[HN Gopher] Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security te...
___________________________________________________________________
Internet-connected cars fail privacy and security tests conducted
by Mozilla
Author : rntn
Score : 511 points
Date : 2023-09-06 12:54 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (gizmodo.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (gizmodo.com)
| jgalt212 wrote:
| > Kia's privacy policy reserves the right to monitor your "sex
| life,"
|
| 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'".
| catchnear4321 wrote:
| somewhere a data scientist is cackling.
| queuebert wrote:
| This reminds me of how my insurance app thinks I'm driving
| whenever I bounce my leg nervously.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| They have cameras and gyroscopes in the cabin. Pretty easy to
| figure it out even without the cameras.
| rekoil wrote:
| Probably intentional to make sure they're not in trouble in
| case this happens to them: https://arstechnica.com/tech-
| policy/2023/04/tesla-workers-sh...
| whoChumpedwho wrote:
| exactly the wrong question will not be asked. at any rate, you
| built this theme park; you protect this theme park. no worries
| ashafer wrote:
| Certain cars let you physically disable this. For example, the
| Tacoma has a "Data Communication Module" (DCM) that performs all
| of this and has a cell radio to phone home. There's a fuse in the
| fusebox you can pull to prevent the DCM from getting any power.
| Only side effect is the in-cabin microphone stops working and you
| can reconnect the fuse at any time.
|
| It's as if the engineering team didn't want to develop a spying
| product and made a convenient way to disable it...
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| FWIW, getting to that fuse is a massive, massive pain in the
| ass on some of their newer cars like the 2023 corolla. It's
| basically not possible. The alternative requires taking off the
| dash and manually pulling out some wires.
|
| In the process you may lose some functionality like some
| speakers, the radio, wireless android auto, microphone, etc.
| EricE wrote:
| lol - if they were only that altruistic. Toyota doesn't make
| the tech, they buy modules from suppliers and integrate the
| tech. Better hope someone doesn't come out with a fancy super
| module that has everything integrated because there will be no
| disabling it as soon as that happens :/
|
| Don't forget Toyota was the manufacturer that was going to
| charge a monthly subscription just for the key fob (!) to work
| until they got a massive backlash over it. A freaking key fob
| that doesn't use cellular or the cloud at all - it's 100% local
| between the fob and the car. And don't think for one minute
| that they won't try to sneak it back in.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| > Better hope someone doesn't come out with a fancy super
| module that has everything integrated because there will be
| no disabling it as soon as that happens :/
|
| Well, hello there, zone ECU!
| philsnow wrote:
| > Better hope someone doesn't come out with a fancy super
| module that has everything integrated because there will be
| no disabling it as soon as that happens
|
| I was just thinking about how to find and disable all the
| microphones in a car and realized that, with software, any
| speaker can be used as a microphone, so the logical
| conclusion is that you'd have to disable all the speakers as
| well.
| jklinger410 wrote:
| 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.
| jen20 wrote:
| 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.
| Tangurena2 wrote:
| I used to work for a state motor vehicle agency.
|
| 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.
| vel0city wrote:
| 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.
| [deleted]
| GoofballJones wrote:
| The "inshitification" now extends to our cars.
| charles_f wrote:
| This is very much in line with the industry trying desperately to
| get into the tech recurring revenue model.
|
| > the manufacturer collects information including sexual
| activity, health diagnosis data, and genetic data, though there's
| no details about how exactly that data is gathered
|
| How is that even possible? Without more details about what this
| means and how it's done, this sounds a bit fishy to me.
|
| > Mozilla said it was unable to determine whether the brands
| encrypt any of the data they collect
|
| Given the auto industry's track record at security, I'm gonna go
| ahead and assume they _all_ store all that in a 2005-era non
| updated mysql database protected by root/password exported
| nightly as a clear-text csv file to an open network folder. And
| since they all do it they can call it an industry standard.
|
| > Berg said the MercedesMe Connect app gives users privacy
| settings and the ability to opt-out of certain services.
|
| Given that these folks try to sell you everything in the car you
| already bought as a service, that's a nice way of saying "if
| you're concerned about us collecting stool sample while using
| rated seats, you can use your car as a decorative piece in your
| garage if you want,l".
