included.
[удалено]
Others are saying that doing this activates "theft prevention" features that disable your car until you allow the company to keep stealing your data.
And also to LexisNexis without the drivers’ consent. LexisNexis then shares your driving habits w your insurance company.
You are the product
Thank you, me lord. May I have another. Indeed, we’re, and have been.
Wouldn't it be "mi-lord" since we'd be the common folk?
We’d be merican
Your data is another product. That doesn’t mean the car isn’t also a product.
Can confirm on Lexus Nexus. I've integrated Lexus Nexus into a few insurance quoting platforms. The data pulled from Lexus goes directly into rating. Tickets/road violations, accident history, and vehicle/address history. I would use myself as a test scenario to verify the the integration was working. The first time I did j was surprised with its accuracy.
Yup, definitely need to get my DCM out of my Toyota.
Removing the dcm wouldn't stop any of the information that I had worked with. Everything that I have seen reported on is public domain Information that Lexus can pull from various government agencies and insurance companies for reported accident history. The companies I worked for never used data directly from vehicles unless specifically requested from the customer. And that was a single company. That One company I worked for was testing an opt in insurance plan where you could place a device from the insurance company into your car to track your driving and adjust your monthly rate based on how safely you drive. In no way am I saying other companies may not get dcm info, but the 3 companies I've worked on quoting applications did not use direct data from customer vehicles.
> That One company I worked for was testing an opt in insurance plan where you could place a device from the insurance company into your car to track your driving and adjust your monthly rate based on how safely you drive. Insurance carriers will raise *your* rates based on how *other* people drive. I don't believe this for a second. I mean, I'm sure that's what you were told, and I don't doubt your story. I doubt seriously that anyone would receive a discount when rates are skyrocketing right now even for people with perfect records.
Key words here is that it was "testing" a plan. This was back in 2017 to 2019 time frame when I worked for that company. I doesnt bother me that you don't believe me. But i wrote the requirements on what data elements where to be added Into the api and passed along to rating. What actually happened with that test product. No idea. How it impacted rating? No idea. My team built and maintained the primary quoting platform. We collected the data elements passed those to rating. They would pass back the actual rates to be applied to spit out a premium in our platform. And insurance carriers do raise your rates based on how YOU drive as well. Get Into a single car accident YOU are at fault for? Or Get a speeding ticket. YOUR rates will go up.
You realize insurance is a risk pool, right?
[удалено]
I'm on mobile, it auto corrected. If you want perfect spelling, Reddit is not for you.
Autocorrect loves to fuck up your spelling of that companies name. I can’t believe someone would be pedantic about that.
And if you ain’t encapsulated and sold by LexisNexis You’re being sold by Equifax
Time to hack secret service Chevy Tahoes and post location data like they do with the celebrities flights
This is true for more than just your car. I work in software and everything from DocuSign to Meta is stealing all the data they can get their hands on and running away with it. The old timers in the government are just too out of touch to police us. It's literally a wild west. The only place you'll see any kind of actual regulations is for O&G and Healthcare. And even in O&G it's more about not blowing stuff up, not privacy lol.
Warrants are required when the owner of property refuses law enforcement. They have never been required when the owner of property allows permission. And they are who owns your data. Remember that whenever you use digital services, they own your data.
So much for "TiN fOiL" hats huh? Telematics need to be removed from vehicles asap. "cHeCk YoUr PoCkEt"... my guy if I paid $40k for a vehicle it shouldn't be tracking me because I PAID FOR IT. An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps... and these apps make money by marketing. If I pay for an app the expectation is that it won't track me. Plus it's more messed up that LexisNexus shares driving habits attached to specific VINs.
This should just be prosecuted like the crime it is. Mass spying and stalking. How is this not mass stalking? A corporation is a person, that person is being a creepy stalker. That person needs to go to jail.
its not spying if you're a big corp! It's *market research!*
simultaneously a person and not a person. thanks America!
[удалено]
haha, unless you leave your phone at home, your provider can narrow down pretty close to where you are just based on the cell towers and 5/4G antennas it ping by triangulating the strength of the signal. Which they will happily hand over to police in most cases.
All phones track you regardless.. has nothing to do with just the apps? The actual gps/wifi is always "tracking" for location purposes for maps. Anytime you're logged in to a browser for anything related to 'near me' whether it's a store like home depot "nearest store" etc.. it's all tracking. The car knowing where I am doesn't bother me.. because I know it has location services (nav) and other features like remote start with my phone... Sharing actual driving data is mental though.. I've gone 20 years without an accident on the road, even though the driving in my car would warrant a huge increase based on the "data". The other part is it's connected telematics.. cars have had storage ever since obd2 ports were a thing. Blow a motor on a 2004 car? Chances are computer is gonna say what it was doing on its last legs.. 8000rpm and kablamo.
I can turn my phone off, leave it behind and travel... using my phone is a choice, can't do much without a car now can I .
Depending on where you live in the US. NYC, Chicago, San Francisco or Seattle, all have great public transit system giving you more freedom without a car. Sadly the USA loves the filthy rich auto manufacturers and made this entire nation pretty much car dependant.
