151–160 of 182 posts
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.
Not that I can find. It's why I won't be buying any cars made this century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Essentially, no. Your best bets are the German manufacturers, some of whom (e.g. Porsche) have data opt outs for all services and exist within a legislative framework that's at least mildly protective of consumer privacy. Even then you should be wary about cars built for export to other markets like the US. It's common for the regional manufacturer to be a separate legal entity, with separate backend services, delive…
Japan's privacy laws are fairly strict and, to some degree, interoperate with GDPR. For context, I've a Toyota GR86 where opting out of data sharing can be done via an app. (Edits for some extra context) https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/images/doc/Toyota%20-%20Co... > (i) the Connected Services Privacy Notice located at www.Toyota.com/privacyvts (“Privacy Notice”). Carefully review the Privacy Notice as it applies t…
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…
Except that is the same modem that is used to call emergency services when you get into an accident.
Can you not just physically disconnect or shield the network antenna (assuming you own the car outright, i suppose if it's financed it might be trickier to do that legally)?
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…
Which is fine for me and others like me. I don't want any of those connected features to begin with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reverse cameras are one of the best things to happen to automobile safety in a long time. The automatic obstacle detection and braking is so great. I’m delighted that it’s such a success that it’s standard in every new car.
> Reverse cameras are one of the best things to happen to automobile safety in a long time. I agree, but I feel like cameras have made everyone feel the need to back into parking spaces, resulting in an epidemic of slightly askew cars that make it more difficult for everyone else to park. It's a small price to pay for increased safety, but it's stilkl annoying.
As a bicyclist, I hate it when people do this, and it's become increasingly common.
The problem is that people don't look when they pull out of parking spaces, so when I'm on a bike in a parking lot, I keep a close eye on the backup lights so I can avoid that car. When people park head-out, that critical signal is no longer visible to me.
I've nearly been hit by people pulling out of spot they parked head-out in a couple of times now as a result.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
360 overhead parking views fix that problem, but they aren’t mandated yet.
Good point. I find that view to be far more useful than any other, though I'm never sure if that's my video game bias showing or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm talking about things like: eyesight assists, automatic braking, side view mirrors that flash and light up constantly, etc. My wife has a new car with all of these features, and they're incredibly distracting. The car brakes automatically in parking lots when it sees shadows, beeps endlessly anytime it sees a curb while in reverse, and alarms anytime she so much as scratches her eye while driving because the softw…
You might have a dud or something because that just doesn't happen in modern cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that is the same modem that is used to call emergency services when you get into an accident.
True, but that's something I'd happily do without in exchange for not being spied on.
I feel for you.
It’s becoming impossible to practice what you preach when it comes to data privacy. ‘Don’t like it, don’t buy it’ is difficult to execute unless you don’t mind not having a car, mobile phone, tv, browse the internet or even go out in a public place. There needs to be regulation and at least the ability to at least easily opt out of any of this insanity, but until there’s one (or probably many) widespread data-breache…
imo, if you don't want the government to track you, the battle is already lost, but there is probably room to limit what private companies are allowed to do on the regulatory front.