I've got a 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee and I've been searching for where the sim card is for the built in cellular modem so I can rip it out.
It astounds me that there aren't more people interested in cutting off the constant telemetry and to be honest it wouldn't surprise me if the car refuses to operate correctly when I do figure out where it's at and pull it.
In 2018? I doubt car manufacturers can move that fast. Apple didn't implement eSIM until 2018 for the iPhone XS. No way an auto maker has it before consumer electronics maker.
The European Commission selected the eUICC format for its in-vehicle emergency call service, known as eCall, in 2012.[23] All new car models in the EU must have one by 2018 to instantly connect the car to emergency services in case of an accident.[24]
For a very long time now you have never needed a SIM to call emergency services. Maybe it's different in the EU but US car models that include telematics (ie Onstar) have been able to call emergency services without a subscription.
overwhelm the brain with input. to hold onto threads like this one, you have to be fairly healthy or fairly mad.
not strapping on tin foil hat, this likely isn’t some massive coordinated effort. it could be done “better.”
this is just making the most of the situation. at scale.
if you simplify the question, “Who wants to let their car manufacturer surveil them?” - the answer is also simple. very few hands are going to be raised.
most people don’t get the tl;dr - they drown in the firehose.
what isn’t out there is a friendly, accessible version of what you’re looking for - multi-manufacturer information on snipping the sensors, why and how, and what you lose in the exchange. if it is out there, it isn’t friendly enough to be readily found.
people are tired, stretched thin, even in the most powerful nations. information access has become so ubiquitous that it has become more challenging to filter than to find.
for many people, there are far more pressing concerns to address than if nissan knows how the back seat was used last night. they would need the time and space to slow down and consider the information, and likely have means to do something, for it to elicit a response. some people would love to have the issue, that would imply having means to get a new car. no, they wouldn’t love the issue, but it is out of reach, so it isn’t deemed worth the effort spent.
right now it’s like saying your cell phone spies on you. most people won’t be getting rid of their phones. some might get foil bags.
faraday cage around your car, on the other hand, isn’t happening.
None of that matters when the info is either routinely sold to others with more time and motivation on their hands, or simply leaked to the public whether on purpose or not.
Google. I’ve searched and searched. I have a 2018 Truck from a different manufacturer and I completely went down the rabbit hole of attempting to remove it. It’s not possible. It’s an assumption that most manufacturers are following the same logic due to economy of scale.
I wonder if one could build a metal cap, shape and color matched to the sharkfin, that goes over the antenna and couples to the roof of the car. Would that be enough to make a small Faraday cage over the antenna? Would leakage though the mounting hole still be enough to let a signal through?
I don't think you really need to get that sophisticated. If you unplug the antenna and send too much current down that antenna line, whatever's on the other side is not going to like it.
> it wouldn't surprise me if the car refuses to operate correctly
I know of a car (Renault in EU) whose SIM access is broken somehow that still works fine, just can't call home. No guarantee that every car will handle it gracefully, but at least some regions don't seem to mandate any enforcement if that module happens to "break".
It is EURO5 or EURO6 emmision norm. It also handles firmware updates, reaction to Volkswagen cheating. Car needs to be online, check for latest firmware and all sort of nasty DRM.
There is also a black box, that records position and speed. It may call emergency if it detects crash. If DRM is violated, car may refuse to start, or only drive like 50 kms.
I don't have a source, but anyone should be able to find relevant articles.
The manufacturer may have to legally include the functionality in cars they sell but in pretty sure the owner isn’t obligated to use or keep the functionality untouched.
By comparison if your seat belts are all frayed and you don’t wear them anyway that’s on you, manufacturer sold you a car with seat belts in good condition and that as far as the “compliance” requirement goes.
Might depend on the wording of the law and how that system is tied into the rest of the car. For example in the states, it is illegal to tamper with any part of the emissions control system on your car. This is mostly about making sure emissions testing via OBD II can’t be gamed, but it also would target modifications like “rolling coal” or turbos and superchargers that allow user controlled fuel mapping. But in the crossfire it catches completely reasonable reasons to modify your emissions system like a flex fuel upgrade, or replacing the computer of your old car with an aftermarket one because the engine immobilizer unit died and they’re paired together and OEM computers and immobilizer kits are either too expensive or not obtainable anymore.
Laws against tampering with vehicle safety devices would easily have a similar effect on your built in phone home systems.
it is illegal to tamper with any part of the emissions control system on your car.
Can you cite the law? I know the EPA has civilly pursues companies that make products that bypass emission controls. But haven’t seen or heard anything that goes as fat as you suggest.
"It is a crime to knowingly falsify, tamper with, render inaccurate, or fail to install any "monitoring device or method" required under the Clean Air Act, including a vehicle’s on-board diagnostic system. Clean Air Act section 113(c)(2)(C)." https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/documents/ta...
Tampering. You may not remove or render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in engines/equipment in compliance with the regulations prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser.
It seems primarily about bypassing or disabling emission controls, not user controlled fuel mapping, or mods like putting in a performance air filter or exhaust. But EPA does consider a flex fuel conversion tampering.
The site you linked mentions the carve out that the EPA has, but note that it requires both retaining or beating original behavior and requires extensive prod of that fact. A similar law affecting phone home circuits would almost certainly not find disabling the ability to phone home as in compliance.
The part of your post that made me curious was whether fuel mapping, or ECU swapping was illegal. It looks like it is in a grey area under Clean Air Act, but generally interpreted as legal as long as you aren't doing things to make your emissions worse.
At least as far as ECUs go, almost every after market ECU I’ve seen doesn’t control OBD II or the CEL (or does so very minimally) and is therefore immediately in violation of not conforming to the requirements to retain OEM level behavior. Fuel mapping is more grey, largely due to the ability of some OEM ECUs to be reflashed and thus retain OBD behavior.
Title 2 of the Clean Air Act "authorizes the EPA to set standards applicable to emissions... the CAA prohibits tampering with emissions controls, as well as manufacturing, selling, and installing aftermarket devices intended to defeat those controls."
They just got a $10M civil judgement against a couple "diesel tuners" here in Michigan:
Yup. Here's a fun hack - you can drive car in EU on US plates, due to international agreements. In that case, you don't have to follow local car inspection standards, but inspection standards of your home country.
Get a plate from US state that has no inspections? You need no inspections at all!
There's usually a time limit on that. Last I checked in my country it's six months before you have to register the car, get local plates, and pay VRT (vehicle registration tax) + VAT. Including the cost of VRT in the VAT calculation, resulting in double taxation.
You can't put foreign plates on an irish registered car without first bringing it out of the country and registering it abroad either. I don't think there's any tax due on re-importing a car that's already been registered however. (you even get the same plate numbers since they're consistently mapped 1-to-1 VIN-to-plate forever)
There is a legal limit, yes, but nobody checks it, so you can do it indefinitely. Around here, there's even a lot of people driving on fake "foreign" plates.