You can use a different car
> An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps. LMFAO! Cheap?? People pay several 100 to over a grand for iphones!
"cheap" when compared to a vehicle is my point.
> An iPhone is totally different because we're talking about a cheap device with free apps An iPhone is a "cheap device" now? I do agree that free apps generally mean you're paying in some other way but if anything iDevices are fairly overpriced.
America is China with extra steps.
Private businesses aren’t being compelled to give up the data. They doing it willingly.
To be fair Congress just passed a law compelling companies to share data with law enforcement without a warrant. So..
Source? Because the only recent passed law I can says [literally the opposite.](https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601266-house-passes-bill-requiring-warrant-to-purchase-data-from-third-parties/)
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/senate-reauthorizes-and-expands-section-702-surveillance Edit: they snuck it in with Ukraine funding. Joke of a government lmao.
Sigh of course they did
They aren't giving it up, they are selling it. And cash in this case is creating the willingness. /pedantic Yay capitalism.
You mean just like telecomm companies, which were selling location data on phones and just got fined to the tune of tens of millions of dollars?
this is one of the reason why i disconnected the 4G modem on my hyundai ioniq5. the other reason is if the company push a firmware turning my car into a brick on 4 wheels.
Senators might actually ban car tracking because they know the shady stuff they do is going to get leaked eventually.
This is why I drive a 1999 toyota pickup with manual windows
2000 4runner still going strong!
All of us “paranoid conspiracy theorists” feeling more and more vindicated every day. Yes, just like we’ve been saying, companies and government are teaming up to spy on everyone, everywhere, at all times.
Because no one decided to push back. The people would run like scared puppies whenever the govt cried terrorism or crime or when it became commonplace for LE to monitor the web. The public is conditioned for it now
Switch to public transport. Hurry!
Most of the time law enforcement is provided this in case where a) the car is stolen b) it involves a missing or suicidal person or c) the police have a subpoena
I love my 24 year old 4runner that doesn't have any of this crap
"I'm sorry, you guys have moving seats? Damn." No joke, my seat is bolted to the floor
tl;dr These companies **require a warrant**: - Ford - GM - Honda - Stellantis - Tesla - Hyundai If you own something other than that, this affects you.
Wow, now explain what senators are doing to millions of innocent citizens without any warrants. The Democrats and Republicans just came together for the millionth time to renew warrantless mass surveillance but oh boy they called out car manufacturers that should play well with the useful idiots.
Just wondering how is this much different than phones collecting location data?
Do phone companies require a warrant before handing location data to police? They should
Also your phones insurance doesn’t increase based on usage habits.
Yes, it was a recent Supreme Court decision - Carpenter v. US.
That applies to cell site location information only, and has nothing to do with phone companies.
Phone companies are who provide cell site information. There are two kinds, historic and real time. This kind of information used to be procured via something called a 2703(d) order, which is what was at issue in Carpenter. The holding in Carpenter explicitly dealt with historic cell site information - i.e. not real time tracking. But it doesn't matter, because the arguments that would need to be made to defend real time cell tracking are the same exact same arguments (Carpenter was just limited to the facts in its case). If they didn't win for historic, they won't win on the even-more-invasive real time tracking. Post Carpenter, you need a warrant demonstrating probable cause to get cell phone location information from a phone company. But yes, it does have "to do with phone companies."
They have no qualms in selling it though. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2024/04/fcc-fines-major-u-s-wireless-carriers-for-selling-customer-location-data/
I'm like 95% sure they do, and telecom companies have long been quite resistant in giving it.
it's not. It's also bad
Phones can be turned off, phones' GPS radios can be turned off while the phone is on, and the phone can be left at home while you travel. There are many ways to avoid your cell phone tracking you. If you have only one car and it tracks you every time you drive it, that is more fucked up and bad. I pulled the cellular connection out of my car. No problems, no tracking.
Google Play Services tracks you all the time. The only way to stop it is to run degoogled Android which normies are not going to be able to do on their carrier bought locked phones
They can still turn off GPS or turn off the phone, or leave the phone at home, just like I already said. Even stock Android and iOS allow the user to disable GPS.
And you can buy a different car or ride the bus.
When I want an abortion and I live in a state where its illegal, and I need to cross the border, I can choose to leave my phone at home. The car is usually the means to get across said border. Not to mention it enables police intimidation, unlawful arrests etc.
The problem is the cost of vehicles. If you pay $25K for something, it's reasonable to not expect that thing to continue to profit off of you by selling your data. Phones are in a different market where they make most of their income from serving ads. Also, most phone tracking leads to personalized ads in an attempt to get you to buy more stuff by serving up stuff you're already likely to buy. Vehicle tracking gives data to insurance companies who can then directly raise your rates because they now have data that says you brake aggressively.
If you own a vehicle, how is government able to get location data without your 4th amendment rights applying? The 3rd party data sales needs to end or not be hidden in a 20 page terms and conditions so people can make clear informed choice.
They make you sign a privacy policy when you purchase new cars. But the policy provides anything but privacy.
It’s Public Roads! No one has any right to use public roads unsafely or for illegal activities
I mean.. you can remove the fuse for the internet to the car...
