I'd like to take this opportunity to reference this thread from a couple of years ago on a car question forum. The discussion was focused around how it was very "tin foil hat" to want to disable...
I'd like to take this opportunity to reference this thread from a couple of years ago on a car question forum.
The discussion was focused around how it was very "tin foil hat" to want to disable the antenna because nobody except Toyota would get or care about the data. There is no hacker trying to break in and retrieve it.
And, yeah, they were right. Nobody is trying to break in and steal your data. That doesn't mean that your data can't and won't be used against you later as more and more connections are stitched together. Brake hard because you were driving defensively and saw someone running a stop sign? It's the same hard brake that shows up because someone was looking down at their cell phone and didn't notice the person in front of them was slowing down. It's all data without context, but data that can and will be used against you as soon as it is practical to do so.
There is further discussion on that thread that none of the data is "misused" - and that discussion is correct too. All of the information was collected and used exactly as intended, to somehow extract more money from people.
And breaking the antenna likely wouldn't help with this either. There's nothing stopping insurance companies for charging you more based on your driving habits. But there's also nothing stopping...
And breaking the antenna likely wouldn't help with this either. There's nothing stopping insurance companies for charging you more based on your driving habits. But there's also nothing stopping them from charging you more because your new vehicle, which they know has this spying capability, isn't returning data. They wouldn't even have to prove you deliberately broke the antenna. They could say, "we don't know whether you deliberately disabled one of your vehicle's components, or if it broke naturally and you don't keep up with vehicle maintenance. Either way, we're charging you more."
When tracking becomes standard, disabling tracking puts a target on your back and makes you suspicious. If you simply have an older car, the insurance company won't expect telemetry from you. But if you disable the tracking, they'll flag you as suspicious if they do receive tracking data from 99.9% of the other owners of your vehicle. You won't even be able to claim, "oh, I just live in an area with bad cell coverage," as they know exactly where you live; your zip code is one way they price your policy. If they're getting telemetry from all your neighbors, but not from you, then they know there's something weird with your car.
Currently this mandatory tracking only applies to newer vehicles, but cars just keep getting older. Eventually the share of cars on the road that don't have this tracking ability will be so small that the major insurance companies can just decline coverage for the models that don't have it. If 95% of cars on the road have tracking capability, then the big insurance companies can simply decline to write policies for the older vehicles. Your 1998 Toyota Corolla might still be running in 2035, but the big insurance carriers will just refuse to write you a policy for it. If their whole operation is built on pricing risk based on individual driving data, they will simply refuse to write policies for any without it.
You likely still would be able to get an insurance policy for an older car without tracking, but it would have to be by specialty carriers that write policies for antique vehicles. And there's nothing stopping even them from requiring tracking either. Even for really old antiques, they might require after-market tracking devices if you want to get a policy. If you're a historical car enthusiast, you might need to let the insurance company install an aftermarket tracking device in the old Model T if you want an insurance policy. You could be driving around in 1920s Model T, and you would still have to have a little GPS chip installed that monitored your acceleration, breaking, and tracked your every move.
To be clear - I am not advocating for people going in and disabling the antenna in their vehicles (for the reasons you stated, as well as the fact that it tends to be in really awkward places that...
To be clear - I am not advocating for people going in and disabling the antenna in their vehicles (for the reasons you stated, as well as the fact that it tends to be in really awkward places that would suck to get to). My point was entirely that data can and will be used against you even if it isn't the classic idea of a guy in a hoodie holding a laptop up to your car trying to intercept the data. It isn't tinfoil hat territory.
Let’s hope that aftermarket chips for GPS spoofing and other forms of telemetry fraud become popular with enthusiasts, then. Fill the data pool with garbage.
Let’s hope that aftermarket chips for GPS spoofing and other forms of telemetry fraud become popular with enthusiasts, then. Fill the data pool with garbage.
I'm so tired. Is it really too much to ask to simply go outside and walk around the neighborhood without the corporatacracy minmaxing such mundane behavior for profit? stuff is already more...
All of the information was collected and used exactly as intended, to somehow extract more money from people.
I'm so tired. Is it really too much to ask to simply go outside and walk around the neighborhood without the corporatacracy minmaxing such mundane behavior for profit? stuff is already more expensive as is, why do they even need excuses like this to crank it up further?
I hate that it's really only because they can that they will. Governments have never moved quickly or on their own to protect people's freedoms, and what's too bad about this data capture moment...