EU "directives" require matching laws to be passed within member states, EU "regulations" apply directly to member states as written. In both cases, enforcement is up to the country you're in.
That’s quite a big assumption to think that it would be clearly labeled, and also that it would have a dedicated fuse. It’s not like that would be such a huge power draw that it needs its own fuse. Pulling the fuse would likely cause the whole infotainment system to go down.
Reading back at my reply, I didn't mean it to sound so authoritative. Just an idea.
I helped a friend do this a couple years ago in a fairly modern car. It most certainly was not clearly labeled, but there were clues that led us to try it out. It indeed disabled more than just the cellular modem but the goal was to disable all "smart" features altogether, along with anything that collects telemetry or phones home. After monitoring how it affected the car, the mild trade-offs were deemed worth it.
I feel like if this were happening 20 years ago, common wisdom would develop to buy from a list of model of cars where people had already blazed the path, directions of what the cell modem looks like and how to unplug it, prominent links to a community working on a libre replacement, and majority opinion of this is just what you should do to cope in the modern world. Now with the web community being so diffuse the majority opinion basically seems to be "whatevs". Perhaps if you dug into the right threads on the right manufacturer-specific forum you could find a thread or two with some investigation, but that's about it. It's also essentially impossible to navigate/compare the amenability of different makes to this.
FWIW I've got no actual experience, but given the general slowness with which the car industry moves I would guess the cell modem is just a module hanging off one of the CAN buses, receiving telemetry broadcast by other modules and injecting/interrogating commands when requested (like modern OBD2 ports). I suppose it could also be part of something like the gauge cluster that links different buses as well (at least on Hondas) but with the modular way cars seem to work I'd guess it's not likely.
I'd try to track down a copy of the factory service manual for your model. Those have seem to have gotten pretty thin these days too in favor of computer-based documentation, but it should at least help you work out how things are generally connected. (No point to the readily-available Haynes manual though. Those are apparently garbage)
My 2021 Wrangler has a very obvious antenna on top of the roll bar, very easy to unplug. (There's actually two - one for SIM stuff, and one for the XM Sat radio)
I think it will be a good differentiation factor in a few years, that a brand comes up with an offline car, i.e. a car that you just refuel/charge and drive - no telemetry/connected features involved.
It may be a niche thing in future, but certainly something that would be appealing to me as a consumer.
That a good idea in theory, but that has a very high bar for non-advanced users.
What I meant is kind of just a regular brand that offers you a regular car with convenience features, but no telemetry/services involved. All local and offline - that's the catch for them, because what brands want is to monetize services...
I think the insurance co will be the main lever in this story. If you have cameras & telemetry: standard insurance, open source offline car: pay premium.
It is already the case today (at least in the UK). If you accept having a "black box", then you have a discount. I already pay the premium to not have that installed.
PS: I understand we're talking about the future here, just wanted to clarify that paying a premium for less telemetry is already here and not a hypothetical case.
I actually wanted to go with an insurer that installs a black box. My dealer, however, doesn't do those (and their standard package is pretty good, so with a new car it was stupid to go with someone else).
My insurance company has a phone app that collects the same info - speed, deaccelation (gyroscopes), etc. the app is optional but qualifies you for a discount after 3 months of app history, if your driving pattern meets their standards. They told me they do not impose rate increases based on the app’s reporting, only discounts. I did not install it
but the point is: You don’t need a car device anymore.
My insurance company's app sometimes detects commuter train rides as car trips. As far as I can tell, there's no way to tell it "No, I'm not actually driving now".
Dashcams have worked just fine for a while, and they don't have to be connected to the internet to pull the data later SELECTIVELY, WHEN NEEDED. Yes, there is a chance it's completely destroyed, but it's fairly minor.
I don't see this happening. I see a lot of collusion between insurance, dealers, makers, and even the federal government to impose spyware for all future models.
I'm with you 100%, but reality is strongly not in our favor.
In order to bring a new car brand to the market, it literally takes the resources of a narcissistic billionaire, and even those are much more like upper-middle class status symbols than affordable conveyance for everyone. The regulatory hill is a steep climb on its own and the incumbents have a literal 100-year head start on how to sell cars to normal people.
Even if we just look at the tech sector... where are the privacy-preserving cell phones? There are none, unless you are willing to do not much else on it other than phone calls, text messages, and very light web browsing.
And unfortunately, the history of narcissistic rich people making cars is none too good. Such cars will either be overly expensive and require parts to be shipped from Italy, or they'll be totally shoddy "look at me" cars like Tesla or DeLorean.
> Even if we just look at the tech sector... where are the privacy-preserving cell phones?
The major brands won't do it, there's no money in it for them to do so, and there's so much regulation, regulatory capture that it's virtually impossible to start a new auto manufacturer without having billions of dollars of private equity to flush down the toilet on it, to target a very small fraction of the market that would want such vehicles, and such a company would just be quickly regulated out of existence if it was ever actually created.
Yes, and that is why I will never buy new unless in the contract I have;
1. No data harvesting
2. If I or anyone discovers any kind of data harvesting, at any time, I get a full refund of the original purchase price plus interest plus 2000 USD from the manufacture. If not received in 6 months, it double ever 6 months.
But from what I understand, I heard due to Massachusetts "Right to Repair", all of that is turned off.
But time for the Federal Gov to step in. I expect they will since some Congress Critter will complain about the Auto Industry tracking them or their children. Or, more then likely, due to how the US Gov have been operating for the last 30 years or so, Congress people will get to purchase "special" vehicles.
In some places, this is not an option. I have a mechanical Euro-5 car without sim card nor infotainment system that I would not be able to use where I live by end 2024.
Welcome to the EU and its low-emissions zones that span over many of its big cities.
Haven't looked into it a great deal yet because there's still plenty of time where I live, but I believe it's possible to get old cars to an emission standard that's compliant. It's not cheap, since it involves replacing the entire engine, but I'd still rather spend money on that than a new car.
I've heard of a few very-low-tech models, which are manufactured for NGO's to use in extremely remote places. Dunno if any of 'em would be street legal in a "normal" country. Those might qualify, and their sales process might be so customized that he could get such a contract. Maybe.
Otherwise, I'd guess it'll be "whatever it costs" vehicles aimed at the uber-rich, and their personal security details.
It is basically impossible to get those road legal in Europe. I know, because those cars tend to be older MY Land Cruisers and such, with those big, old diesel engines. And there is a sub-culture that loves those. Still, the only way to get one of those is if the car is old enough to qualify as a classic. Similar to Land Rover Defenders and the US.
Mid 90s, and you can qualify for a historical car registration in Germany (min. age 30 years). Problem is, with all those diesel limitqtions regarding city acces, and classical cars being excempt, there is a discussion going to either get rid of those classic car excemptions or to increase the minimum age to 40 years.
