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

There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 111 posts

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#61

Post by b112 »

derekdahmer wrote: post #59
b112 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't get is, why hasn't anyone stated the obvious. Why do cars have location data stored onboard? Personal information? GPS data? I have a phone, which already has stupid levels of personal info in it. Who on Earth needs another phone in their car, tracking everything, watching where I drive, who I call, on and on and on. I don't get it. No one needs any of this crap in a car. Take a phone for example, terrib…

Most cars probably don't store that data. The opposition ad is lying about whats in your car and who can access it.

If it's one thing I've learned over the years, it's that if someone can, and there's any profit motive, they will.

In terms of storing data? 20 years ago my VW recorded a great deal, as I discovered when the dealer's repair shop said to me "So you like to drive fast, eh?".

They knew precisely how fast, too.

What else is stored in that black box, which is often used by insurance companies, and police, after an accident? And required to be there, by US law? Or I suppose if they decided to execute a warrant against it?

These days, I'd be astonished if GPS data wasn't stored there too. And a lot more, as well.

Yet I say this ; do you know? Precisely? Exactly and precisely what is stored there?

Yet outside of the EDR/black box, there's the infotainment system, often with GPS data as well.

Note that I 100% agree with 'right to repair'.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#62

Post by ladberg »

dragonwriter wrote: post #37
kelnos wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have them in CA as well. I think in general they're a good workaround for getting things passed that the legislature for some reason doesn't have the political will to work on. On the downside, repealing these things usually takes another ballot measure (the legislature can't touch most of these), so if one passes that turns out to be a bad idea, it'll be harder to remove it. Unfortunately we do have a few persist…

> Prop 13, I'm looking at you This year's Prop. 15 would radically revise the tax limitation scheme adopted in Prop. 13/1978 by removing much commercial/industrial property from the coverage of it's limitation on annual increases of assessed value, and seems to be polling comfortably ahead.

If anyone's reading this and similarly hates Prop. 13 (1978), then please vote No on Prop. 19 this year!

It sounds good on the surface (helping disabled, elderly, and wildfire victims) but is truly just another way to extend Prop. 13 by allowing the type of rich homeowners who already unfairly benefit from Prop. 13 to continue to do so while buying a new house.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#63

Post by msds »

ISL wrote: post #25
Retric wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a double edged escape hatch. In practice the vast majority of voters know little to nothing about what’s being decided. On the other hand many third rail political views have a great deal of popular support. So, IMO the trick is to require a very large number of signatures to get on the ballot.

Agreed. It is useful to pass things that a legislature may never pass, like term-limits for legislators. In Washington State, the initiatives frequently yield legislation that has conflicts/dependency problems with the existing law, something that happens far less-often with bills from within the legislature. Also agreed that a high signature-number bar is one of the simplest/expedient ways to limit ballot-initiative…

And steal office chairs/break campaign finance laws, but I'm not sure if he does that for the notoriety or just can't help himself...

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#64

Post by Vinnl »

kibwen wrote: post #13

The other ballot option in MA this year, Question 2, would enable ranked choice voting for state and federal elections. There was a bit of a thread about this the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24561551 What's weird is that before moving to MA I had never even heard of ballot options. As far as I can tell they just don't exist in PA, so social studies curricula just don't teach them. I'm increasingly…

> What's weird is that before moving to MA I had never even heard of ballot options.

I'm not even from the US - what are ballot options? I can't find much about them, but from what I've seen, they seem similar to referendums?

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#65

Post by sschueller »

hprotagonist wrote: post #2

The No side's ads are incredibly scummy. The retired boston police commissioner has done an ad spot for Yes on Right To Repair specifically to slap down the "you will be raped in a parking lot" FUD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bye5DRBSpw The EFF is also strongly in favor, naturally, but i think Ed Davis will pull more weight if anyone's undecided. (when marijuana legalization was on the ballot in 2016, the then-…

It's absolutely disgusting how privacy and the right to repair are being mixed together.

