Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 182 posts

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#101

Post by Silhouette »

voz_ wrote: post #41
ep103 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bizarre to see the "I have nothing to hide, so why should I care" defense on the top of Hacker News. Post Scriptum: If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. - Cardinal Richelieu You have to move to feel the chains.

That’s not what I am saying, actually. I think tracking should be illegal. But I don’t live in a fantasy world. My point was that in our real world, where everything already tracks me, who cares?

My point was that in our real world, where everything already tracks me, who cares?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

Also even if tracking you is of no special interest to anyone and you personally do not mind there will still be people who affect you where those things will certainly not be true. You have elected representatives with the power to make laws that can profoundly affect you. There are professionals like doctors and engineers and law enforcement officers whose professional conduct and judgement are matters of public safety. There are investigative journalists who provide important checks on the power of others in our society. There are whistleblowers who might become vital sources for any of the above to do their work based on good information. None of these people should be subject to inappropriate influence and any intrusion into their privacy compromises that.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#102

Post by User23 »

Tarball10 wrote: post #15
moonterrace wrote: post #8

2019 car here, equipped with a rear camera. Been driving for 43 years and I refuse to use the cam. The thing that bothers me is now I have to check the mfg connectivity TOS and must opt out instead of opt in to what data is transmitted - it’s ridiculous. Don’t get me started on the ever increasing software subscription services these manufacturers are trying to levy on consumers.

What does refusing to use the rear view camera have to do with data collection? Those were added because kids were getting run over and killed by reversing vehicles. It seems irresponsible to not check it (along with all the other normal checks you do when reversing).

Refusing to use the backup camera is one of those peculiar boomerisms. Every boomer I know refuses to use them and everyone that I know that refuses to use them is a boomer.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#103

Post by photonbeam »

mech7654 wrote: post #97
rideontime wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A teaching moment. Sometimes the regulators actually do know what's best.

I am often frustrated at the poor visibility out of modern cars and I wonder how many crashes are caused by the poor visibility. It is the other side of the tradeoff that crash survivability data will not show- how many crashes would have been avoided altogether with better visibility.

Had a near miss today with a cyclist who was covered by the giant windshield pillars

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#104

Post by AlotOfReading »

Silhouette wrote: post #91
AlotOfReading wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same pipe that exfiltrates tracking data is bringing in the data for all the connected features of your car. That would include things like satellite radio, onboard navigation/GPS, software updates/recalls, and concierge/safety services (e.g. OnStar). In some cases, the same data is being used to both track you and provide the service, because the collection is happening somewhere on the backend. I wouldn't be su…

The network connection is a pretty fundamental part of the vehicle software architecture and a lot of things depend on it. Which is very worrying when you stop and think about it. If anything that actually matters is reliant on anything not travelling with you then that can not be a good sign for the safety and security of the vehicle. For one thing any vehicle that has any open incoming connectivity of any kind imme…

I should clarify that when I say it's a fundamental part of the architecture, I don't mean in the sense that it becomes unsafe or nonfunctional in the absence of one. Rather, I mean that it's a fundamental communication mode you have to consider when engineering a vehicle, just like cellular internet is a fundamental consideration for mobile OS architecture despite the existence of airplane mode. Hardware is selected in part to support the feature, storage is chosen to support log retention goals assuming periodic offloading, etc.

Whether it's unsafe, or a potential security vector, or has any number of other undesirable properties will depend on the specifics. Every vehicle is a highly heterogeneous distributed system, so the systems I've had a hand in designing may look very different than a different platform within the same company, let alone a different manufacturer.

But yes, every vehicle should remain safe without a network connection and privacy should be not only available, but the default.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#105

Post by Silhouette »

xadhominemx wrote: post #54
public_defender wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a false choice. There is no reason that safety would require commercial surveillance. Also, why did you put the word tracking in quotation marks?

They put it in quotes because no one is using these data to follow any individual’s life or movements. These days are all aggregated and/or anonymized before any detailed analysis.