I'd imagine there will be a real problem with this in Germany - at least with Mercedes Benz, cars of the 80s and 90s will dramatically outlast those from the 2000s onwards!
Many already come with that. (I am not aware of which models though. Toyota should have it in many.)
As a rule of thumb you could consider "cars which are planned as vehicles that could be lent for longer periods of time": it is foreseen that if the client stops paying for the subscription, the car is remotely disabled.
Thanks for linking to a 4 year old story. Now link to the follow-up stories to where Apple no longer does this and they were sued for breaking their privacy policy. Google still does it, as in their TOS they basically say "yeah, we're going to be looking over your shoulder at everything you do, as that's how we make our money".
Yeah, we ban Huawei 4/5G infrastructure, and ban them fr using western / US tech, but are totally fine with whatever data BYD and EV OEMs do. But then TikTok and Xaomi are totally fine still, so what do I know...
The entire area of connected devices is a security and privacy dumpster fire. However bad you think it is, it’s worse. Everything is full of both intentional telemetry and security vulnerabilities.
I connect my phone to my 2015 Nissan's bluetooth, but just for music. GrapheneOS lets me prevent its access to my contacts, call history, active calls, text messages - anything but music audio. To me (but not the less tech literate, I know), if you're connecting your car to your phone, it's obvious that it is able to gather things about you.
That said, because I don't know much about cars, I don't know if the car is even capable of phoning home or by what means. Is it a 4G signal? Just a radio transponder? How do I even investigate without tearing my dash apart?
I dug into the article, specifically the Nissan section. It reads like the car itself _could_ be gathering information on its own. IMO, the Nissan phone app is the more likely culprit here.
Unless there's something wild going on with XM, or there's a WiFi backdoor, the only other way the car is getting data out is over OBD2. And that's all engine, tires, and performance stuff: https://www.amazon.com/Turbo3-Leaf-Spy-Pro/dp/B00PMLTPN0/?ta...
> The wireless features in your vehicle, including Over the Air Updates require use of your in-vehicle modem (if equipped). While Over the Air Updates are being made, some other wireless features may be unavailable or may require a wired connection. Please see FAQs for additional information.
Interesting. I've never connected my car to my wireless network and I've never used the Nissan app. I think I used a burner email when setting things up, but that was years ago so I don't remember the details. I'll see what happens if I try an OTA update later today and report back.
All new EU cars since 5 years ago are obligated to have 'eCall' which contacts emergency services in case of a crash. Most manufacturers solve that problem by including a 4G module.
Older cars also collect information. Most dealers read out the nav computer drive at service intervals so they also know where you've been, who you called etc, only a bit later.
The car companies won't let that information out to independent repair shops (except where mandated by laws). The "right to repair" movement is one attempt to make it possible.
The worst offender is John Deere and their newer farm tractors. Only authorized repair centers can get the software needed to troubleshoot the vehicles. Part of why Deere does not want details out there is that some tractor models have the exact same engine, but different power outputs based on how much the customer paid. One could "unlock" a more powerful engine without paying corporate. The really big "implements of husbandry" (as my state calls them) can cost $500k. At peak planting/harvesting time, you can wait weeks for a technician to come to your farm. Or spend a few thousand dollars having it driven to the dealership by truck.
IMHO, the decent indies are all sat on copies of either the original dealer software (by whatever means…) or copies built by companies to emulate original dealer software (VCDS for VAG for example)
One more reason I'm glad I connect my phone with a headphone jack. Just an analog connection carrying audio. The car doesn't even know what it's playing, as far as I know. Though some cars do seem to extract track names and artist names over the aux jack, so I think there's a little more than just an analog signal?
An analog jack should just be an analog signal, the beauty of it for applications like this being that it just works and for a variety of devices including the very first Sony Walkman to name just something which did not include any extra information. While in theory it is possible to encode extra and inaudible information in there, it seems more likely that if a car then knows what is playing it is just using Shazam or similar.
Possibly a side channel digital encoding of the track information, similar to how radio stations can display things like track name on your car radio. But I'm not really sure.
Do you mean the thing for reading a magnetic stripe? It's no surprise that can be trivially sent over an audio interface. That's how recording audio onto tape works in the first place.
Don't Android and iOS by default prevent bluetooth from accessing your contacts and calls. I know on Android you have to click a permission popup when connecting to bluetooth to allow contact and call access
But then you have Android Auto getting full access to the cars OBD. One more reason to use Bluetoth, but Googpe, and I assume Apple as well, aren't any better.
Yeah, it's usually a cell module (older ones were 3G). Many times it's on its own daughter board and you can disconnect the bridge to the main board, or otherwise unplug it so it can't communicate with the car or towers. I did that to my car that has OnStar and the Bluetooth etc worked fine, but it couldn't transmit/connect to any network.
The hell! You got a 2015 Nissan with Android Auto?
I got a 2017 Infiniti that some trims did even come with Bluetooth, needless to say none had carplay or Android Auto. Damn you Nissan.
But I bought that car because its something for me to tinker with and I plan to replace that proprietary head until with an after one. And also use an Arduino 4 inch LCD to tap into the Can bus to show Hvac settings.
doesn't say android auto, just the nissan bluetooth. it has voice commands and can access your contacts if you let it, so you hit the talk button on the steering wheel and say "Call Bob D" and it will call, etc. It's kind of jank. same thing with reading out received text messages while driving.
I always wonder to what extent those opt outs actually do something. I remember reading about the “unsubscribe” button for emails that never really did anything.
When you connect a phone to most cars via Bluetooth, the call and general audio permissions are separate from text message and contact info. So for example, in my mom's new car, I connect my phone so that when I drive it, I can take phone calls and listen to music. But for example it can't even display the contact name of contacts who call me, because it doesn't have access to that, so it just displays the phone number.
It almost feels silly to ask, but is this legal even in the United States with its comparatively weak privacy laws? In many states, a vehicle is legally an extension of the home. So legal rights and protections that apply in one's home also apply in one's vehicle. Is the idea that, buried somewhere in the legalese, is a statement that the buyer is granting the automaker the right to spy?
Yes, the US is pretty nearly lawless when it comes to privacy issues. Half the protections we have today are "it's legally required in the EU but low cost enough to just do globally".
The real "cheat code" is that much of the de facto government is the private sector. Imagining some hard dividing line between "government" and "private sector" is a fallacious red herring.
The supreme court recently decided there's no right to privacy in the US (they used this as justification for rolling back Roe v. Wade). It's pretty clear they'll be taking away more rights over the next few years.
“Always” is a long time. Cars from the 1920s are on the road today, but do you want that to be your daily driver? Do you care about safety or the safety of your passengers?
This kind of backwards thinking does not scale to everyone who wants privacy in their car. And it does not scale into the long-term future of driving.
> Do you care about safety or the safety of your passengers?
One could make an argument that modern vehicles have gone way too far in the "protect occupants at all costs" direction at the expense of safety for literally everyone else.
