Live data from Hacker News

Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

nytimes.com

191–200 of 256 posts

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#191
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expectation of privacy. Roads are mostly public, Google Glass can go all kinds of places

You will absolutely get into some kind of trouble (social or legal) if you put a camera on a sidewalk and start filming whoever goes by. On the other hand CCTV cameras don't receive any flak. Society is usually not obviously consistent about privacy matters. The ultimate determining factor is what seems creepy vs what is necessary. So its entirely possible that some societies might decide that the video taping done b…

No you won't, I've had a camera mounted on my house for years with no issues, I did this when my car got hit by a neighbor and I had to chase down camera footage from a CCTV camera operated by a home builder down the street, having that footage was the only way they were held responsible for it, as after initially admitting to it they later decided they didn't want to pay. Many people also run dashcams for insurance purposes, perfectly legal.

Personally I find devices that record locally or to user-owned services perfectly fine, keeping local recordings on your dashcam's SD card, awesome, keeping your home recordings on your NVR, NAS or private server, that's okay, but sending that to corporate or government owned services is generally bad. There's a limit to how much an individual can do with the data they record from a few places they own, their car, their house, etc. There's no limit to how much abuse a large entity can do with that data, facial recognition and more computing power than they know what to do with.

Drawing this line legally however is... extremely challenging.

The reality is what we have here is a tradeoff between freedom and security with any individual CCTV camera. Those are both valuable things in their own right and such tradeoffs should be made carefully.

When we then hand that data off to a corporation or government entity, that tradeoff looks very different - now they have access to thousands if not millions of sensors. The freedom implications become much higher and the security is often replaced with things like "how good is our traffic data?", "how can we improve our self-driving system to sell more cars?" or "how can the Chinese government bust more Muslims?". The aggregated result is rarely worth it.

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#192
post #15

> Modern cars collect as much as 25 gigabytes of data per hour. Links to this McKinsey study as a source: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/... Which says: > Today’s car has the computing power of 20 personal computers, features about 100 million lines of programming code, and processes up to 25 gigabytes of data an hour. McKinsey doesn't cite any sources. But more importantly, processing 25…

Processing means some conclusion was reached. You don't have to transmit 25gb of data to be spied on - only the results of having processed it.

{"insurance-risk": True}

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#193

One of the reasons I didn't buy a Tesla was because I didn't want Elon tweeting about my actions if something happened and I died on the road. The salesman laughed at me when I said this. While I acknowledge this is extremely unlikely, I'm still not interested. I want to be in control of all my data, all the time, in all situations. I don't want any third party to benefit from studying my behavior, ever. If you try t…

I agree with you - their public disclosure of details of incidents over the years lacked... class.

Also, you can opt-out of all tesla data collection.

There are a few levels of this. One is in the car's UI, LITERALLY hidden at the bottom of "safety and security" there is a [Data Sharing] screen that you have to scroll to see. It supposedly prevents video clips from being uploaded to tesla. Other parts of the UI ask for permission, such as traffic-aware routing. I don't know about the new chrome-based browser - we know google has baked tracking baked into chrome.

Level two is basically "disable the SIM" no online access. Stuff doesn't work, like the map tiles won't load from google and loads of other data can't be transferred to tesla.

It's still not clear what happens with level two when you enter a service center, because onboard wifi will auto-connect to tesla APs.

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#194
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car makers will get data they can use to simulate and test their self-driving cars. But car makers will also get full GPS traces - showing where you live, where you work, where you shop and every time you speed. And they'll probably get what phone was seen on bluetooth, how many seats were occupied, and what radio station was listened to. All identifiable by vehicle, and very close to identifiable by driver. Will the…

I saw an article here ages ago that stated researchers only needed very little driving data and they could identify the driver. So many hidden patterns in the way we break or accelerate they were able to with a high accuracy identify the drivers. I have no doubt cars can and do identify drivers.

Sometimes I've wondered if that data is also predictive of how you'll react in different situations or perhaps in a game like poker or stock trading. Maybe an AI can use it to tailor a pricing strategy just for you in not too distant future. that's near black mirror territory.

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#195
post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the crux of this issue is what is or is not "my" data. I think that any data that is generated as a result of my actions, or by machines that I own, is my data for all intents and purposes. I understand that you disagree with that. That's entirely fair, and I'm not trying to change your thinking on this. What I'm trying to understand is on what basis you are deciding what is or is not my data.

Yep, we disagree on this :). Sure, I'll take a stab at that. Data is data, it doesn't belong to someone just because they played a role in creating it. You don't care about the water company tracking your water usage or knowing how often you flush your toilet is my guess. Yet that is data you are creating. If you found out the water company was checking your dropping for drug usage and selling that to the government…

> You don't care about the water company tracking your water usage or knowing how often you flush your toilet is my guess.

