They are here. They are the future. They are not going away.
Let's discuss.
This is a really good article that highlights some of the data management issues:
They are here. They are the future. They are not going away.
Let's discuss.
This is a really good article that highlights some of the data management issues:
That is an interesting read. Data on each of us is everywhere now and the harvesting is getting better. I think we are getting to the point where all of our activities are trackable with facial recognition and license plate reading cameras.
it would be nice if there was at least transparency on what data is pulled from a car and where it is going. However I doubt the average person thinks about it enough to care. I am conscious of it but I have almost given up knowing how much my phone and the internet are harvesting on me. I tell my kids if you don't want people to know about it don't do it.
The turning point for me was a few years ago when some Walmart gift cards were stolen from my wife's work. The person used the card and Walmart was able to give the police high resolution pictures of the person, how long they were in the store, every item then got, what car they came in and the license plate.
They may not be going away, but we still have a choice if we want to drive one. At least for the time being.
In reply to Racebrick :
Our choices are becoming more limited.
Onstar has been around since 1996. It collected more data than people realized. They track location and speed even if you cancel your subscription, and sell the data.
In 2020, 48% of all new cars shipped were connected. By 2030, it is projected to be 96%. The data is more valuable than the car, so I expect the rate to accelerate.
I guess technically we also have the choice to not have a smartphone...
SV reX said:I guess technically we also have the choice to not have a smartphone...
Yep. This is one of those areas where you can vote with your wallet, but you will be out of line with 99.99% of society and things will just move on without you.
Seeing the phaseout of 3G networks causing issues with existing vehicles underscores for me that support is going to impact long term ownership a great deal.
A friend wrote recently that anytime you see the phrases "smart" or "connected" you should replace that with "surveillance" to see what the true purpose of its connectivity is. Having devices like Alexa and a smart phone exponentially decrease the privacy you can expect. It's a bit too late obviously, this train left the station a while back. There are really no guardrails on how much data is collected, how long it's stored, and how it's sold.
I don't worry about connected cars in particular, they're a symptom of a wider movement towards more surveillance and less privacy.
At some point I expect I'll have to root my car like I root my phone, removing any apps that phone home and reconnecting the car to self-hosted servers if I so choose (which may require a hardware upgrade to connect to new cell networks). Not an issue for me right now though and I don't expect it will be for at least a decade.
Onstar has been around for decades.
In reply to SV reX :
8 billion people in the world. How much data can be monitored?
I'm weird, massively outside the normal, and diligently looking for bargains I can use. So basically I have zero marketing value.
Sure I commit crimes on a regular basis. On the freeway I'm often 5 mph or so over the speed limit. I roll stop signs when they are clear. Occasionally fail to signal. Especially if no one is around me.
I'm under constant monitoring by the camera's on the bus. 5 camera's on the big buses and 2 on the small buses.
Anything you want to know about me is on the record. Yawn!
ProDarwin said:SV reX said:I guess technically we also have the choice to not have a smartphone...
Yep. This is one of those areas where you can vote with your wallet, but you will be out of line with 99.99% of society and things will just move on without you.
This. It's part of the norm now, and I honestly don't find it that big of a deal. In some cases, it can actually be helpful. It my line of work that data can be (and is) used to help protect our insured from liability exposure, or too much exposure.
In reply to frenchyd :
Therefore, your insurance company can learn your driving habits and raise your rates.
Don't think you are immune.
And? I'm getting near the age where they will raise my rates just for living this long.
The only way to beat the house. Er insurance companies is keep them competitive. Change every few years. Give them the whole package so the loss of your business really hurts.
Some of you are rather paranoid...
my uncle has a country place...
frenchyd said:In reply to SV reX :
8 billion people in the world. How much data can be monitored?
I'm weird, massively outside the normal, and diligently looking for bargains I can use. So basically I have zero marketing value.
Sure I commit crimes on a regular basis. On the freeway I'm often 5 mph or so over the speed limit. I roll stop signs when they are clear. Occasionally fail to signal. Especially if no one is around me.
I'm under constant monitoring by the camera's on the bus. 5 camera's on the big buses and 2 on the small buses.
Anything you want to know about me is on the record. Yawn!
Exactly. Collecting a large amount of data is easy. Having somebody look at the data and actually make sense of it is hard, and time consuming.
amg_rx7 (Forum Supporter) said:Some of you are rather paranoid...
Some of us prefer our private thoughts and habits to stay that way. Some of us are sick of being the product. Some of us are really fed up with PAYING to become the product. Some of us think the marriage of big tech and big government should have resulted in treason charges instead of a new marketing program.
"You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide" got us into this mess.
I didn't intend this to be about personal paranoias. I really don't care.
I thought the article was interesting in the dynamics of who has access, and hoped we could discuss without acting silly.
For example, the article discusses the inability of independent service shops to access the data, or whether we actually want automakers to be the gatekeepers of data like when we stop at Starbucks.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:Collecting a large amount of data is easy. Having somebody look at the data and actually make sense of it is hard, and time consuming.
Companies train AI for exactly this reason. It can comb through the data infinitely faster than humans can.
Personally, I don't care if they know where I stop to eat, get gas, or what my daily traveling looks like.
I am more concerned with law enforcement having that data, or if the data becomes necessary to repair the car and manufacturers lock it as mentioned above.
On topic, I have very mixed feelings.
On the one hand, I love the idea of connected cars being able to work together autonomously to cut down on all the bullE36 M3 on the roads, handle traffic efficiently, and in theory allow for less time traveling and more time doing. Bob knows people can't do those things themselves.
On the other hand, the government, the large tech companies, and even the automakers have all proven individually they cannot be trusted and that they only care about the bottom line, so that combining them can be nothing more than a massive mistake.
If only we could get new players into the game that don't have decades of history working together to screw the customer for their own benefit...
My vehicles are the least of my worries. None of them are connected and I can probably make it through the rest of my life without dealing with one.
The cell phone on the other hand gives them plenty of information and I have it with me constantly.
In the grand scheme of things, I'm a super tiny cog in the giant machine. No one is really interested in me beyond advertising and going by what ads they send me, the information they gather isn't doing them any good.
ProDarwin said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:Collecting a large amount of data is easy. Having somebody look at the data and actually make sense of it is hard, and time consuming.
Companies train AI for exactly this reason. It can comb through the data infinitely faster than humans can.
8 billion ( and growing) people doing an infinite number of things demands priorities.
For example if I'm King of AI data I would search for the most destructive things first. Mass Murder, for example.
Way down on the bottom would be benign choices such as where to buy a cup of coffee.
Remember even if that data can all be harvested, there are finite resources to react to that data.
RevRico said:On topic, I have very mixed feelings.
On the one hand, I love the idea of connected cars being able to work together autonomously to cut down on all the bullE36 M3 on the roads, handle traffic efficiently, and in theory allow for less time traveling and more time doing. Bob knows people can't do those things themselves.
On the other hand, the government, the large tech companies, and even the automakers have all proven individually they cannot be trusted and that they only care about the bottom line, so that combining them can be nothing more than a massive mistake.
If only we could get new players into the game that don't have decades of history working together to screw the customer for their own benefit...
I agree. Let the cars travel in tightly congested packs at far greater speeds would require automated driving but would deal with gridlock and slow travel times. Instead of 30 minute commute it could be a 8 minute commute ( or less) without the need to cover valuable farm land with roads.
Heck,replace cars with drones to deal with traffic vertically and imagine the benefits.
Anything that sends a signal, can accept a signal. The last thing I need is some jagoff with a laptop bricking my car for ransom. It's part of the reason I don't trust self install wireless home safety systems.
You'll need to log in to post.