E.g. Very thick A-pillars are a major cause of pedestrians and cyclist getting hit. "I literally didn't see them :(" So many cases. All of this nonsense so that the passengers can have 40+ airbags cushion their special asses - and only if they screw up. All of that lack of visibility and tons of extra mass just in case. Pedestrians and cyclists almost universally suffer more for every extra safety measure added for the occupants of vehicles.
I was in a newish car (~2019 as opposed to my 51-year-old one) recently and those THICC pillars really stood out as being detrimental to visibility, not to mention the claustrophobic overall feeling of the interior.
I'm fine with seatbelts, and even a few airbags, as long as they're safety devices that stay out of the way when they're not in operation.
The windshield on my old Chevy truck is greater than 180°, it's fantastic, especially since it's such a large vehicle, you really want to see as much as possible
I also have an '54 Chevy, a '62 CJ, a '69 wagon, a '68 Suburban, and a '84 Ford. I have a pretty good track record of keeping old things running well. Eventually my new cars (01 and two 03s) will cease to be repairable, but I have invested time and money in a very well maintained fleet of older vehicles, it's one of my only practical hobbies.
That's your choice. You can buy new, convienent, modern cars that spy on you and will be dead in ten years. Or you can buy old, reliable cars that lack most modern amenities but can be repaired forever with a metal lathe and a welder.
It's my choice not to learn how to use a metal lathe and a welder, or find someone with those skills to do it for me? How is that supposed to scale to millions of people who want the same privacy?
Not to mention the fact that most such cars are already gone - so if more people adopt the GPs position, the prices will go through the roof for him too.
That's true, but this isn't a solution, it's my hobby. No one has suggested that people should buy only antique vehicles.
But to clear up this, it's a relatively inexpensive hobby if you are discerning and can wait. Only my wife's 03 Suburban cost more than $3000. Most of my antiques I have bought for far less. I bought the CJ5 this summer and it cost me $500 plus a new starter ($40). I also bought the '54 Chevy 2-ton this year, that cost $1000 and a new pair of contacts ($7) to get running and passing inspection.
My coworkers all play video games. They spend more on computer parts than I spend on most entire vehicles.
To be clear, I agree with you (and drive a car from the 80s when I need to drive) - but am also in favour of legislation absolutely banning this kind of collection for when I ever do need a new vehicle. If you want your hobby to remain affordable it's probably a good idea to push for new cars to be at least as good as old ones!
Never once suggested it would. All I said was that this is why I personally avoid new cars. I dislike things I cannot fix and I dislike things that actively harm me. If you or anyone else feels this way, the onus is upon you to solve it.
Most people want their data taken, or are ambivalent at best. Most people would hate driving old cars. They take work, most people want less work, not more.
Most of the parts for a pre-computerised car can be made in a decent machine shop. The computers and software for newer cars are a huge contrast from that.
Really depends, you can find some 80s and I think even till 93, trucks without any computers. I have a 1954 Chevy 2-ton and the early 90s Chevy 3500HDs and the early 90s GM box trucks are great donors because a lot of stuff is sized (axles is a big one) right and the box truck's engine is a drop in replacement if you want to convert to diesel.
around here it's literally just the amount of time until you get hit by a car, everyone I've known who bikes (n=5) or motorcycles (n=4) on the regular has been hit. Only the severity varies.
IANAL but this is clearly not even close to being legal under GDPR. Especially those collecting article 9 stuff (biometrics, genetics, sexual orientation, race, etc).
I think its just a matter of time before someone buys a new car that does this and takes the manufacturer to the EU courts. The argument that concent is given when you buy/use the car will not hold up for one second.
Car manufactors will have to allow you to use the car without collecting anything.
I think you are correct about the article. But I still think a lot of cars on the EU market collects (top much) information. But thats just a guess for sure
Car dealerships are notoriously horrible about privacy as well. The last time I bought a car at a dealership they wanted me to sign a release that allowed them to use photos and videos of me as part of their television and online advertisement. They were stunned when I refused and threatened to nix the whole deal and I challenged them to do exactly that before (of course) a manager was summoned and eventually I was taken to an office to complete the purchase where I could not be accidentally caught on video or photos which would result in them getting sued for using my image and likeness.
I bought a used vehicle at a dealership back in 2018. A couple of years later my daughter was looking for her first car and so we went to the same place. We were just browsing, and were met by a different sales rep. He had to excuse himself to tend to a different customer and during that time we left to go check out other places.
While we were at a different dealership I get an unexpected phone call. It was the sales rep at the first dealership, who I had never met before, and had certainly not given my phone number. I asked him how in the fucking hell he even knew my name, let alone my phone number, and he explained that the rep that sold us our vehicle in 2018 recognized me. I told him that was a very creepy and off-putting experience, that I do not consent to unsolicited phone calls from them, especially in such a creepy situation, and that I won't ever be purchasing another vehicle from them.
They have no respect for privacy. I use a Ford.com@domain.com to request a quote from Ford's official website. Apparently Ford shared my information with a dealer. That makes sense, but the dealer continued to email me and advertise cars from other manufacturers.
security in 95% of places is an afterthought. Your data is not really secure at all in the vast majority of places that keep it. Best you can do is be careful who gets it, and even then they often sell it.
Depending on your climate, you should probably have the right front frame member inspected for rust. My father had an '09 4Runner & got into a front-end crash. In the process that member was exposed, and while it looked fine on the outside, it was full of rust from the inside and quite thin.
Don't get me wrong, I drive an '01 Ranger that is more rust than steel at this point, but it is still good to know what you have.
>I drive an '01 Ranger that is more rust than steel at this point
You poor man. I had a 3.slow 6 cyl. 0-60 in 16s was almost an accomplishment. I guess that's what you get when you have a 155hp motor trying to pull a 3800 lb vehicle.
I drove a '93 Ranger with the 98 horsepower 2.3L 4-cylinder and the 5-speed manual in the late 2000s from 130,000 miles to 280,000 miles; it carried the supplies to paint dozens of houses and got me through college without any debt on car payments or tuition. My wife still mocks me for the purple pinstripes and the fact it was shorter than her, but I was driving it when she was just an acquaintance and I was still driving it home from our wedding, so clearly she actually liked it and just won't admit it.
It could eventually achieve 70 mph on the downhills with a slight tailwind, but it's not a vehicle for people who are in a hurry. I never entered it into any kind of drag race, so I didn't worry about the 0-60 time. Sadly, it died when a neophyte mechanic tried to lift it by the body instead of the ladder frame; the body mounts were able to keep the sheet metal from sliding around but the rust gave way when they tried to put them in tension. No, it would not have been safe in a rollover...