Tell that to Jim Farley, the Ford executive who infamously observed, "We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing." He then issued possibly one of the most unconvincing retractions in the history of corporate newspeak the next day.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#106

Post by blendo »

bnjmn wrote: post #7

Are there any new cars / car brands that credibly promise not to track their drivers? Any car with a network connection for software updates seems likely to be harvesting driver data, or is at least capable of doing so.

Yes, our 2021 Mazda lets you opt out in two ways.

1. Every time you start the car, you can navigate into the system menus to deactivate data collection and transmission.

2. Call customer support, give them your VIN, and follow up in a week or two. That’s what we did.

Alternatively, I suppose you could just pull the SIM card or its fuse.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#107

Post by OnlineGladiator »

russdill wrote: post #92
OnlineGladiator wrote: post #25

For many cars it's relatively straight-forward to disable the cellular modem, and sometimes it won't impact the other functionality of the car at all. Chances are someone in a forum somewhere has done the legwork for you. Do a google search and realize how easy (or hard) it is to do for your vehicle. Most of the time it won't even impact your warranty, apart from the modem you've purposefully disabled and no longer c…

Ok, but what about when you take it in for service and the first step in the service manual is to verify connectivity, which they do. There car then uploads it's backlog of data.

To each their own, but my recommendation is to not go to the dealer after buying the car (unless it's to fix something expensive covered under warranty). I recommend finding a good mechanic.

That said, I'm not pretending this is a perfect solution. But it's good enough for me and it can probably help other people as well.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#108

Post by flagrant_taco »

NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #95
alejohausner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're leaving out the punchline of your reply: those side-impact bars protect passengers better, but they also make the car windows higher, and reduce visibility. It's harder to see out the back of modern cars when you simply turn your body around and look behind you. That's why backup cameras are becoming mandatory in new cars.

If the regulators really knew what's best, wouldn't they push to reduce the overall frame size of vehicles, rather than allowing monster SUVs to take over the highways all over these United States? I just watched a video where they lined up about a dozen small children sitting in front of an SUV, and the driver could not see any of them through the windshield. If visibility is a problem, then personal cars are too la…

If regulators knew what was best, I honestly think they would stop acting as though that can define what is best for hundreds of millions of people with a shortlist of laws.

Life is complicated. Our country is diverse in population, culture, environment, etc. What's good for some of not good for all.

The fact that there are multiple competing ideas of how to best design a car for safety is case in point. Larger frames and door reinforcement makes sense for intrusion protection, but the oposite makes sense to favor visibility. Which approach is considered so good as to make a legal requirement, and what options aren't included in that choice?

I'd be happy to see our government heavily fund unbiased research and public education. In this example, learn what different car designs do for safety and tell the public. Allows us to make our own decisions, empowered with a better understanding of what our options are.

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#109

Post by flagrant_taco »

foobarbecue wrote: post #29
alejohausner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're leaving out the punchline of your reply: those side-impact bars protect passengers better, but they also make the car windows higher, and reduce visibility. It's harder to see out the back of modern cars when you simply turn your body around and look behind you. That's why backup cameras are becoming mandatory in new cars.

Interesting. I didn't know that. Before the accident, I would have taken bigger windows over the side-impact bars if I'd been presented with the choice. And now I'm thankful to the regulators for taking away that freedom of choice. Odd.

Honest question - Would you rather have had the knowledge of the pros and cons of different designs, or the lack of freedom of choice when regulators know what's best for you?

Re: How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

#110

Post by flagrant_taco »

photonbeam wrote: post #103
mech7654 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am often frustrated at the poor visibility out of modern cars and I wonder how many crashes are caused by the poor visibility. It is the other side of the tradeoff that crash survivability data will not show- how many crashes would have been avoided altogether with better visibility.

Had a near miss today with a cyclist who was covered by the giant windshield pillars

I lived in Europe for a few years and was really struck by the focus on protecting pedestrians rather than drivers
Post reply on HN