I have a 2005 Toyota and 69 Beetle ...
Fuck you, data leeches ... you'll get nothing from me.
Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
241–250 of 280 posts
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like this is not enough: https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/simpler-solution-for-dis... The most reliable way to permanently silence the cellular modem is to pull the relevant fuse. In the above case, this also disables the microphone, which I think is a positive. Unplugging the DCM entirely, however, seems to disable to right speaker, which is wired through the DCM for some reason.
>Unplugging the DCM entirely, however, seems to disable to right speaker, which is wired through the DCM for some reason. I'm cynical, but unnecessarily coupling the ability to send telemetry with some feature people definitely want seems like exactly the sort of thing that would be done intentionally.
[dead]
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#243I notice that not one comment here, nor the article, notes that this doesn't happen with a Tesla.
This is not a conspiracy, just normal human behaviour. The loud voices are loud. People are complaining about cars that do collect data. Do you see ANY comments about any manufacturer that doesn’t do this? The only time I’ve ever seen a comment like that was regarding older used cars. All it can tell us is that maybe this is something tesla should market (if it’s true) rather than bullshit like “self driving”
>rather than bullshit like “self driving”
You should go try it. Do a free test drive with FSD next time you have a free hour. You'll stop using the scare quotes.
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#244Terms of use to even read the article: > third-party partners process information about you and how you use our services, including clicks and screen recordings, using first and third-party cookies, pixels, and similar technologies
Any type of data gathering should be forbidden. The "with consent" is bullshit, as the only way to not give consent is to leave society and live in a cave. (No driving a car, no taking a flight, no reading a website, no subscribing to any service, not playing games, etc.) When there is no real choice there is no consent either.
Corporations have profiles on citizens that makes the Gestapo or the KGB seem uninformed in comparison. There is no freedom when the people in power know everything about you.
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strongtowns is happy to follow the money and incentives on all sorts of other issues. Why do they just throw up their hands and say "it's the developers" on this issue? Developers don't do anything that costs money, like set up an HOA, without a reason. The developers create the HOA because you need your >1ac residential development to pass stormwater permitting. While you theoretically could make each individual .25…
Not just storm water, but also things like maintenance of 'common areas', roads, and snow removal. Many small municipalities are budget strapped and don't want to be responsible for plowing/surfacing the new little 1/8 of a mile culdesac the developer created to build their 'neighborhood'. In carving up the 5 acres the developer purchased, the 30 houses they squeezed in left some remainder that wasn't buildable or od…
>so I can't really explain why HOAs go beyond the collective expenses into the draconian rules.
Grass is really good at filtering/absorbing/treating stormwater so you might have to force everyone to keep their lawns lawn because the way you've got the lots graded you need that little bit of extra because it lets you make your "shit parcel" where the basin will go a little smaller and squeeze one extra house into the development.
Beyond that I think what a lot of it comes down to is that local governments are invariably run by a lot of the same kinds of busybodies that HOAs attract and the way rules are written these days the "normal permitting process" exists only to let the useful idiots think that just about everything isn't discretionary. There's always some gotcha or twistable phrase so everything goes through a special permit or variance of some sort. That opens up all sorts of off the record dealing wherein the developer agrees to throw everything and the kitchen sink into the initial HOA rules and the Karens in government make sure those things are in there before deciding how to exercise their discretionary approval.
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
Besides the irony of a privacy-conscious user using facebook to buy a car... those "perfectly-serviceable vehicles" are 1. no longer manufactured, and 2. will not last forever. Unless a new age of unconnected cars becomes a reality in the near future, I don't see this being a long-term solution.
"will not last forever" doesn't comport with observed reality to date. There are literally model A's still on the road. Barring true oddities there doesn't appear to be a model of production vehicle that has gone extinct at any point in automotive history. Anyway, three of my cars are older than I am, and I am not a young man. Buying into their shit is optional.
Finding parts for older cars is a very real concern, aside from a handful of cars that are very popular with enthusiasts.
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
My wife's Ioniq 5 was hit on the bumper while it was parked. Took weeks for all parts to get to the dealer and cost thousands of dollars because sensors etc. if someone hit my 1981 Volvo 240 the same way I'm not even sure it would cause any noticable damage.
Someone forgot to set the brake in their car, rolled into the back of my dads 70ish pickup. It rolled the width of a parking row, on fairly flat surface. The car had no chance obviously, but it was pretty funny seeing the damage; bumper and fender, not just a minor one you could slap out with a good fist slam either. There was zero damage to the truck
[deleted]
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#248Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
other drivers will assume someone else already called it in and drive past
Good god thats a bleak thought, where do you live that people behave like that?!
Re: Data collected by cars and sold to third parties
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN on average is a little behind on the general EU "privacy" stance (though I saw some recent topic about that here). EU was about privacy, a few decades ago. Nowadays it did a complete U-turn and legislates mandatory anti-privacy union-wide laws every year. - Chat Control law, now all messaging must be intercepted and monitored. - eIDAS law, mandating that web-browser vendors must now accept state issued root certif…
Breathtaking levels of misinformation here. There is no EU law that mandates "all messaging must be intercepted and monitored." There is no EU law mandating permanent, non-disableable cameras and microphones in cars. ProtectEU is not a law, not related to email and does not demand any "backdoors." The AI Act bans real-time facial/biometric recognition in public places... which is a good thing. It does not "legalize A…
What do you mean no law mandating permanent camera?
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=PI_... https://medium.com/@shahadilh18/your-car-will-soon-watch-you...
ChatControl 2.0 is exactly "all messaging must be intercepted and monitored" ...
Some of it probably is a slippery slope argument however that slippery slope has materialized already in other areas ... And security plays a role here as well. Maybe the camera/software/system is mandated not to identify driver (as is written in ADDS "spec") but atrocious security the modern car has would probably allow for that somehow...