General Motors Co. has ended its OnStar Smart Driver program after customers complained it violated their privacy.
OnStar had cut deals with LexisNexis and Verisk to share personal driving data as part of the program, which they then shared with insurance companies. The idea was that safe drivers would get better rates.
Some GM vehicle owners said they either didn’t know they had consented to the program or that their rates went up. With complaints piling up in recent weeks, GM ended Smart Driver, the company said in a statement Wednesday.
Probably too quick to see if the consequences are few. They lost a profitable business, they lost trust, they lost an entire method of gathering data, and they haven't even started on the...
Probably too quick to see if the consequences are few.
They lost a profitable business, they lost trust, they lost an entire method of gathering data, and they haven't even started on the inevitable lawsuits yet.
This is damage control before the suits become unprofitable to settle.
True, but it won't be an existential threat to the company. I suppose there's an argument to be made that since their products can be in service for over a decade and are safety critical, its...
True, but it won't be an existential threat to the company. I suppose there's an argument to be made that since their products can be in service for over a decade and are safety critical, its continuity is good for existing owners. But I'd like them to feel it as little more than the ebb and flow of stock price.
But also this story will have already contributed to that sense of fatigue from things being terrible, so the next company that comes along and does the exact same thing will have less pushback,...
But also this story will have already contributed to that sense of fatigue from things being terrible, so the next company that comes along and does the exact same thing will have less pushback, and then it will become normalised…
Archive link
All previous Tildes discussions about OnStar Smart Driver
Corporation tries to pull a fast one, gets caught, faces few consequences.
Probably too quick to see if the consequences are few.
They lost a profitable business, they lost trust, they lost an entire method of gathering data, and they haven't even started on the inevitable lawsuits yet.
This is damage control before the suits become unprofitable to settle.
True, but it won't be an existential threat to the company. I suppose there's an argument to be made that since their products can be in service for over a decade and are safety critical, its continuity is good for existing owners. But I'd like them to feel it as little more than the ebb and flow of stock price.
But also this story will have already contributed to that sense of fatigue from things being terrible, so the next company that comes along and does the exact same thing will have less pushback, and then it will become normalised…
That escalated quickly. Didn’t realize how short the time line was until I clicked the previous discussion link.