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

Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

techno-fandom.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 272 posts

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#211

Post by numpad0 »

zevon wrote: post #87
Terr_ wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hopeful that stuff like Android Auto or Apple CarPlay will continue moving some of the risky obsolete-able complexity away of the giant expensive machine I plan to keep for over a decade (the car) and into smaller easier-to-replace ones (my smartphone.) A quick outline for those who haven't used them: The car's head-display becomes mostly-controlled by your phone, which is what supplies any navigation, music, pod…

This is a bit of a two-edged sword. I kind of doubt that Carplay and Android Auto will keep working with new phones as long as a car can. At which point you will end up with an old smartphone in your car or some workaround like that.

HDMI should have had a multitouch-over-EDID extension. An I2C HID controller with a spec-agreed address should be able to be just wired in parallel to EDID ROM line and it would just work. Lack of such standard must have strongly justified existence of CP/AA.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#212

Post by mox1 »

ethbr1 wrote: post #174
ryandrake wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need judges to start growing a backbone and declaring these one-sided "agreements" unconscionable. The company has outsized power over the purchaser, the terms tend to be one-sided, and there is no meaningful choice to the purchaser. These things should be clear cut cases of unconscionability, and judges should be throwing them out left and right and penalizing the companies who try to push them.

Absent something like a component of the GDPR, I'd highly doubt the judiciary in any country is going to originate a major civil right. The correct place ELA / T&A consent should be defined is in something like the GDPR -- along with strict requirements as to what standard of consumer free choice is required for it to be enforceable.

I would prefer to take it broader and codify it in law that:

1. The terms and conditions of a product, service, etc. "primarily" aimed at a consumer have simple, human readable terms. Like a food label or similar to the broadband label.

2. The terms are presented and acknowledged PRIOR to purchasing (not after opening the package, driving off the lot, putting the DVD into the player). The company needs to find a way to deliver the T&C's before purchase. If you need me to agree to 50 pages things before I can use your product, I didn't really purchase it, I am receiving a license to use it....

3. If these terms and conditions will be changed retroactively (for existing customers) that must be optional, opt-in and not required to continue to use the product.

I think this would stop a lot of the shenanigans companies pull on end users, that they DON'T pull in B2B environments.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#213

Post by BizarroLand »

ryandrake wrote: post #163
bradley13 wrote: post #91

I would like to see some legal and regulatory steps. When we purchased our Ioniq, there was no agreement for data sharing, etc. - we have basically a cash register receipt, nothing more. Whenever there is a major update, an insanely long T&A appears on the screen. No one is going to read it. The only options are "accept" or clicking it away. If you click it away, it comes back the next day. It cannot possibly be lega…

We need judges to start growing a backbone and declaring these one-sided "agreements" unconscionable. The company has outsized power over the purchaser, the terms tend to be one-sided, and there is no meaningful choice to the purchaser. These things should be clear cut cases of unconscionability, and judges should be throwing them out left and right and penalizing the companies who try to push them.

It's not the judges job to bring a case before the court.

What we actually need is a Consumer Protection Alliance that is made by and funded by people who want protection from this and are willing to pay for the lawyers needed to run all of the cases and bring these cases before a judge over and over and over again until they win.

This would mean people like you and me and a million others of us paying $20-$50/month out of pocket to hire people to sue companies that do this shit.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#214

Post by aidenn0 »

foobarian wrote: post #161
Terr_ wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hopeful that stuff like Android Auto or Apple CarPlay will continue moving some of the risky obsolete-able complexity away of the giant expensive machine I plan to keep for over a decade (the car) and into smaller easier-to-replace ones (my smartphone.) A quick outline for those who haven't used them: The car's head-display becomes mostly-controlled by your phone, which is what supplies any navigation, music, pod…

I can't figure out why car manufacturers insist on building whole parallel universes of UIs, media apps, nav apps et cetera. Doesn't it cost a ton? Do people actually use/want this stuff?

It's very simple. They want to "own" the experience.

If their HU was 100% Apple or 100% Android, then e.g. a BMW and a Honda would feel the same.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#215

Post by BizarroLand »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #139
bradley13 wrote: post #91

I would like to see some legal and regulatory steps. When we purchased our Ioniq, there was no agreement for data sharing, etc. - we have basically a cash register receipt, nothing more. Whenever there is a major update, an insanely long T&A appears on the screen. No one is going to read it. The only options are "accept" or clicking it away. If you click it away, it comes back the next day. It cannot possibly be lega…

This is the kinda of thing that was preventing me from seriously considering Tesla. I accept that there is a lot more tech involved so some updates are necessary, but turning cars into cells on wheels made everyone way too eager to not ship finished product.

