A Seattle-based appellate judge ruled that the practice does not meet the threshold for an illegal privacy violation under state law, handing a big win to automakers Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen and General Motors.
This makes perfect sense to me. If you plug your phone in to your car and give it permission to access all your shit, then it will access all your shit, and store it locally so that it doesn’t have to re-download all your shit every time. If you don’t want your car to do that, then don’t plug in your phone and give it permission to do that.
Having said that, it is terrifying how much of our personal data modern cars collect. We should be fighting that, but this specific case was not the way to do that.
The article specifically mentions this which implies that it’s stored on the car.
Berla’s software makes it impossible for vehicle owners to access their communications and call logs but does provide law enforcement with access
But it’s immediately followed up with
Many car manufacturers are selling car owners’ data to advertisers as a revenue boosting tactic
Pretty much all new cars being sold today, most cars in the last 5 years, and a large percentage of cars sold in the last 10 all have some sort of cellular modem that reports back to home base with all sorts of info, then they turn around and sell it. GM has been doing this for 20+ years at this point with on star which is included in almost every car they’ve made.
Sure, but from what I’m seeing, the article wasn’t about them selling it. It was about them storing it, which only happens after you plug your phone in and agree to their terms.
This makes perfect sense to me. If you plug your phone in to your car and give it permission to access all your shit, then it will access all your shit, and store it locally so that it doesn’t have to re-download all your shit every time. If you don’t want your car to do that, then don’t plug in your phone and give it permission to do that.
Having said that, it is terrifying how much of our personal data modern cars collect. We should be fighting that, but this specific case was not the way to do that.
The article specifically mentions this which implies that it’s stored on the car.
But it’s immediately followed up with
Pretty much all new cars being sold today, most cars in the last 5 years, and a large percentage of cars sold in the last 10 all have some sort of cellular modem that reports back to home base with all sorts of info, then they turn around and sell it. GM has been doing this for 20+ years at this point with on star which is included in almost every car they’ve made.
Sure, but from what I’m seeing, the article wasn’t about them selling it. It was about them storing it, which only happens after you plug your phone in and agree to their terms.
WTF does that even mean?
Sure they are selling your private conversations, but I only care about the fact that they had to store it to do it?
Your logic holds true as long as that data stays in the car. Pretty sure this ruling allows them to slurp that data up and use it however they want.
They would do that? Just copy all our data and use it for their own interests?
I’m shocked, shocked I say!
Yeah, people fuck kids also, it doesn’t mean it should be permissible
deleted by creator
@xkforce @plz1 although I agree with what your saying, it shouldn’t be a concern.
It is a concern but shouldn’t. If car makers followed a fair privacy stance, would we use more of those features? My guess is …yeah?
Privacy brings more customers so in turn its a solid business move! Is it a profitable one? That’s the one I wanna answer!
I disagree. I want every interaction to be processed individually and iteratively. I look forward to my stereo turning into a BOOM box.