I like to imagine there's one still dry and rust-free in a barn somewhere in the Southwest that just needs some hoses, fluids, and a clean paint job (with purple pinstripes, that's important!) I would pick that over a new Maverick any day, never worry for a moment about it selling my data, and I'd have a stupid grin on my face every time I saw it. The only thing that could make it better would be if I could bolt an EV motor to the flywheel, elevate the bed by 6", and sandwich a battery pack under it.
the 4cyl was about as fast as the 3.0 6cyl but got much better fuel economy. I didn't hate that it was slow. I hated that it was slow and only got 20mpg lol
I totally agree I just feel like there's a sweet spot in the early 2000s where crash safety was better (not the best, but way closer to modern) and traction controls were standard but you didn't have all the spyware. My 2000 4Runner was unfortunately designed in the 1990s which means the doors are super thin as are the roof pillars. Not a deal breaker mind you, it's just the sort of thing that I won't want it until it's too late.
Same here, I bought mine just as pandemic car prices plunged. It's not my primary right now but it might just become it. It's sad because I'm a car guy and I like some of the newer tech and all, I just can't stand all the markups and spyware and most of the time I just don't want to bother debugging my ride.
I've never bought a new car and don't have any plans to soon
My 2001 Tundra is a spy-free, comfortable and versatile life/work vehicle that works as well in the city as it does hauling logs and steel on my property. I have three school age kids and prefer my truck to a Van (I've owned one in the past too) any-day.
Not a bad plan. There might still be some options out there. The previous generation of Silverado (14-18?)you could get a work truck without OnStar or anything. Didn't even have a key fob or Bluetooth. Costs a hell of a lot less too.
Except when you live in a city where they start to limit and ban transit of older cars, to force people transitioning into lower emission models, or public transit.
Like in Spain (through rules ultimately coming from Europe) there is a class of vehicles which are gradually being kicked out (banned from crossing certain very ample boundaries around the city): gasoline cars made before 2001, and diesel powered cars made before 2006.
For example, your 23 year old Toyota 4Runner would be deemed too polluting (or noisy, or both) to drive near the city center and auxiliary accesses of Madrid, and starting from 2025 it will be outright banned from driving on any part of the city, with a circle area of ~23 Km (14 miles) diameter from the center.
American carbrains can’t imagine a society that doesn’t depend on huge ass vehicles for daily transportation.
A reminder that driving isn’t a right, it’s a privilege that you have to get a license to do, and many other places that aren’t America don’t design their cities and even their small towns [1] around the idea that you must own a vehicle.
Congestion taxes and pollution rules tend to affect city centers where personal vehicle ownership is unnecessary and even something that could be considered detrimental to society as a whole.
I didn’t agree to die early due to elevated pollution levels in my city just so you can drive your truck around downtown.
Approximately half of all global oil use is associated with roadways. Maybe draining the world’s oil is a solid plan for the oil states and geopolitically massive superpowers of the world, but many countries have to import all of their oil, so owning a 19mpg Toyota 4Runner in a country like Spain is arguably a national security issue.
"A reminder that driving isn’t a right"
It is in America. Our constitution constrains the government, it doesn't grant us rights - we already have them as human beings. I can't imagine living under a cynical government that has that equation flipped but obviously you've been conditioned to accept it.
That’s just plain factually incorrect. You aren’t allowed to drive unless you pass a written and driving test in all 50 states, with only a few exceptions like agricultural use.
The default state of your rights in the USA is that you are not allowed to drive. It is effectively an additive privilege that you have to go out of your way to obtain.
The constitution doesn’t restrict the government’s ability to regulate the operation of a motor vehicle, and all 50 states have enacted laws that effectively make driving a privilege. You’re even required to buy insurance from a private company in order to maintain that privilege.
The fact that driving was legal by constitutional default before the passage of traffic laws isn’t relevant to the present day legal status quo.
I would also like to request that right wing libertarian weirdos stop equating every mundane, benign, and sensible societal rule to draconian conditioning by the big bad evil government. Please.
We destroyed our world’s best rail infrastructure on purpose to serve industrialist automotive companies. You could get anywhere by train in 1925, with so much frequency it is a daunting task to even count up the schedules.
Despite now having 3x the population of that time period, our rail service is basically non-existent in comparison. This isn’t the case in less wealthy and less dense countries.
What is the cost of the interstate highway system? How much of it could have reduced lanes or not exist if there were trains? How much productivity and GDP is wasted on people operating vehicles on the highway when trains can travel over 3x faster and facilitate continued work?
No: If you're rich enough to restore a car that you bought from someone that was poor enough to still be driving it with stock components, then the US won't punish you.
The best way around this for those wanting an EV car is to get a classic car that's been well-maintained and do an electric conversion. The only 'infotainment system' anyone needs is a tablet or phone; a charging system for electronic devices shouldn't be too hard to set up either.
Okay so you wanna hear something absolutely horrifying?
My new CPAP machine has a 4G modem and it shares all my sleep data with the company. There’s some people at the local office who can tell precisely when I’m asleep and how asleep I am.
Could you possibly want any better data for when to rob someone?
I’ve put the thing in airplane mode and they called saying they can’t get the data needed for the first month, required for insurance purposes. Nope. My last machine had an SD card. How about you do that instead?
I had to look it up: CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure; to treat sleep apnea disorder
I do have sleep apnea disorder but probably a mild one as I don't feel exhausted at all. Reading your comment sparked the idea that it might be a good idea to verify the severity. If there will be any CPAP machine involved I will for sure think of its privacy impact.
I have a new EV (a modest MG ZS long range 2022) and I'm not much concerned about privacy BUT much, much, much more about remote controls ability from the factory AND potentially someone else due to some crapware vulnerabilities who happen to be vast https://samcurry.net/web-hackers-vs-the-auto-industry/
My take is simple:
- all cars can be connected BUT the connection must be user controllable, meaning the car must run on FLOSS easily installable by the formal owner;
- all cars can offer remote controls BUT in a classic ssh-alike fashion, meaning it's ok to have a web(cr)app for end users, but not proxyed by the OEM only. OEM might act as a proxy to circumvent NAT, but the user is free to choose a DynDNS and other P2P/distributed solution hosted alone.
In mere privacy IMVHO my car can snoop videos of me/anything surrounding / capture audio no more and no less than an Android or iOS macrospy also know as smartphones. So I'm equally concerned BUT so far such smart devices can't potentially lock me outside in the middle of anything, making me crash on some people and than state I'm a terrorist crushing on purpose and so on. Witch limit much the risk surface.
I want to know how these license agreements work, legally speaking?
We bought a new car and signed the purchase agreement. Nowhere was there anything resembling a software license. Some months later, the display has a pop-up "our terms and conditions have changed". Um...which terms would those be, and when did we ever agree to them? Anyway, how can they make a one-sided change to a contract?
Here's the relevant legalese from Toyota:
"By purchasing or leasing a vehicle equipped with an active Connected Services system, you specifically consent to our electronic collection and use of your account information and vehicle data and our storage of such data wherever we designate."
Does the new owner of a used vehicle have to sign this too? And if this was skipped during the selling process, is the data now collected in the name of the previous owner?