I hate that it's really only because they can that they will. Governments have never moved quickly or on their own to protect people's freedoms, and what's too bad about this data capture moment is that they're not likely to since people are giving it up themselves.
I sincerely hope that generations that grew up with tech will revolt against this, but I'm certainly pessimistic. People have terrible tech literacy.
This isn't necessarily a tech literacy issue. Folks who have grown up with their lives public on the Internet may not view privacy the same way that someone who grew up pre Facebook does. The ends...
I sincerely hope that generations that grew up with tech will revolt against this, but I'm certainly pessimistic. People have terrible tech literacy.
This isn't necessarily a tech literacy issue. Folks who have grown up with their lives public on the Internet may not view privacy the same way that someone who grew up pre Facebook does. The ends of the spectrum seem to be "I have a stalker" and "I film my life and put it on Twitch/YouTube."
It's nice to have 2005 and 2017 (cheapest Ford Focus) cars. One doesn't have to cope with this modern crap. And once time comes to buy new car after the 2005 one becomes unsustainable (too much...
It's nice to have 2005 and 2017 (cheapest Ford Focus) cars. One doesn't have to cope with this modern crap. And once time comes to buy new car after the 2005 one becomes unsustainable (too much for repairs than the price of the car), we will look into another (cheap) used car.
I really liked the one comment where someone brought up how the car manufacturers now enjoy metering out already-installed “upgrades” for a cost. Or, potentially, shutting things off unless you...
I really liked the one comment where someone brought up how the car manufacturers now enjoy metering out already-installed “upgrades” for a cost. Or, potentially, shutting things off unless you pay for them. (Blackmail?)
Bolt owner here. I am certain I never signed up for OnStar Smart Driver. Just checked my app. After tapping on the Smart Driver section, it gave me the onboarding tutorial and then dumped me into...
Bolt owner here. I am certain I never signed up for OnStar Smart Driver.
Just checked my app. After tapping on the Smart Driver section, it gave me the onboarding tutorial and then dumped me into my stats screen. I could see detailed information on every single trip I’ve taken since November 2023.
It gives the following:
A map of the trip which also shows locations of hard brakings and accelerations
The time, date, and duration of the trip
The number of hard brakings and accelerations
Percentage of the trip traveled over 80 MPH
Average speed
Percentage of the trip that was a “Late Night Drive” (I think this refers to 12:00 AM - 4:00 AM)
Percentage of the trip that the driver’s seatbelt was buckled
I toggled it off and it said my data would be deleted. I’m pissed it was even being tracked in the first place, but I’m also pessimistic enough to believe that the toggle is probably just a placebo and they’ll keep gathering my data anyway.
Update: sent this article to two of my friends who are also Bolt owners. Smart Driver was active for both of them as well. Also pinging fellow Bolt owner @Akir, just in case you missed this news.
Update: sent this article to two of my friends who are also Bolt owners. Smart Driver was active for both of them as well.
Also pinging fellow Bolt owner @Akir, just in case you missed this news.
Exact same story for me. I never opted in, and was never alerted to being enrolled in this program. The only thing even remotely close to notification was that the monthly diagnostic report...
Exact same story for me. I never opted in, and was never alerted to being enrolled in this program. The only thing even remotely close to notification was that the monthly diagnostic report started mentioning it with a link to describe what it was, which I never bothered to look at because it looked tons of other corporate branded BS that they always come up with.
If you hear anything about a class action lawsuit, let me know.
Just curious as a recent Bolt owner, are you paying for OnStar to use the app? I tried setting it up when we first bought the car but after some googling came to the conclusion I needed OnStar to...
Just curious as a recent Bolt owner, are you paying for OnStar to use the app? I tried setting it up when we first bought the car but after some googling came to the conclusion I needed OnStar to use the app which I wasn't interested in paying for so I just deleted the app. Is that the case?
Nope, I’m not paying for OnStar (I think it’s a huge ripoff!). Without it, the app is still technically functional but nearly useless. The only things I can do are see my charge status, range, and...
Nope, I’m not paying for OnStar (I think it’s a huge ripoff!).
Without it, the app is still technically functional but nearly useless. The only things I can do are see my charge status, range, and tire pressure. The bottom third of the screen is a permanent ad for me to “Shop Accessories.”
I agree there. Pretty expensive for essentially nothing I don't already have in a smart phone that does it better as far as I can tell. What the name of the app? I'm wondering if I got the wrong...