If there's one device/product in my life that I do not want to have reliant on CI/CD, that I want delivered to me in a fully finished and ready to go condition where I can trust that absent material breakdown will stay exactly the same, it's my car.

Update your apps all you want. Change the layout. Betray your users and sell their data to AI, whatever, the consequences are on you.

Update my car, change its performance or range or the layouts of the buttons in the infotainment system so that I might be distracted or expecting an outcome that is suddenly no longer possible and I or the people I injure in the accident have to live with the consequences for the rest of our lives.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#216

Post by doctorpangloss »

ryandrake wrote: post #163
bradley13 wrote: post #91

I would like to see some legal and regulatory steps. When we purchased our Ioniq, there was no agreement for data sharing, etc. - we have basically a cash register receipt, nothing more. Whenever there is a major update, an insanely long T&A appears on the screen. No one is going to read it. The only options are "accept" or clicking it away. If you click it away, it comes back the next day. It cannot possibly be lega…

We need judges to start growing a backbone and declaring these one-sided "agreements" unconscionable. The company has outsized power over the purchaser, the terms tend to be one-sided, and there is no meaningful choice to the purchaser. These things should be clear cut cases of unconscionability, and judges should be throwing them out left and right and penalizing the companies who try to push them.

The status quo is, as long as clickthroughs don't hurt the consumer then and there, they are valid. Can you imagine if this status quo were upended? Chaos. The end result would be a uniform agreement, kind of like the GDPR, but more expansive, and guess what: the scope of what clickthroughs will permit would be expanded, not constrained.

This thing about judges... if you brought a complaint to court that doesn't show any harm, you'll get the opposite result that you want: judges will expand the legality of clickthroughs. This is what happens, without a doubt.

Privacy advocates have numerous strategic failures. One is failure to show meaningful harm of specifically the data gathering permissions in these clickthroughs, in any legal venue, anywhere. The harms have always been of other issues, like a data breach, and even then, the harms amount to ones of dollars per person, in places where judges have approved data breach settlements. Another failure is of leadership/education: they cannot communicate the very simple idea to the public that there is privacy in the sense of limiting government overreaching versus privacy in the sense of limiting dissemination of embarrassing personal information. There are so many steps in this privacy mission before the judges.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#217

Post by aidenscott2016 »

farmdve wrote: post #200
aidenscott2016 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

P2 Volvo?

You guessed correctly.

I’ve been following that thread very closely. Prepping myself to install cruise control but as I have a cem-b in my car, I have to solder to the board.

What changes have you made?

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#218

Post by kube-system »

msgodel wrote: post #175
ryandrake wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need judges to start growing a backbone and declaring these one-sided "agreements" unconscionable. The company has outsized power over the purchaser, the terms tend to be one-sided, and there is no meaningful choice to the purchaser. These things should be clear cut cases of unconscionability, and judges should be throwing them out left and right and penalizing the companies who try to push them.

It's arguably a violation of the CFAA.

It wouldn't be a very solid argument. Telematics are universally disclaimed in owners manuals. A good chunk of modern owners manuals are legally-required disclaimers of various sorts which are all deemed valid for those reasons.

And a ruling that it doesn't matter because "nobody reads that" wouldn't be a good thing either -- basically that would make most SaaS engineer into criminals.

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#219

Post by dansmith1919 »

rconti wrote: post #22

Had to look up "yuppie button" to figure out what they were on about. Sounds like a fun fellow. Lights up all of the lights on the back of the car for funsies. Oh they're all DOT-approved, so it's probably a good idea. Definitely a safety feature. Their manifesto makes them totally believe that everyone else on the road is the problem. https://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/yb/

“immediate communication is needed to make any impression on our cellphone-addicted, TV-culture populace with zero attention span nowadays”

Dude sounds insufferable tbh

Re: Vanishing from Hyundai’s data network

#220

Post by kube-system »

MobileVet wrote: post #179
zevon wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit of a two-edged sword. I kind of doubt that Carplay and Android Auto will keep working with new phones as long as a car can. At which point you will end up with an old smartphone in your car or some workaround like that.

This isn’t something I have actively thought about… but now that you bring it up, I am definitely concerned. If the APIs were deprecated, CarPlay would be useless as the auto manufacturers would not update their head unit. The thread about an F150 with a known Bluetooth issue is a great example. Number one vehicle sold in the US for a LONG time, and yet no incentive to keep it working apparently

Automakers didn't update the cassette decks in their cars when CDs came out. You could expect cassettes to be around in cars for a good solid ~20 years, but that was about it. At some point technology moves on.

> Number one vehicle sold in the US for a LONG time, and yet no incentive to keep it working apparently

Yeah, there's no incentive to fix problems when people buy the product anyway.

Post reply on HN