| araes wrote:
| From: https://www.nissanusa.com/privacy.html
|
| "How is this possible" re:
|
| > collects information including sexual activity, health
| diagnosis data, and genetic data
|
| > Sources for collection: Direct contact with users and Nissan
| employees.
|
| Also:
|
| > by occupying a vehicle that is utilizing such services you
| agree to Nissan collecting and using the information
|
| > You promise to educate and inform all users and occupants of
| your Vehicle
|
| Interesting Note: I think this implies if you are a Uber / Lyft
| / ect... customer you consent to Nissan collecting your sex
| activity and genetic information and all related secondary
| analyses by occupying the vehicle.
| alwaysbeconsing wrote:
| > Without more details about what this means and how it's done
|
| The article seems to be based on a review of the privacy
| policies rather than sniffing actual collected data. We can
| conclude the policy leaves openings for them to do it, but it
| may not in fact be done at this time.
| cortesoft wrote:
| > How is that even possible?
|
| Yesterday, you visited a dating site a bunch. Today, you drove
| to a house that wasn't yours and the passenger side door
| opened. Then you drove to a restaurant and the passenger side
| door opened again. Then you drove back to the house you don't
| live at and the car was there overnight.
| lambdasquirrel wrote:
| > How is that even possible? Without more details about what
| this means and how it's done, this sounds a bit fishy to me.
|
| Did you visit some explicit site without VPN (or at least a
| private tab)? Bingo. The data brokers will correlate you. Once
| your data can be correlated, whatever they gather is thrown
| into the pool. I'll bet that there's some back-scratching going
| on somewhere. Hey we know all about where John is at when he's
| driving, and we'll sell/give you that data and in exchange we'd
| like to buy/trade some ads on those other sites-of-interest
| he/she goes to.
| charles_f wrote:
| When it comes to privacy data handling, the term "collecting"
| is a very specific term that means they are directly
| collecting it from you, so, unless they use the term in a non
| standard way, that means they supposedly collect your genetic
| material and sexual preferences _from you_. Which, erk, but
| also, how?
| fuzzyset wrote:
| Sexual _preference_ and genetic _material_ are very
| different from sexual _activity_ and genetic _data_. These
| privacy polices are always very broad (not saying this is a
| good thing). The multitude of microphones in cars can
| easily accidentally (or purposefully) record sex acts. A
| camera to detect driver awareness (for auto cruise or sleep
| alarms) can detect your eye color, which could be construed
| as genetic data. Idk if airbags deploy based on weight on
| seats (i.e. less powerful for smaller people), but weight
| data is health data.
|
| I'm not so pessimistic that I think the Toyota techs are
| swabbing your car and sending it over to 23andMe.
| ravenstine wrote:
| Plus we know that the likes of Tesla and Ring/Amazon have
| no qualms about having a good laugh watching your camera
| footage until they get caught with their pants down
| (perhaps literally in some cases).
| RajT88 wrote:
| Well 23andMe doesn't pay a bounty on DNA.
|
| Yet.
| ricktdotorg wrote:
| > The worst offender was Nissan, Mozilla said
|
| this is ironic; my wife bought a brand new 2020 model year Nissan
| 370Z 50th anniversary edition in 2021, and it feels like it is
| from the late 90s.
|
| no touch screen (actually no screen at all!), no GPS/navigation,
| no tracking, no Bluetooth audio streaming(!!) it does have mobile
| phone Bluetooth connectivity and a terrible backup camera but
| those are the only bits of modern in-car tech it has.
|
| it feels like a very analog modern sports car without any of the
| crap that most modern sports cars have.
|
| more of this please!
|
| sadly, seems like the new Z coupe went all-in on the in-car tech,
| much like Nissan's other offerings.
| EricE wrote:
| How can it have no screen? They even forced Mazda to put a back
| up camera in the Miata - which is beyond idiotic.
| gorbachev wrote:
| Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37401563
| Nifty3929 wrote:
| The biggest problem I have is tracking that the government has
| access to. We're in a situation where the government knows
| everywhere your phone has been, and everywhere your car has been.
