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

Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 307 posts

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#121

Post by lukan »

rockskon wrote: post #53
plagiarist wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a HN user recently on a related post explaining to everyone that they don't need privacy because they personally aren't harmed and a murderer was caught by one of these cameras. It turns out protesters don't need privacy, either, because of various reasons. Same for women seeking adequate healthcare, I'm sure. Or LGBT people attempting to exist. Sorry, I am strawmanning a little. Actually, we'll simply have…

In response to someone in another thread who argued against personal privacy, who said "Why do people feel they can behave in a way that can be blackmailed", I responded with the following: --- Yeah, how dare someone do or say anything that some random crazy asshole could use to threaten that person's personal or professional life or even put them in danger of physical harm. To hell with gay kids growing up in very t…

"That person who made a racist joke on Discord when they were 13 years old? That should be able to ruin them when they're 30!"

Or society could move on and accept that people progress. Also I am not aware of any instances where 30 year olds were punished for a racist joke they made with 13.

The only instance I remotely know, is of a german politician, who made a deeply racist and neonazi pamphlet when he was 17 - and the result was some public outcry but nothing else.

Still privacy is important, simply because those who do surveillance are not trustworthy either.

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#122

Post by dingdongditchme »

sanex wrote: post #72
dingdongditchme wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh god yes... but I am carrying my self chosen surveillance device with me every single time I enter a car.

At least your self chosen surveillance device doesn't end up reporting rapid acceleration events to LexisNexis and then Progressive.

...not yet. But I am sure they could.

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#123

Post by chii »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #82
Gigachad wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also surprising how little money is being made. If I was buying a new car and there was an option where I could pay 61 cents for the privacy respecting version, it would be a no brainer.

The automotive OEMs are really bad at monetizing this data. How much they make is not how much could be made if the same data was in the hands of more capable entities.

So you as a privacy-desiring car buyer could offer 2 or 3 times more than 60cents to the car OEM. Or, even 10x more. The monetization of that data by the third party surely cannot be 10x their cost - that would be an enormous margin that seem unrealistic. But increasing the price of the car by $6 is almost a rounding error to the car price.

Plus, if you were allowed to opt-out, the rest of the opt-in data from other people become _slightly_ less useful.

Therefore, all the gov't needs to do is to mandate that car manufacturers offer the option at a reasonable price (where the 10x price is considered reasonable).

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#124

Post by cferry »

jmward01 wrote: post #81

Hey major CEOs, if you think this is all so ok then please start publicly publishing your real-time driving/sensor data to your privacy policy pages as an example of what you collect.

Get ready to hear something along the lines of "Rules for thee but not for me"...

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#125

Post by Brybry »

taneq wrote: post #106
vegetablepotpie wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the legislation that exists requires surveillance tech be installed on new vehicles. https://www.gadgetreview.com/federal-surveillance-tech-becom...

That’s weird wording, it’s not live-streaming the DMS camera feed… is it?

There's no actual rule yet, they're still working on it. [1]

tldr; Impairment detection methods are currently too inaccurate to use (both false positive and false negative).

And then if anything is ever accurate enough they'll have to create testable standards that car manufacturers can easily implement.

And NHTSA is concerned with security and privacy issues as well. They'll keep updating congress on progress once a year.

My take is it's very possible the rule may never get made.

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2026-03/Report-t...

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#126

Post by huflungdung »

dyauspitr wrote: post #13
giantg2 wrote: post #8

I yanked the bridge between the rest of the car and the cellular board.

Yeah, I have a Ford F150 lightning. I just pulled fuse 8. I periodically connect it so I can receive over the air updates. I hope it doesn’t store all of its data and then upload it all at once every time I put the fuse back in.

[dead]

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#127

Post by prism56 »

I have a Kia that's networked (since disabled). I did a GDPR data request and after a couple of weeks they sent me numerous CSV files and I was a little amused at some of the data fields.

Here's some examples I thought aren't for my benefit.

- How long I let the car warmup before driving after every start, - max speed, - acceleration rates, - Lateral acceleration around corners tagged with GPS data, - every GPS datapoint, - destinations and exactly when I set off and arrived

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#128

Post by Terr_ »

sfRattan wrote: post #12

With cars, networked computers are encroaching on privacy from two sides: the computers inside the car sharing sensor data and the computers outside the car sharing camera data from known points on the road. Older cars may not have cellular data, and some new cars (e.g. the Slate electric car) may be specifically designed without cellular connections or with easily removable chips, but so much can still be inferred f…

> It's not enough even to have private cars. The solution must be legislation

Regarding the importance of legislation versus "just don't buy those", I think this piece [0] seems relevant. To summarize the argument:

1. Consumer choices are never enough to really change things. It's a false promise, one the people making the decisions are happy to let you believe.

2. If you do believe that "voting with your wallet" works, then when things inevitably fail to change it leads you to blame others for "not doing their part" and being insufficiently picky or not denying their own desires.

3. Ultimately this means: (A) No policy change; (B) You spend a lot of time denying yourself nice things; (C) It creates division between people who have the same goals; (D) Your experience is frustrating bickering and purity-tests.

4. Instead you should pursue real politics. While you can't do it alone with a computer, it offers: (A) Real results; (B) No self-sabotage when you truly need a product; (C) You gain allies; (D) You experience comradery and excitement.

[0] https://pluralistic.net/2026/05/21/purity-culture/#stop-fuck...

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#129

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Cider9986 wrote: post #86
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #26

Has anyone proposed a solution that balances privacy and consumers’ desires for connectivity features? EDIT: Sorry, I meant a legal requirement.

Rivian has given a cool solution, apparently because of consumer demand, or idk why they did. Rivian lets you disable all data collection: ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47967786 ) I don't think consumers care about their cars being connected. Personally, I would just rather use my phone for whatever connected features you would want in a car.

This might make up for its lack of CarPlay for me.

Re: Cars collect a startling amount of data about you

#130

Post by pizzly »

sanex wrote: post #72
dingdongditchme wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh god yes... but I am carrying my self chosen surveillance device with me every single time I enter a car.

At least your self chosen surveillance device doesn't end up reporting rapid acceleration events to LexisNexis and then Progressive.

In theory it could. Usually there is accelerometers on them so they can definitively measure this. The tricky part would be determining if the phone belonged to the driver and which car is being driven.

You could properly infer if the phone owner is the driver by determining if they use the phone less than the other car's inhabitants or if they are the only phone detected driving at that speed and location. Or they use the phone more during traffic jams and less during more intense driving.

Then this leaves determining what car is involved. You could potentially see if the phone is connected to the car's entertainment system. That would tell you what car model it is perhaps even with a unique car id though the serial number. Some cars may have bluetooth/wi-fi and the phone could potentially passively scan the largest most consistent signal to get the car's model without ever connecting.

Cross referencing from other data sources (cameras) would give this information though may still be difficult/expensive/unlawful.

So in response to your comment its possible that the chosen surveillance device does actually report acceleration events to LexisNexis and then Progressive. Or this is is a case of overly being paranoid. Either case the possibility exists.

Post reply on HN