Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#311

Post by mrguyorama » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 6:15 PM UTC

tempfile wrote: post #273

EvanAnderson wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You want to hurt the company and it's owners... The owners of big companies include lots of pension plans, index funds, etc. Hurting those owners, who didn't have any say in the bad decisions, is probably not what we want. Jail for executives who approve or have knowledge of illegal activities sounds good to me.

> Hurting those owners, who didn't have any say in the bad decisions Why do you think this? Executives have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, so if these actions are more profitable, they are legally required to perform them. Moreover, the primary beneficiaries are the owners. Indeed, if you harm the shareholders by reducing the price of shares, you are harming them in the most fair way possible: In p…

>Executives have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, so if these actions are more profitable, they are legally required to perform them.

Zero percent of this is correct, and even if they had a legal responsibility to make "as much money as possible", which they don't, that would definitely not force them to commit crimes

The "fiduciary responsibility" is NOT "to make every dollar possible", it is a "don't purposely hurt the company" rule.

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#312

Post by mrguyorama » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 6:24 PM UTC

vel0city wrote: post #132

jajko wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but if you really optimize it to ad absurdum, everybody will pay according to damages they will cause, negating whole point of 'socialized' spread-across-variable-population insurance. End users shouldn't generally want insurance to run over-optimally, that benefits just shareholders of given insurance and not population overall. That I consider myself above-average driver changes absolutely nothing in this. And…

I'm not generally for hyper analyzed metrics gathering in this case (I don't like the privacy implications), but I'm generally for riskier drivers paying significantly more. Individuals should feel the costs of their driving more in the US IMO. I don't like heavily subsidizing people who drive so recklessly. Maybe then they'd realize overly building car dependent cities isn't that great in the end. Convincing risky d…

>Convincing risky drivers to pick an option other than driving seems great to me

This is the US. WHAT option?

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#313

Post by wcunning » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 6:38 PM UTC

oremolten wrote: post #305

This reminds me of the scene from Mr.Robot. GM / onstar likely set aside a few million in a "Rainyday" fund from the additional profit they made from this and that money sat in the market/bonds and they probably made 100x off that money what they will be fined/judgment-ed.

The funny thing is that they supposedly only made a couple million from this, total. I can't remember if that was an internal discussion from when I worked there a few months ago or a news article, but I'm pretty sure of it either way. That makes the whole stupid thing just dumb.

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#314

Post by klyrs » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:02 PM UTC

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #270

klyrs wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Safe drivers subsidize unsafe drivers and this subsidy can and should be reduced when possible with better predictive information. Okay, that's an interesting perspective, let's explore. A policy that can be unilaterally cancelled at any time, and forces you to put cameras in your car, could be the most efficient insurance ever. As long they manage to predict that you'll be in an accident in time to electronically…

Car insurance companies are already generally legally required to give notice in writing 30 days before cancelling your policy, even for material changes in risk. Let’s try to stick to the real world.

You're the one proposing to change real world policies. I find it really interesting that I'm speaking directly from the libertarian playbook and the anti-insurance folks in the conversation are telling me to trust the government regulations. Especially when those very government regulations would be eviscerated by the proposed changes.

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#315

Post by splitstud » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:04 PM UTC

digging wrote: post #110

akira2501 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Paxton is a crook, but in this case he's fighting the good fight. The Texas Attorney General is an entire office of people. It's always nice to know that while you want to judge the book by it's cover you're willing to put that aside. It is always odd to me that people feel the need to announce this.

Paxton is a crook though, abuses the power of his office, and generally would prefer to act in ways that hurt his political opponents rather than ways that server the public. He works against the public interest and should be called out for it. So, it's genuinely shocking for the TAG under his direction to be protecting consumers from these kinds of abuses.

[dead]

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#316

Post by splitstud » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:07 PM UTC

randcraw wrote: post #18

I can't imagine why this case should succeed if this same practice has long been tolerated by telcos or Facebook -- any company that provides no opt-out to collection and sale of personal info. If Texas had real guts, they'd pass a law that clearly prohibits the collection and sale of personal info without explicit opt-in. But nooooooo...

[dead]

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#317

Post by rockskon » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:29 PM UTC

I'm concerned that this practice will continue minimally abated with a mandatory inclusion in the ToS forcing you to agree to continually provide your driving data or else you don't get the car.

Seems to be standard practice in tech these days to lawyer-away any meaningful notion of consent.

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#318

Post by downrightmike » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:42 PM UTC

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #214

downrightmike wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should just have full data-autonomy enshrined in law. This starts that path.

There's really no way to allow companies to have your data when they need it, and also not lose it. Even if they don't sell our data, they can just get hacked, our info gets leaked, and now everybody has it anyway. Data security should come first, then data privacy, then data autonomy. HIPAA was basically created to do this (require your consent to receive your information, then require your consent to transmit or sh…

We need to fine the shit out of companies that have leaks

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#319

Post by rockskon » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:45 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #152

stainablesteel wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its not just that i don't want electronics built into cars i don't want data coming from my car i don't need a phone to be built into my car i don't need navigation to be built into my car they need to stay in their lane we need anti-enshittification laws

The best way to combat this is walking and bike lanes. With no alternative to cars for most people you will see this kind of behavior continue. Trying to pit automakers against each other on this topic and others is the misdirection. They want to distract you from wanting alternatives so that you don’t even need to have a spying car in the first place.

What about every single person that doesn't live in the city and needs to commute 30+ miles to get to work?

Re: Texas sues GM for unlawfully collecting and selling drivers' private data [pdf]

#320

Post by vel0city » Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 7:49 PM UTC

mrguyorama wrote: post #312

vel0city wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not generally for hyper analyzed metrics gathering in this case (I don't like the privacy implications), but I'm generally for riskier drivers paying significantly more. Individuals should feel the costs of their driving more in the US IMO. I don't like heavily subsidizing people who drive so recklessly. Maybe then they'd realize overly building car dependent cities isn't that great in the end. Convincing risky d…

>Convincing risky drivers to pick an option other than driving seems great to me This is the US. WHAT option?

We won't end up actually adopting other forms of transportation if we keep subsidizing cars for everyone.