Also, as a PSA: Your local state government sells car registration data to data brokers and car manufacturers. It is often used for behavioral targeting.
Federal law requires the manufacturers get your up to date mail address for recall purposes.
Legislators make sure that the agencies sell that data (this is the source of those "we've been trying to reach you about your vehicle's warranty" letters/calls). Sometimes they interfere to ensure that their buddies/lobbyists don't pay for it.
I doubt these datasets have anything to do with the "we've been trying to reach you about your vehicle's warranty" calls, as I know people who got a lot of those calls but never owned a vehicle (some were even minors!). Every time I listened to one of their messages it never had any actual targeted car information.
Every time I've bought a car recently (which for Reasons has been a few times), I've ended up with utter scum sending mail designed to look "official" while skirting the actual reserved terms trying to scam me into extended warranties and so forth.
If I had more time I would use their free return address to ship boxes of broken bricks.
Once you normalize this state of affairs in one digital sector (social media, search, whatever), you've normalized it, period.
You can't say: X and Y can milk this, but Z and W cannot. Everybody will want to get a piece of action from such a lucrative scheme.
In turn once the managing elites of all these formerly non-tech sectors that get increasingly digitized (mobility, finance, insurance, health etc) get satisfied that their legal / reputation risk is manageable they will invest further in this direction and lobby hard to preserve their investment value against "intrusive and innovation limiting regulation".
It all follows logically and it is a dystopic downward spiral that has no bottom.
I have a 2019 Subaru Outback. I also use GrapheneOS on a Pixel 3A. I have noticed that, when my phone is plugged in and I have location services enabled (for navigation), when I'm NOT using navigation, the icon in the top bar indicating location services being used pings once every 30 seconds.
I'm sure onboard cell modems can be used to triangulate well enough, but just knowing that my car likes to hitch a ride on my phone's sensors has creeped me out forever. I'll definitely be looking for an old beater car as my second when the time comes.
658 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 390 ms ] threadIt astounds me that there aren't more people interested in cutting off the constant telemetry and to be honest it wouldn't surprise me if the car refuses to operate correctly when I do figure out where it's at and pull it.
The European Commission selected the eUICC format for its in-vehicle emergency call service, known as eCall, in 2012.[23] All new car models in the EU must have one by 2018 to instantly connect the car to emergency services in case of an accident.[24]
I'd say they have been around since then.
edit: here is a great talk about how eSIMs work from last CCC https://media.ccc.de/v/camp2023-57190-demystifying_esim_tech...
not strapping on tin foil hat, this likely isn’t some massive coordinated effort. it could be done “better.”
this is just making the most of the situation. at scale.
if you simplify the question, “Who wants to let their car manufacturer surveil them?” - the answer is also simple. very few hands are going to be raised.
most people don’t get the tl;dr - they drown in the firehose.
what isn’t out there is a friendly, accessible version of what you’re looking for - multi-manufacturer information on snipping the sensors, why and how, and what you lose in the exchange. if it is out there, it isn’t friendly enough to be readily found.
for many people, there are far more pressing concerns to address than if nissan knows how the back seat was used last night. they would need the time and space to slow down and consider the information, and likely have means to do something, for it to elicit a response. some people would love to have the issue, that would imply having means to get a new car. no, they wouldn’t love the issue, but it is out of reach, so it isn’t deemed worth the effort spent.
right now it’s like saying your cell phone spies on you. most people won’t be getting rid of their phones. some might get foil bags.
faraday cage around your car, on the other hand, isn’t happening.
EG if the cell tower was very close.
Was fine after I used a resistor to turn that power into mild heat.
Could use an SDR or emf reader. It'll take a while since you need to catch a cellular keep alive but otherwise should be fine.
I know of a car (Renault in EU) whose SIM access is broken somehow that still works fine, just can't call home. No guarantee that every car will handle it gracefully, but at least some regions don't seem to mandate any enforcement if that module happens to "break".
There is also a black box, that records position and speed. It may call emergency if it detects crash. If DRM is violated, car may refuse to start, or only drive like 50 kms.
I don't have a source, but anyone should be able to find relevant articles.
By comparison if your seat belts are all frayed and you don’t wear them anyway that’s on you, manufacturer sold you a car with seat belts in good condition and that as far as the “compliance” requirement goes.
Laws against tampering with vehicle safety devices would easily have a similar effect on your built in phone home systems.
Can you cite the law? I know the EPA has civilly pursues companies that make products that bypass emission controls. But haven’t seen or heard anything that goes as fat as you suggest.
E.g.: https://www.dinancars.com/products/software-tuning/engine-tu...
This allows you to change the engine programming on a BMW. They do note it is not legal in California.
Tampering. You may not remove or render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in engines/equipment in compliance with the regulations prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/part-1068/section-1068...
It seems primarily about bypassing or disabling emission controls, not user controlled fuel mapping, or mods like putting in a performance air filter or exhaust. But EPA does consider a flex fuel conversion tampering.
https://afdc.energy.gov/bulletins/technology_bulletin_0807.h...
With a relevant paragraph on page 2
The site you linked mentions the carve out that the EPA has, but note that it requires both retaining or beating original behavior and requires extensive prod of that fact. A similar law affecting phone home circuits would almost certainly not find disabling the ability to phone home as in compliance.
They just got a $10M civil judgement against a couple "diesel tuners" here in Michigan:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-awards-10-milli...
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/national-enforcement-and-com...
but yeah, this is civil action against vendors, not anything that police will fine people for on the side of the road.
Get a plate from US state that has no inspections? You need no inspections at all!
You can't put foreign plates on an irish registered car without first bringing it out of the country and registering it abroad either. I don't think there's any tax due on re-importing a car that's already been registered however. (you even get the same plate numbers since they're consistently mapped 1-to-1 VIN-to-plate forever)
I 100% oppose these inspections, and fully supported the initiative to remove them from my state.
Cars younger than 3 years or older than 40 years ("historic vehicles") are generally exempt. If your MOT isn't up to date, your insurance is invalid.
For Euro7 it will be necessary by design.
I helped a friend do this a couple years ago in a fairly modern car. It most certainly was not clearly labeled, but there were clues that led us to try it out. It indeed disabled more than just the cellular modem but the goal was to disable all "smart" features altogether, along with anything that collects telemetry or phones home. After monitoring how it affected the car, the mild trade-offs were deemed worth it.
FWIW I've got no actual experience, but given the general slowness with which the car industry moves I would guess the cell modem is just a module hanging off one of the CAN buses, receiving telemetry broadcast by other modules and injecting/interrogating commands when requested (like modern OBD2 ports). I suppose it could also be part of something like the gauge cluster that links different buses as well (at least on Hondas) but with the modular way cars seem to work I'd guess it's not likely.