I agree there. Pretty expensive for essentially nothing I don't already have in a smart phone that does it better as far as I can tell.
What the name of the app? I'm wondering if I got the wrong one initially because I couldn't even sign in.
Thanks, after some more investigation I found out my OnStar account didn't like to my Chevrolet account. I signed in online and it prompted me to connect them and now the app works. Glad I tried...
Thanks, after some more investigation I found out my OnStar account didn't like to my Chevrolet account. I signed in online and it prompted me to connect them and now the app works. Glad I tried it again.
In some cases driving data was being shared without the permission of the car owner. And the insurance companies jacked up people's rates. Quelle surprise!
LexisNexis, which generates consumer risk profiles for the insurers, knew about every trip G.M. drivers had taken in their cars, including when they sped, braked too hard or accelerated rapidly.
In some cases driving data was being shared without the permission of the car owner. And the insurance companies jacked up people's rates. Quelle surprise!
And even if they did have "permission," they're lying by omission by claiming that. I'm sure buried in the paperwork you sign is some language agreeing to tracking. However, it is not possible for...
And even if they did have "permission," they're lying by omission by claiming that. I'm sure buried in the paperwork you sign is some language agreeing to tracking. However, it is not possible for anyone other than the very rich to fully read all the contracts they sign. I've seen estimates before that, if you were to attempt to fully read every consumer contract, website terms of service, etc., that you encounter in a given year, that would literally have to be your full-time job. The only people who can actually afford to review all the things they sign are people with the absurd wealth necessary to hire an attorney to review everything.
This is why in academic research involving human beings, simply having them sign a waiver is never satisfactory. Yes, in the bought-and-paid-for legal system we have, simply signing that you agree to something is often legally binding. But it's a lie. It's not true informed consent. We can't choose whether to have our privacy violated or not, because it literally isn't possible for all but the top 0.1% to actually read everything they sign.
Just to be clear, because I think this is a huge part of the issue with modern society, it's not that you can't read it, so much as you have 0 leverage to do anything about it. When all companies...
However, it is not possible for anyone other than the very rich to fully read all the contracts they sign.
Just to be clear, because I think this is a huge part of the issue with modern society, it's not that you can't read it, so much as you have 0 leverage to do anything about it.
When all companies put "sign your life away" in their contracts, your ability to meaningfully fight, especially for major purchases, is just nonexistent. Some of the things they're putting in there almost certainly won't hold up in court, but good luck ever getting that far, and even worse some of it would, with the current argument just being "well go buy something else then" when everyone else does the same.
This is exactly where the asleep at the wheel congress should be making laws, but of course that's never going to happen because they're the kind of people who can get exclusions to any part of these rules they don't like, are just totally ignorant it's happening anyways, and of course get a nice chunk of donations from it.
Do you think things will change as the body of congress changes from the silent generation/boomer era, or is the greed and lack of empathy cross-generational? median congress age is late 50's so...
that's never going to happen because they're the kind of people who can get exclusions to any part of these rules they don't like, are just totally ignorant it's happening anyways, and of course get a nice chunk of donations from it.
Do you think things will change as the body of congress changes from the silent generation/boomer era, or is the greed and lack of empathy cross-generational? median congress age is late 50's so we should theoretically have started the shift towards Gen X in the policy seat.
That technically applies to the people too. Millenials/Gen Y are starting to age into what is historically a more politically active age bracket. Will they vote for proper representatives or are we just as prone to the same narrative as those before us?
I'd hope that with a new generation in power we'd see a bias toward this kind of action, but what disappoints me (or maybe it's just confusing) is that criticism would first come from a justice...
I'd hope that with a new generation in power we'd see a bias toward this kind of action, but what disappoints me (or maybe it's just confusing) is that criticism would first come from a justice and oppression perspective over a nuts and bolts tech perspective.
Maybe I'm noodling in my own little corner, but millennials and especially Gen Z have been careening toward being tech oblivious ever since the smart phone came out. Understanding how the actual tech works has been regressing when the internet and devices became walled gardens with hand-holding app experiences.
This sounds like a 'When I was your age...!' statement, but when the Z's I know don't understand folder hierarchies and file extensions, I begin to get worried.
The system as it stands self selects for those traits. While I do think a younger generation in Congress would be an improvement, the entire election process we have is going to encourage those...