You would guess wrong.

Water utilization metrics are a good proxy for determining the number of residents at the billing address which I consider should be private information -- even to the apartment lessor. It can also be a good proxy for determining health habits: use of laundry or dishwashing machines consumes a very consistent and predictable amount and flow rate of water. Even taking a bath would be fairly consistent, and a shower only somewhat less so. Not only would the amount be consistent, but the flow rate can be a proxy too. Are you going to tell me that it would be better for society to see what I do with water in my own home? Are you going to tell me that that information is the water company's data because they're providing the water that I bought?

Think I'm crazy? Check this out. There are many states where marijuana is legal. Despite that, the government seeks electric company's utilization information to determine whether or not someone's "likely" growing illicit substances. [1] Think what you want; I think this is government overreach. Which is exactly your situation with the water company, except with electricity instead.

And, as it is, I get a bill at the end of every month which details exactly how much water I've been billed for. Water is water and the bill doesn't care what I used it for, or for how many different people, or even what I did with it (...except wastewater which also gets billed).

Data, on the other hand: I have no bill whatsoever to tell me what data was taken, nor at what time. As things are today: I don't have an opportunity to limit the amount or scope of data taken other than to prevent it from being collected in the first place. Simply having a phone connected to the internet means data is being taken.

At least with water I can turn off the faucet! At least with water if there's a leak I can complain to the water provider and get repairs done! At least with water if the leak causes damage elsewhere I can get an exact estimate of damage done and hire someone to repair it if it were my fault: or demand the water company to repair damages if it's their fault.

On the other hand: once data's leaked there's absolutely nothing you can do to prevent it from continually causing damage. Was your social security number leaked? FACT: it was, thanks to credit reporting agencies complete disregard for security. Do you think sufficient steps have been taken to rectify that and prevent it from happening again in the future?

In the future when your water company is able to determine that you have three people living in your home instead of two (because your mother in law decided to visit for a week) and then you get advertisements for new babies (your spouse just had a scarring miscarriage through no fault of her own -- which prompted your MIL to visit), or for roommates (surely if you had a roommate for a short time then you're open to having a roommate for a longer time?), or they let the leasing office know that someone is living there without paying rent (oh wow, you are allowed to have guests over, right?), or contact the police because you live near the border and they suspect you're harboring an illegal immigrant (hope your mother in law brought her identification papers with her...): I think when that moment comes maybe then you might wish you had some privacy.

[1] https://www.dispatch.com/article/20110228/NEWS/302289766

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#196

Collecting my car data as a sanitized way of saying a creepy auto manufacturer is constantly spying on us. In what scenario did it suddenly become okay for corporate America to spy on us constantly?

I think for most people there is a strong disincentive from acknowledging certain realities. Superficiality is practically a social expectation in the age of twitter. Human discourse occurs through a series of one-liners. The subject of privacy in the age of IoT is esoteric and difficult for the average user to grasp or implement, and is basically discouraged. Of course, there is enormous money in data collection, and insidious corruption is an evidently common human faculty. So the truth gets distorted, the field gets flooded with (mis)information, and the average user, bewildered by the complexity and opaqueness, elects to ignore it, because all his friends do.

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#197

Something that bothers me is why are companies so casual about attaching fragile networked software to long-lived durable goods like cars? The manufacturer has no economic or legal incentive to keep that patched over the life of the hardware. This is the rotten shortsighted mindset of modern-day tech: all the benefit for the company, none of the responsibility.

Why can't they just shut it all down when they're done patching? Send out your final patch disabling networked functionality completely.

Nothing in the car should be reliant upon such services, hacking the remaining systems after this is disabled would involve physical access to the car, considering you can just as easily unscrew the pedal or cut the brake lines or what-have-you, that's probably an acceptable tradeoff.

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#198
(X) owners should control data collected by (X)

I'd add: at least possess this data, maybe also control (but not necessarily 100% e.g. I would want to be able to say, as the nation-state, that some data must be made available to others, e.g. safety related, accident related, energy efficency related)

Sounds like a fairly obvious rule. Doesn't make it easy for the business to sell the value added services things or to make moat vs competition...

Re: Car Owners Should Control Data Collected by Cars

#200
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not as creepy as giving a big corporation access to microphones around your house. It astounds me that much of America has done exactly that.

I assume you don't use a smartphone, for the sake of consistency. It's really hard for me to draw a distinction between home voice assistants that you can activate via a voice command and smartphones that you can activate via a voice command.

A smartphone you generally have to pick up and talk into - by their nature home VAs are just always-on microphones all over your house.
Post reply on HN