We need better privacy but that is a separate topic.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#66

Post by nickff »

cheweh wrote: post #49
nessunodoro wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scummy is a polite word for the advertisements. It's been fascinating to watch them evolve in waves. First wave: POV of a predator in a parking garage approaching a woman. Grave female voiceover: "Sexual predators could track your automobile, and remotely control the vehicle - including unlocking the doors." The female victim turns as the camera descends on her - she screams - "Vote No on Question 1. Don't let sexual…

Over $23 million paid by automakers funded these scummy advertisements. Thankfully we know this from campaign finance transparency. The ads say in fine print that they are paid for by the "Coalition for Safe and Secure Data" and that top donors include "the Alliance for Automotive Innovation." A Coalition campaign finance report from 2020 [0] shows $23 million in receipts from the likes of Ford Motor Company, General…

Do these reports really matter? Did they change your mind about the issue, or shape your opinion in any way other than fueling your previous view?

I hear many people support these sorts of rules, but nobody seems to really benefit from them.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#67

Post by elihu »

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #48
elihu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That Yes ad raises more questions than it answers. What constitutes mechanical data? Does it include timestamps of when the engine was running and for how long? Is location data explicitly excluded? What about data that could be used to infer location, like vibration sensors picking up pothole impacts or gravel roads? It seems simpler to just say: "This bill gives you, the owner of the vehicle, the right to give acce…

If you are actually a potential rapist there are plenty of easier methods than setting up a fake repair garage and matching vibration sensors with pot holes. The entire idea is ridiculous.

Well sure, but if the larger point you're trying to make is that sensitive data doesn't get into the hands of the wrong people, "the data isn't actually sensitive data" is a weaker argument than "random people can't access your data without your explicit permission, and then only for a limited time."

The creepy "no" add is implying that your car's data is just available on some website for anyone to look up. That's a pretty big misconception that should be contradicted.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#68

Post by OliverJones »

On the positive side of this: My local repair shop has sent a couple of email blasts explaining how they'll be able to use this data safely to help us, and respectfully asking us, their customers, to vote Yes On 1. I'm all for it. And I do infosec for a living.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#69

Post by swiley »

b112 wrote: post #50
jghn wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're incredibly scummy but a super thin veneer. I don't know how anyone buys their BS. On one hand they feature grease monkeys talking about people hacking your car, I'm not sure people should be using their local mechanic for cybersecurity advice. More important, the fine print at the end makes it clear that it's the auto manufacturers sponsoring those ads, and their bias is obvious. I'll lose some faith in human…

What I don't get is, why hasn't anyone stated the obvious. Why do cars have location data stored onboard? Personal information? GPS data? I have a phone, which already has stupid levels of personal info in it. Who on Earth needs another phone in their car, tracking everything, watching where I drive, who I call, on and on and on. I don't get it. No one needs any of this crap in a car. Take a phone for example, terrib…

All of the crap in modern cars makes me worried about my 2006 toyota dying.

It bothers me how hard it is to talk to the computers in that, these new cars are an entirely new level of disturbing.

Re: There's another right to repair fight brewing in Massachusetts

#70

Post by technothrasher »

hprotagonist wrote: post #2

The No side's ads are incredibly scummy. The retired boston police commissioner has done an ad spot for Yes on Right To Repair specifically to slap down the "you will be raped in a parking lot" FUD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bye5DRBSpw The EFF is also strongly in favor, naturally, but i think Ed Davis will pull more weight if anyone's undecided. (when marijuana legalization was on the ballot in 2016, the then-…

The "No" column in the official state voter information booklet is almost criminally scummy. They quote Jane Doe, the Mass coalition against sexual assault and domestic violence, to make it seem like they're against the law. If you go to Jane Doe's website they say they aren't against the law, that the quote wasn't authorized, is out of context, and that they're disgusted that somebody would use battered woman as pawns to further their unrelated political agenda.
Post reply on HN