The system as it stands self selects for those traits. While I do think a younger generation in Congress would be an improvement, the entire election process we have is going to encourage those who are constantly focused on donations first, because those are the ones who win
This could be fun as my husband and I share our Bolt. It would be really nice if the stuff we opted out of thanks to CA privacy laws actually applied to the car's data.
This could be fun as my husband and I share our Bolt. It would be really nice if the stuff we opted out of thanks to CA privacy laws actually applied to the car's data.
The more crap I hear about new cars, the more I appreciate my 21 year old car (which also still has tactile buttons and not a touch screen to operate it, including on the radio).
The more crap I hear about new cars, the more I appreciate my 21 year old car (which also still has tactile buttons and not a touch screen to operate it, including on the radio).
This, seriously. I'm going to stick to cars from the 80s - 2000s from now on, as they are new enough to be fuel injected and have a lot of modern conveniences, but old enough that computers...
This, seriously. I'm going to stick to cars from the 80s - 2000s from now on, as they are new enough to be fuel injected and have a lot of modern conveniences, but old enough that computers haven't taken over every component and put flashy screens all over your dashboard. It feels so much better to drive when the throttle and steering are mechanically connected rather than the drive-by-wire type systems with floaty controls that are common in cars nowadays.
You're obviously being sarcastic, but that's literally a thing! The past 3 times I've signed up for auto insurance, they've asked me if I want to sign up for their Safe Driver discount, where they...
You're obviously being sarcastic, but that's literally a thing! The past 3 times I've signed up for auto insurance, they've asked me if I want to sign up for their Safe Driver discount, where they either have me use an app, or send me a little doo-hickey to plug into my vehicle, that sends data to them, and they offer discounts based on driving.
But if they're already getting the same fucking data, what's the point?!
You're hitting a couple marks here... A driver who signs up for safe driver discounts is willing to be actively tracked and likely to drive safer because they know they're being tracked. The car...
You're hitting a couple marks here...
A driver who signs up for safe driver discounts is willing to be actively tracked and likely to drive safer because they know they're being tracked.
The car sends them the into and they can cross reference it with the extra data and have an even more robust data set.
They've essentially jacked up everyone's rate anyway and the 'discount' is a percentage of the price increase - so, you're not actually getting any discount they've just jacked you up a little less.
I can't remember the exact number, but the insurance discount i was offered to install a monitoring device was laughable. I'm disinclined to agree to tracking just out of principle, so obviously...
I can't remember the exact number, but the insurance discount i was offered to install a monitoring device was laughable.
I'm disinclined to agree to tracking just out of principle, so obviously I'm not the target market, but it didn't feel like a valuable offer at all.
Seems unlikely. Vehicle insurance is a business not a charity. It would make little sense for them to take a double loss by paying to acquire the data while also permanently giving you a discount....
Seems unlikely. Vehicle insurance is a business not a charity. It would make little sense for them to take a double loss by paying to acquire the data while also permanently giving you a discount.
Even if someone managed to drive with 0 "infractions" (not sure how else to call these) their rates would increase as the average price paid by the drivers around them goes up
I don't know, insurance companies do compete with each other for well qualified customers who are unlikely to file claims. Structuring your rates such that drivers receive safe driver discounts...
I don't know, insurance companies do compete with each other for well qualified customers who are unlikely to file claims. Structuring your rates such that drivers receive safe driver discounts helps with your recruitment and retention of customers.
That might mean having a higher starting rate, but I bet at least some would do so in order to be able to advertise discounts.
Makes about as much sense as getting a promotion (or not laid off) based on the quality of work performed. So, of course not. Corporate veneer of loyalty bonuses have long died off.
Makes about as much sense as getting a promotion (or not laid off) based on the quality of work performed. So, of course not. Corporate veneer of loyalty bonuses have long died off.
When I bought my car in 2017 I was surprised by how difficult it was to get a non Wi-Fi enabled car. At the time I'd read the Wired car hacking story and been to at least one Defcon car hacking...
When I bought my car in 2017 I was surprised by how difficult it was to get a non Wi-Fi enabled car. At the time I'd read the Wired car hacking story and been to at least one Defcon car hacking village, possibly two.
I'd been told that automakers can tell who is driving the car based on advertising and breaking speed. I'd also been told that there were no software security standards for cars, only software standards for handling things like braking. I ended up having to special order my car in order to not have Wi-Fi.
I'm very pro-privacy but I figured that if insurers were giving 15%+ discounts to safe drivers then really what they'd done was increase rates for everyone, and then on documented less-safer...