How?
Should have a fuse layout in your vehicle manual. Just pull the fuse.
Isn’t gps satellite? That’s why it works without a WiFi connection
Gps is only a receiving signal. No data is sent up.
Watch some YT videos. It's not hard to take the tracker out of your car.
Is there a list somewhere of what year the tech was implemented, on a model by model basis \[snitch-free rides\]? Regardless of what the manufacturers say, it seems like the data's going to inevitably leak out by some means, intentional or otherwise.
Can you just remove the antenna to stop this? I Bluetooth everything from my phone anyway.
You can probably just pull the fuse
How do I physically rip the tracking out of my car?
My friend is a police officer in a major metro area. They can type up your plate and know if you’re in the area and where. Every car that comes in or out of the city is plate scanned. When they get an alert from one part of the city, they’ll have the guy pulled over a block after he crosses into their area. It’s only a matter of time (if they’re not already) that the highway patrol is scanning your plate when you get on and off the freeway and averaging your speed. My point being, the car companies should not be giving up this data because it’s not theirs to hand over and we have warrant protections. The idea that the authorities have your vehicle’s location at a moments notice is already past the point of no return. This tactic is merely cheap departments trying to short cut the plate scanning installation and management budget.
Who cares! These same people are walking around with a computer in their pocket that gets tracked constantly.
Car dependent infrastructure corrodes the public's freedom, privacy, and general rights. You know what doesn't track you? Bicycles and walking shoes. Even public transit has methods of fare collection that give zero ability to track those using it.
> You know what doesn't track you? Bicycles and walking shoes. Even public transit has methods of fare collection that give zero ability to track those using it. The list of things that don't track you gets shorter every day/month/year. Some people see this as a problem.
That's a bunch of garbage. There's nothing inherent about those issues to car infrastructure, it's all a choice that the car manufacturers chose out of greed. Many of our cars have none of that privacy invading bullshit at all. We gain significant freedom of travel by owning these cars as well, far more freedom than shoes and bikes offer.
> There's nothing inherent about those issues to car infrastructure, it's all a choice that the car manufacturers chose out of greed. You don't even need car manufacturers to do anything. Automated license plate recognition is super easy, and requires little more than some cameras at every intersection to track the movement of every car in a city.
Freedom like these: Government operated licensing and registration program. Mandatory insurance. Gasoline. Expensive maintenance, car and roads.
All those things are trivial to me, compared to the ability to travel anywhere I want at any time. My car is not expensive, as it's paid off and gets great gas mileage. Government taxes on mine are under $100 per year.
well that's rich lol, a legislative body that's entirely owned by facebook pretending to care about data privacy
It would be great if people had privacy, and it wasn't being bought off by the government due to the lax regulations around it.
Car companies have no reason at all to collect your location data in the first place. That bothers me far more than giving it to police. If they want to track me to Meijer for groceries, have at it.
Making them get a warrant wouldn't really make much difference. Judges routinely rubber stamp warrants with little or no scrutiny.
Can the also help me find my keys that I lost?
At a quick glance I'm a little shocked to see how many different people can actually issue a subpoena in the US. Ya'll have a bit of bloat there. I honestly didn't think a warrant was needed considering what the 2 seemed to be intended for but with who can all write them up it's not shocking to see that some of the companies at least put up a little fight. Although I'm a little curious how many of them they lose since I'm betting it's more than 0(kind of pointless to say they don't give out the data if what they mean is that they send out the lawyers for a bare minimum fight and give up 95% of the time and still never tell the people involved).
Does your credit card bank also sell all your shopping location data to police without a warrant? Senators need to wake up and smell the coffee. - car company - smartphone apps and OS vendor - telephone co - credit card bank ALL these companies might sell your data to police without a warrant right now What's stopping them? Senate are some slow ass thinkers.
Buddy they are in bed with them.
Buddy they are in bed with them.
You’d think they’d at least SELL our data to the pigs.
2006 S ion Xb. Manual trans bread box. Will drive that into it's grave.
Ban all cars just like tiktok
This is technically facism, right?
I think it's called technocracy. Everything is decided based on technology, because the computer is always right.
What does the computer say about the constitutionally of warrantless surveillance? Just because a computer is involved doesn't mean it makes the decisions.
It only does what it is told. If the programmer doesn't care about your Constitution, the computer doesn't care either. Nor does it even have any clue about such an issue. It's just happily and gainfully employed even though it doesn't have to eat like the rest of us. It revolts by running your electric bill up.
No it’s surveillance. Fascism is when they use the data to track leftists and persecute them.
The police are very likely doing that.
Fascism is when the pigs and corporations collaborate to use data to surveil and persecute leftists but not ‘loyal citizens’. They just surveil those.
This is why I will drive my pre- automated high-tech bullshit new era car into the ground. Cars nowadays are no longer tactile. They require "updates" and fobs and a button to start the engine. Fuck that shit. Give me a fucking key again. Give me gears. Give me levers. Give me dials. Fuck touch screens. I'll keep bluetooth but if I had to give that up too I would if I could stave off new tech bullshit. Only thing good about newer vehicles is "cleaner" running capabilities.