FTC needs to force auto manufacturers to allow the vehicle OWNER to disable data collection at the very least. If it were up to me it would allow owners to disable the sim card and OTA completely. I personally don’t know anyone who uses the in car gps over google/apple maps anyway.
Thank you for specifying that the collection of data is the problem, not just how it’s handled once collected.
Unfortunately, disabling the SIM or wireless module in the car isn’t enough, since collected data could still be downloaded at a shop during warranty repair, or smog check, or (if you’re unlucky) post-accident inspection, or by a mileage-tracking device from an insurance company.
Exactly! We need HIPPA style laws covering all personal data.
I’m not sure if HIPAA requires medical providers to delete your data, let’s make certain to include that. It needs to act transitively. If you request deletion, the data must be gone from everyone they passed it on to, and so on. If they send it abroad and cannot enforce the deletion, let’s have some million-dollar fines per instance.
I personally don’t know anyone who uses the in car gps over google/apple maps anyway.
And this is why the newer GM cars don’t support android auto / carplay
I will drive my 2003 Envoy I inherited into the ground, and after that it’s a 2008 Camry, and then I’ll ride that into the ground. Good God, if kid-me would have known adult-me would have turned into a Luddite…
Luddite…
Avoiding spyware doesn’t mean you’re opposed to labor-saving technology, much as avoiding tasers doesn’t mean you’re opposed to electronics. :)
Avoiding spyware doesn’t mean you’re opposed to labor-saving technology
They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices. “They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.”
What the fuck, I have been brainwashed. Ludd et al were legit. We could have a really nice society but somehow the average person is irredeemably stupid to not join a movement such as that.
they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages.
A machine that avoids that can be called labor-saving, in the sense that it saves the employer from having to pay for skilled labor. I get the distinction you’re making, and thanks for the article, but it really doesn’t invalidate the use of the phrase.
Still a good clarification, though, and I side with the skilled labor on this one. :)
Yeah true, kid-me would be very proud that I’m opposed to anti-labor practices!
There are legitimate uses for vehicle telemetry being stored by the vehicle and uploaded to the manufacturer.
Identifying unexpected behaviour under certain driving conditions and being able to contact emergency services in an accident are two important examples. Remote diagnosis in the case of a breakdown is another.
None of these uses include selling the data to third parties or using the data to create a profile of the vehicle owner.
There is a difference between destroying looms, corrupting LLMs by feeding bad data and causing an uprising like the Butlerian Jihad of Dune or the Second Renaissance of The Matrix.
Interesting. This sounds like the same kind of intention-laundering you usually see with, like, precious metal and tropical goods supply chains, but for violating people’s privacy rights instead of using slave labour.
Sounds like they turned the cars into IoT devices, where the user can’t have the data, but the manufacturer can.
And it’s definitely not just G.M.!
F*** all these spying, lying companies for normalizing this kind of behavior.
Can someone who is able to please paste the article?
Thank you
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
G.M.’s spokeswoman had told me that this data collection happened only to people who turned on OnStar, its connected services plan, and enrolled in Smart Driver, a gamified program that offers feedback and digital badges for good driving, either at the time of purchase or via their vehicle’s mobile app.
That this happened to me, the rare consumer who reads privacy policies and is constantly on the lookout for creepy data collection, demonstrates what little hope there was for the typical car buyer.
Harry Brignull, author of “Deceptive Patterns: Exposing the Tricks Tech Companies Use to Control You,” said: “In these sorts of agreements, they need to be very clear about the true function of it.
Ms. Barker said G.M.’s terms and privacy statement allowed the company to share information with “third parties” — legalese that people agree to on the first screen the salesman was instructed to show us.
Kate Aishton, a lawyer who advises companies on data and privacy practices, deemed the process poorly designed for obtaining actual user consent, particularly since it takes place in a high-pressure sales environment.
A new car, like mine, has hundreds of sensors, the former employee said, so even just a 15-minute trip creates millions of data points, including GPS location — all of which is broadcast in near real time to G.M.
Saved 90% of original text.
I hope car makers keep making those “basic trim” cars with nothing actually “smart” about them. Those are the ones I go for, and just replace the radio with my own. I don’t need anything from my car except drive and play music through wire or Bluetooth.
I drove one of these recently as a rental, and told my partner that they were tracking our every move to send to our insurance company. Didn’t believe me, so thank you for this article! I’ll always feel like I’m being watched and recorded in new cars. I don’t even like having personal conversations in them for fear of a potential active mic somewhere…