I'm very pro-privacy but I figured that if insurers were giving 15%+ discounts to safe drivers then really what they'd done was increase rates for everyone, and then on documented less-safer drivers on top of that. So I signed up for the driver telemetry thing to prove I'm a safe driver (and maybe I have more rights over my data). Seems that at this point they'd likely have my data anyway (though I still keep a dumb car around).
So figuring a 20% rate increase, thats 120%. I get a 15% discount on that 120% if I'm a good boy and that brings me down to 102%. I'm not actually saving money compared to before, and I may not have any more rights over my data, but at least now I can fight a further rate increase (which is essentially what this whole process of proof is anyway).
I'd like to take this opportunity to reference this thread from a couple of years ago on a car question forum.
The discussion was focused around how it was very "tin foil hat" to want to disable the antenna because nobody except Toyota would get or care about the data. There is no hacker trying to break in and retrieve it.
And, yeah, they were right. Nobody is trying to break in and steal your data. That doesn't mean that your data can't and won't be used against you later as more and more connections are stitched together. Brake hard because you were driving defensively and saw someone running a stop sign? It's the same hard brake that shows up because someone was looking down at their cell phone and didn't notice the person in front of them was slowing down. It's all data without context, but data that can and will be used against you as soon as it is practical to do so.
There is further discussion on that thread that none of the data is "misused" - and that discussion is correct too. All of the information was collected and used exactly as intended, to somehow extract more money from people.
And breaking the antenna likely wouldn't help with this either. There's nothing stopping insurance companies for charging you more based on your driving habits. But there's also nothing stopping them from charging you more because your new vehicle, which they know has this spying capability, isn't returning data. They wouldn't even have to prove you deliberately broke the antenna. They could say, "we don't know whether you deliberately disabled one of your vehicle's components, or if it broke naturally and you don't keep up with vehicle maintenance. Either way, we're charging you more."
When tracking becomes standard, disabling tracking puts a target on your back and makes you suspicious. If you simply have an older car, the insurance company won't expect telemetry from you. But if you disable the tracking, they'll flag you as suspicious if they do receive tracking data from 99.9% of the other owners of your vehicle. You won't even be able to claim, "oh, I just live in an area with bad cell coverage," as they know exactly where you live; your zip code is one way they price your policy. If they're getting telemetry from all your neighbors, but not from you, then they know there's something weird with your car.
Currently this mandatory tracking only applies to newer vehicles, but cars just keep getting older. Eventually the share of cars on the road that don't have this tracking ability will be so small that the major insurance companies can just decline coverage for the models that don't have it. If 95% of cars on the road have tracking capability, then the big insurance companies can simply decline to write policies for the older vehicles. Your 1998 Toyota Corolla might still be running in 2035, but the big insurance carriers will just refuse to write you a policy for it. If their whole operation is built on pricing risk based on individual driving data, they will simply refuse to write policies for any without it.
You likely still would be able to get an insurance policy for an older car without tracking, but it would have to be by specialty carriers that write policies for antique vehicles. And there's nothing stopping even them from requiring tracking either. Even for really old antiques, they might require after-market tracking devices if you want to get a policy. If you're a historical car enthusiast, you might need to let the insurance company install an aftermarket tracking device in the old Model T if you want an insurance policy. You could be driving around in 1920s Model T, and you would still have to have a little GPS chip installed that monitored your acceleration, breaking, and tracked your every move.
To be clear - I am not advocating for people going in and disabling the antenna in their vehicles (for the reasons you stated, as well as the fact that it tends to be in really awkward places that would suck to get to). My point was entirely that data can and will be used against you even if it isn't the classic idea of a guy in a hoodie holding a laptop up to your car trying to intercept the data. It isn't tinfoil hat territory.
Oh I agree. Not every reply is a rebuttal.
Let’s hope that aftermarket chips for GPS spoofing and other forms of telemetry fraud become popular with enthusiasts, then. Fill the data pool with garbage.
I'm so tired. Is it really too much to ask to simply go outside and walk around the neighborhood without the corporatacracy minmaxing such mundane behavior for profit? stuff is already more expensive as is, why do they even need excuses like this to crank it up further?
I hate that it's really only because they can that they will. Governments have never moved quickly or on their own to protect people's freedoms, and what's too bad about this data capture moment is that they're not likely to since people are giving it up themselves.