I'd try to track down a copy of the factory service manual for your model. Those have seem to have gotten pretty thin these days too in favor of computer-based documentation, but it should at least help you work out how things are generally connected. (No point to the readily-available Haynes manual though. Those are apparently garbage)
I have a 2019 Grand Cherokee and I think we both have the updated head unit. Let me know if anything works.
[1] https://www.jeepgarage.org/threads/uaq-antenna-connections.2...
It may be a niche thing in future, but certainly something that would be appealing to me as a consumer.
What I meant is kind of just a regular brand that offers you a regular car with convenience features, but no telemetry/services involved. All local and offline - that's the catch for them, because what brands want is to monetize services...
The Oscar.
PS: I understand we're talking about the future here, just wanted to clarify that paying a premium for less telemetry is already here and not a hypothetical case.
but the point is: You don’t need a car device anymore.
In order to bring a new car brand to the market, it literally takes the resources of a narcissistic billionaire, and even those are much more like upper-middle class status symbols than affordable conveyance for everyone. The regulatory hill is a steep climb on its own and the incumbents have a literal 100-year head start on how to sell cars to normal people.
Even if we just look at the tech sector... where are the privacy-preserving cell phones? There are none, unless you are willing to do not much else on it other than phone calls, text messages, and very light web browsing.
> Even if we just look at the tech sector... where are the privacy-preserving cell phones?
PinePhone?
The only viable option is to get a used dumbcar and rip out the existing head unit.
1. No data harvesting
2. If I or anyone discovers any kind of data harvesting, at any time, I get a full refund of the original purchase price plus interest plus 2000 USD from the manufacture. If not received in 6 months, it double ever 6 months.
But from what I understand, I heard due to Massachusetts "Right to Repair", all of that is turned off.
But time for the Federal Gov to step in. I expect they will since some Congress Critter will complain about the Auto Industry tracking them or their children. Or, more then likely, due to how the US Gov have been operating for the last 30 years or so, Congress people will get to purchase "special" vehicles.
Welcome to the EU and its low-emissions zones that span over many of its big cities.
Haven't looked into it a great deal yet because there's still plenty of time where I live, but I believe it's possible to get old cars to an emission standard that's compliant. It's not cheap, since it involves replacing the entire engine, but I'd still rather spend money on that than a new car.
Otherwise, I'd guess it'll be "whatever it costs" vehicles aimed at the uber-rich, and their personal security details.
I think some already comes with that.
As a rule of thumb you could consider "cars which are planned as vehicles that could be lent for longer periods of time": it is foreseen that if the client stops paying for the subscription, the car is remotely disabled.
Are there state security issues with Chinese cars too?
That said, because I don't know much about cars, I don't know if the car is even capable of phoning home or by what means. Is it a 4G signal? Just a radio transponder? How do I even investigate without tearing my dash apart?
Unless there's something wild going on with XM, or there's a WiFi backdoor, the only other way the car is getting data out is over OBD2. And that's all engine, tires, and performance stuff: https://www.amazon.com/Turbo3-Leaf-Spy-Pro/dp/B00PMLTPN0/?ta...
Edit: OH. Looks like there's Over-the-air updates on some models. https://www.nissanusa.com/connect/features-apps/over-the-air...
> The wireless features in your vehicle, including Over the Air Updates require use of your in-vehicle modem (if equipped). While Over the Air Updates are being made, some other wireless features may be unavailable or may require a wired connection. Please see FAQs for additional information.
Older cars also collect information. Most dealers read out the nav computer drive at service intervals so they also know where you've been, who you called etc, only a bit later.
The worst offender is John Deere and their newer farm tractors. Only authorized repair centers can get the software needed to troubleshoot the vehicles. Part of why Deere does not want details out there is that some tractor models have the exact same engine, but different power outputs based on how much the customer paid. One could "unlock" a more powerful engine without paying corporate. The really big "implements of husbandry" (as my state calls them) can cost $500k. At peak planting/harvesting time, you can wait weeks for a technician to come to your farm. Or spend a few thousand dollars having it driven to the dealership by truck.
Now I'm wondering if any car stereos have four-pin aux inputs to send headset button inputs or microphone audio back to the phone.
But I bought that car because its something for me to tinker with and I plan to replace that proprietary head until with an after one. And also use an Arduino 4 inch LCD to tap into the Can bus to show Hvac settings.
No android auto required.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception
It's very difficult to show monetary damages in order to actually sue
Please tell me this is lawyer CYA boilerplate, or is there a way for the shocks to tell "if this van's a rockin', don't come a knockin'".
This kind of backwards thinking does not scale to everyone who wants privacy in their car. And it does not scale into the long-term future of driving.
One could make an argument that modern vehicles have gone way too far in the "protect occupants at all costs" direction at the expense of safety for literally everyone else.
E.g. Very thick A-pillars are a major cause of pedestrians and cyclist getting hit. "I literally didn't see them :(" So many cases. All of this nonsense so that the passengers can have 40+ airbags cushion their special asses - and only if they screw up. All of that lack of visibility and tons of extra mass just in case. Pedestrians and cyclists almost universally suffer more for every extra safety measure added for the occupants of vehicles.
I'm fine with seatbelts, and even a few airbags, as long as they're safety devices that stay out of the way when they're not in operation.
The windshield on my old Chevy truck is greater than 180°, it's fantastic, especially since it's such a large vehicle, you really want to see as much as possible
But to clear up this, it's a relatively inexpensive hobby if you are discerning and can wait. Only my wife's 03 Suburban cost more than $3000. Most of my antiques I have bought for far less. I bought the CJ5 this summer and it cost me $500 plus a new starter ($40). I also bought the '54 Chevy 2-ton this year, that cost $1000 and a new pair of contacts ($7) to get running and passing inspection.
My coworkers all play video games. They spend more on computer parts than I spend on most entire vehicles.
Most people want their data taken, or are ambivalent at best. Most people would hate driving old cars. They take work, most people want less work, not more.
Most of the parts for a pre-computerised car can be made in a decent machine shop. The computers and software for newer cars are a huge contrast from that.
I think its just a matter of time before someone buys a new car that does this and takes the manufacturer to the EU courts. The argument that concent is given when you buy/use the car will not hold up for one second.
Car manufactors will have to allow you to use the car without collecting anything.
While we were at a different dealership I get an unexpected phone call. It was the sales rep at the first dealership, who I had never met before, and had certainly not given my phone number. I asked him how in the fucking hell he even knew my name, let alone my phone number, and he explained that the rep that sold us our vehicle in 2018 recognized me. I told him that was a very creepy and off-putting experience, that I do not consent to unsolicited phone calls from them, especially in such a creepy situation, and that I won't ever be purchasing another vehicle from them.
I wonder where they put the facial detection camera
Anything made after about 2015 feels WAY over-engineered, for my tastes at least.
Don't get me wrong, I drive an '01 Ranger that is more rust than steel at this point, but it is still good to know what you have.