I sincerely hope that generations that grew up with tech will revolt against this, but I'm certainly pessimistic. People have terrible tech literacy.
This isn't necessarily a tech literacy issue. Folks who have grown up with their lives public on the Internet may not view privacy the same way that someone who grew up pre Facebook does. The ends of the spectrum seem to be "I have a stalker" and "I film my life and put it on Twitch/YouTube."
It's nice to have 2005 and 2017 (cheapest Ford Focus) cars. One doesn't have to cope with this modern crap. And once time comes to buy new car after the 2005 one becomes unsustainable (too much for repairs than the price of the car), we will look into another (cheap) used car.
I really liked the one comment where someone brought up how the car manufacturers now enjoy metering out already-installed “upgrades” for a cost. Or, potentially, shutting things off unless you pay for them. (Blackmail?)
Bolt owner here. I am certain I never signed up for OnStar Smart Driver.
Just checked my app. After tapping on the Smart Driver section, it gave me the onboarding tutorial and then dumped me into my stats screen. I could see detailed information on every single trip I’ve taken since November 2023.
It gives the following:
I toggled it off and it said my data would be deleted. I’m pissed it was even being tracked in the first place, but I’m also pessimistic enough to believe that the toggle is probably just a placebo and they’ll keep gathering my data anyway.
Update: sent this article to two of my friends who are also Bolt owners. Smart Driver was active for both of them as well.
Also pinging fellow Bolt owner @Akir, just in case you missed this news.
Exact same story for me. I never opted in, and was never alerted to being enrolled in this program. The only thing even remotely close to notification was that the monthly diagnostic report started mentioning it with a link to describe what it was, which I never bothered to look at because it looked tons of other corporate branded BS that they always come up with.
If you hear anything about a class action lawsuit, let me know.
Just curious as a recent Bolt owner, are you paying for OnStar to use the app? I tried setting it up when we first bought the car but after some googling came to the conclusion I needed OnStar to use the app which I wasn't interested in paying for so I just deleted the app. Is that the case?
Nope, I’m not paying for OnStar (I think it’s a huge ripoff!).
Without it, the app is still technically functional but nearly useless. The only things I can do are see my charge status, range, and tire pressure. The bottom third of the screen is a permanent ad for me to “Shop Accessories.”
I agree there. Pretty expensive for essentially nothing I don't already have in a smart phone that does it better as far as I can tell.
What the name of the app? I'm wondering if I got the wrong one initially because I couldn't even sign in.
myChevrolet
Thanks, after some more investigation I found out my OnStar account didn't like to my Chevrolet account. I signed in online and it prompted me to connect them and now the app works. Glad I tried it again.
In some cases driving data was being shared without the permission of the car owner. And the insurance companies jacked up people's rates. Quelle surprise!
And even if they did have "permission," they're lying by omission by claiming that. I'm sure buried in the paperwork you sign is some language agreeing to tracking. However, it is not possible for anyone other than the very rich to fully read all the contracts they sign. I've seen estimates before that, if you were to attempt to fully read every consumer contract, website terms of service, etc., that you encounter in a given year, that would literally have to be your full-time job. The only people who can actually afford to review all the things they sign are people with the absurd wealth necessary to hire an attorney to review everything.
This is why in academic research involving human beings, simply having them sign a waiver is never satisfactory. Yes, in the bought-and-paid-for legal system we have, simply signing that you agree to something is often legally binding. But it's a lie. It's not true informed consent. We can't choose whether to have our privacy violated or not, because it literally isn't possible for all but the top 0.1% to actually read everything they sign.
Just to be clear, because I think this is a huge part of the issue with modern society, it's not that you can't read it, so much as you have 0 leverage to do anything about it.
When all companies put "sign your life away" in their contracts, your ability to meaningfully fight, especially for major purchases, is just nonexistent. Some of the things they're putting in there almost certainly won't hold up in court, but good luck ever getting that far, and even worse some of it would, with the current argument just being "well go buy something else then" when everyone else does the same.
This is exactly where the asleep at the wheel congress should be making laws, but of course that's never going to happen because they're the kind of people who can get exclusions to any part of these rules they don't like, are just totally ignorant it's happening anyways, and of course get a nice chunk of donations from it.
Do you think things will change as the body of congress changes from the silent generation/boomer era, or is the greed and lack of empathy cross-generational? median congress age is late 50's so we should theoretically have started the shift towards Gen X in the policy seat.
That technically applies to the people too. Millenials/Gen Y are starting to age into what is historically a more politically active age bracket. Will they vote for proper representatives or are we just as prone to the same narrative as those before us?
I'd hope that with a new generation in power we'd see a bias toward this kind of action, but what disappoints me (or maybe it's just confusing) is that criticism would first come from a justice and oppression perspective over a nuts and bolts tech perspective.
Maybe I'm noodling in my own little corner, but millennials and especially Gen Z have been careening toward being tech oblivious ever since the smart phone came out. Understanding how the actual tech works has been regressing when the internet and devices became walled gardens with hand-holding app experiences.
This sounds like a 'When I was your age...!' statement, but when the Z's I know don't understand folder hierarchies and file extensions, I begin to get worried.
The system as it stands self selects for those traits. While I do think a younger generation in Congress would be an improvement, the entire election process we have is going to encourage those who are constantly focused on donations first, because those are the ones who win
This could be fun as my husband and I share our Bolt. It would be really nice if the stuff we opted out of thanks to CA privacy laws actually applied to the car's data.
The more crap I hear about new cars, the more I appreciate my 21 year old car (which also still has tactile buttons and not a touch screen to operate it, including on the radio).
This, seriously. I'm going to stick to cars from the 80s - 2000s from now on, as they are new enough to be fuel injected and have a lot of modern conveniences, but old enough that computers haven't taken over every component and put flashy screens all over your dashboard. It feels so much better to drive when the throttle and steering are mechanically connected rather than the drive-by-wire type systems with floaty controls that are common in cars nowadays.
Oh cool I assume this also means that if the data looks good then I'll get a big discount on my insurance.
You're obviously being sarcastic, but that's literally a thing! The past 3 times I've signed up for auto insurance, they've asked me if I want to sign up for their Safe Driver discount, where they either have me use an app, or send me a little doo-hickey to plug into my vehicle, that sends data to them, and they offer discounts based on driving.
But if they're already getting the same fucking data, what's the point?!
You're hitting a couple marks here...
A driver who signs up for safe driver discounts is willing to be actively tracked and likely to drive safer because they know they're being tracked.
The car sends them the into and they can cross reference it with the extra data and have an even more robust data set.
They've essentially jacked up everyone's rate anyway and the 'discount' is a percentage of the price increase - so, you're not actually getting any discount they've just jacked you up a little less.
I can't remember the exact number, but the insurance discount i was offered to install a monitoring device was laughable.
I'm disinclined to agree to tracking just out of principle, so obviously I'm not the target market, but it didn't feel like a valuable offer at all.
I've always wondered what happens if you get one of those things for the discount and then just never plug it in.
They don't give you the discount. They'll alert you that you're not using it and take the discount away.
Seems unlikely. Vehicle insurance is a business not a charity. It would make little sense for them to take a double loss by paying to acquire the data while also permanently giving you a discount.
Even if someone managed to drive with 0 "infractions" (not sure how else to call these) their rates would increase as the average price paid by the drivers around them goes up
I don't know, insurance companies do compete with each other for well qualified customers who are unlikely to file claims. Structuring your rates such that drivers receive safe driver discounts helps with your recruitment and retention of customers.
That might mean having a higher starting rate, but I bet at least some would do so in order to be able to advertise discounts.
Makes about as much sense as getting a promotion (or not laid off) based on the quality of work performed. So, of course not. Corporate veneer of loyalty bonuses have long died off.
When I bought my car in 2017 I was surprised by how difficult it was to get a non Wi-Fi enabled car. At the time I'd read the Wired car hacking story and been to at least one Defcon car hacking village, possibly two.
I'd been told that automakers can tell who is driving the car based on advertising and breaking speed. I'd also been told that there were no software security standards for cars, only software standards for handling things like braking. I ended up having to special order my car in order to not have Wi-Fi.
I'm very pro-privacy but I figured that if insurers were giving 15%+ discounts to safe drivers then really what they'd done was increase rates for everyone, and then on documented less-safer drivers on top of that. So I signed up for the driver telemetry thing to prove I'm a safe driver (and maybe I have more rights over my data). Seems that at this point they'd likely have my data anyway (though I still keep a dumb car around).
So figuring a 20% rate increase, thats 120%. I get a 15% discount on that 120% if I'm a good boy and that brings me down to 102%. I'm not actually saving money compared to before, and I may not have any more rights over my data, but at least now I can fight a further rate increase (which is essentially what this whole process of proof is anyway).