You poor man. I had a 3.slow 6 cyl. 0-60 in 16s was almost an accomplishment. I guess that's what you get when you have a 155hp motor trying to pull a 3800 lb vehicle.
I drove a '93 Ranger with the 98 horsepower 2.3L 4-cylinder and the 5-speed manual in the late 2000s from 130,000 miles to 280,000 miles; it carried the supplies to paint dozens of houses and got me through college without any debt on car payments or tuition. My wife still mocks me for the purple pinstripes and the fact it was shorter than her, but I was driving it when she was just an acquaintance and I was still driving it home from our wedding, so clearly she actually liked it and just won't admit it.
It could eventually achieve 70 mph on the downhills with a slight tailwind, but it's not a vehicle for people who are in a hurry. I never entered it into any kind of drag race, so I didn't worry about the 0-60 time. Sadly, it died when a neophyte mechanic tried to lift it by the body instead of the ladder frame; the body mounts were able to keep the sheet metal from sliding around but the rust gave way when they tried to put them in tension. No, it would not have been safe in a rollover...
I like to imagine there's one still dry and rust-free in a barn somewhere in the Southwest that just needs some hoses, fluids, and a clean paint job (with purple pinstripes, that's important!) I would pick that over a new Maverick any day, never worry for a moment about it selling my data, and I'd have a stupid grin on my face every time I saw it. The only thing that could make it better would be if I could bolt an EV motor to the flywheel, elevate the bed by 6", and sandwich a battery pack under it.
Bought my 2000 SR5 in 09 and it’s gone way up in value since then.
Have had 3 random people ask me over the last few years how much I’d take for it and the answer is always “not for sale.”
My 2001 Tundra is a spy-free, comfortable and versatile life/work vehicle that works as well in the city as it does hauling logs and steel on my property. I have three school age kids and prefer my truck to a Van (I've owned one in the past too) any-day.
Like in Spain (through rules ultimately coming from Europe) there is a class of vehicles which are gradually being kicked out (banned from crossing certain very ample boundaries around the city): gasoline cars made before 2001, and diesel powered cars made before 2006.
For example, your 23 year old Toyota 4Runner would be deemed too polluting (or noisy, or both) to drive near the city center and auxiliary accesses of Madrid, and starting from 2025 it will be outright banned from driving on any part of the city, with a circle area of ~23 Km (14 miles) diameter from the center.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_Low_Emission_Zone
A reminder that driving isn’t a right, it’s a privilege that you have to get a license to do, and many other places that aren’t America don’t design their cities and even their small towns [1] around the idea that you must own a vehicle.
Congestion taxes and pollution rules tend to affect city centers where personal vehicle ownership is unnecessary and even something that could be considered detrimental to society as a whole.
I didn’t agree to die early due to elevated pollution levels in my city just so you can drive your truck around downtown.
Approximately half of all global oil use is associated with roadways. Maybe draining the world’s oil is a solid plan for the oil states and geopolitically massive superpowers of the world, but many countries have to import all of their oil, so owning a 19mpg Toyota 4Runner in a country like Spain is arguably a national security issue.
[1] https://youtu.be/ztpcWUqVpIg
The default state of your rights in the USA is that you are not allowed to drive. It is effectively an additive privilege that you have to go out of your way to obtain.
The constitution doesn’t restrict the government’s ability to regulate the operation of a motor vehicle, and all 50 states have enacted laws that effectively make driving a privilege. You’re even required to buy insurance from a private company in order to maintain that privilege.
The fact that driving was legal by constitutional default before the passage of traffic laws isn’t relevant to the present day legal status quo.
I would also like to request that right wing libertarian weirdos stop equating every mundane, benign, and sensible societal rule to draconian conditioning by the big bad evil government. Please.
Hell, I'd even love to look at such a fantasy map for Atlanta, GA where Marta is built out throw all that crazy Atlantan sprawl...
https://youtu.be/svao4PZ4bGs
Despite now having 3x the population of that time period, our rail service is basically non-existent in comparison. This isn’t the case in less wealthy and less dense countries.
What is the cost of the interstate highway system? How much of it could have reduced lanes or not exist if there were trains? How much productivity and GDP is wasted on people operating vehicles on the highway when trains can travel over 3x faster and facilitate continued work?
If you're poor enough, the US government won't punish you for relying on an older car.
My new CPAP machine has a 4G modem and it shares all my sleep data with the company. There’s some people at the local office who can tell precisely when I’m asleep and how asleep I am.
Could you possibly want any better data for when to rob someone?
I’ve put the thing in airplane mode and they called saying they can’t get the data needed for the first month, required for insurance purposes. Nope. My last machine had an SD card. How about you do that instead?
I do have sleep apnea disorder but probably a mild one as I don't feel exhausted at all. Reading your comment sparked the idea that it might be a good idea to verify the severity. If there will be any CPAP machine involved I will for sure think of its privacy impact.
My take is simple:
- all cars can be connected BUT the connection must be user controllable, meaning the car must run on FLOSS easily installable by the formal owner;
- all cars can offer remote controls BUT in a classic ssh-alike fashion, meaning it's ok to have a web(cr)app for end users, but not proxyed by the OEM only. OEM might act as a proxy to circumvent NAT, but the user is free to choose a DynDNS and other P2P/distributed solution hosted alone.
In mere privacy IMVHO my car can snoop videos of me/anything surrounding / capture audio no more and no less than an Android or iOS macrospy also know as smartphones. So I'm equally concerned BUT so far such smart devices can't potentially lock me outside in the middle of anything, making me crash on some people and than state I'm a terrorist crushing on purpose and so on. Witch limit much the risk surface.
We bought a new car and signed the purchase agreement. Nowhere was there anything resembling a software license. Some months later, the display has a pop-up "our terms and conditions have changed". Um...which terms would those be, and when did we ever agree to them? Anyway, how can they make a one-sided change to a contract?
"Fun" right?
Federal law requires the manufacturers get your up to date mail address for recall purposes.
Legislators make sure that the agencies sell that data (this is the source of those "we've been trying to reach you about your vehicle's warranty" letters/calls). Sometimes they interfere to ensure that their buddies/lobbyists don't pay for it.
If I had more time I would use their free return address to ship boxes of broken bricks.
You can't say: X and Y can milk this, but Z and W cannot. Everybody will want to get a piece of action from such a lucrative scheme.
In turn once the managing elites of all these formerly non-tech sectors that get increasingly digitized (mobility, finance, insurance, health etc) get satisfied that their legal / reputation risk is manageable they will invest further in this direction and lobby hard to preserve their investment value against "intrusive and innovation limiting regulation".
It all follows logically and it is a dystopic downward spiral that has no bottom.
It is totally doable for the government to regulate social media differently from automobiles--it's happening right now!
I'm sure onboard cell modems can be used to triangulate well enough, but just knowing that my car likes to hitch a ride on my phone's sensors has creeped me out forever. I'll definitely be looking for an old beater car as my second when the time comes.