| I doubt we're far from the gov't being able to de-activate your
| car at will also.
|
| I would like to have privacy from corporations, but I really wish
| we'd keep the focus on privacy from our governments, since they
| have such ultimate power over us.
| hedora wrote:
| In the US, the government has access to 100% of the information
| the corporations have.
|
| Also, corporations have all sorts of power over us that should
| be reserved for the government. For instance, they control
| electronic currency, freedom of association (online), and your
| ability to distributed and purchase most media.
|
| The government has been able to use onstar to deactivate GMC
| vehicles at will for over a decade. Of course, GM can do this
| too.
| kornhole wrote:
| Kill switches are now required for cars produced after 2026.
| https://www.musclecarsandtrucks.com/biden-infrastructure-bil...
| It is for your safety. ;)
| TheLoafOfBread wrote:
| Of course, that it won't be disabled by crooks and used for
| crimes like kidnapping people.
| Nifty3929 wrote:
| I am not worried about crooks disabling my car. I'm worried
| about the government doing it.
|
| We need to stop being fearful of _each other_ and start
| becoming fearful of our overlords.
| TheLoafOfBread wrote:
| Government is not going to kidnap me with such
| underhanded action. They will just arrest me for some
| made up crime and erase me from history.
| eficek wrote:
| https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-402773429497
| kornhole wrote:
| Maybe kill-switch is not the best definition of the
| feature. The required technology monitors the driver to
| prevent starting the car or forcing it to pull over. In the
| context of the parent article which explains how the
| overall monitoring systems fail on privacy and security, we
| can see how these combined with the car stopping feature
| can be used against us. We are ultimately trusting the
| companies and government to do what is in our interests
| rather than theirs. Some people trust Apple not to use or
| share their data with government to be used against them.
| Trusting the largest corporation in the world and the most
| powerful government in the world is a major leap for me,
| but everybody theoretically makes their own choices.
| thegrim000 wrote:
| Pretty much the definition of corrupt/biased "fact
| checkers" right here. It's a mechanism where the car can
| decide to turn itself off and prevent you from driving.
| It's literally a kill switch, where the car refuses your
| commands. They're arguing semantics about how it currently
| isn't a _remote_ kill switch, only a local kill switch.
| Reminds me of other similarly ridiculous "fact checks"
| where someone claims something like "X is raising taxes by
| 9%!" and they fact check it as "completely false" because
| technically it's not 9%, it's 9.1%, or whatever.
|
| Of course in the future the kill switch will also be
| mandated to be remotely triggerable, we all know it, but by
| that time the overton window will have shifted far enough,
| by things like mandating local kill switches, that making
| it remote as well will slip through easily in however many
| years.
|
| I will never in my life own a vehicle that can decide,
| locally or remotely, to refuse to function, or that can
| decide to slam on the brakes by itself, or that can phone
| home data about me. Not sure how much longer I can get away
| with that before older, non-smart cars are declared evil
| and banned, in the name of climate change or walkable
| cities or whatever, but we'll see.
| CP3f6kMA wrote:
| It's my car. Who are these people to place restrictions on
| what I do with it?
| plagiarist wrote:
| "It's not a kill switch, it slows the vehicle to a stop
| instead of being instant." I fail to see the practical
| difference. I don't want my car incorrectly deciding I am
| impaired and "coasting to a gentle stop" on the way to a
| hospital during a medical emergency or something.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| The problem is that the private companies tracking you can be
| compelled (if they don't voluntarily) give up your tracking
| data to the government.
|
| Stopping government tracking starts with stopping private
| industry tracking, as the latter is happy to give it away/sell
| the data or can be forced to by law.
| Nifty3929 wrote:
| I agree with your premise, but disagree with your conclusion.
|
| Yes, of course data that goes to the corporations gets
| scooped up by the government.
|
| But we need to stay laser focused on the main goal of
| maintaining privacy from our government, which may include
| efforts at privacy from corporations.
| motohagiography wrote:
| The problem when you don't have competitive markets is that
| companies collude to use their oligopoly power and start
| exploiting people instead of making products for them. It's
| socially destructive because without privacy and moral context,
| all that is left is nihilism. Without privacy for the human
| exceptions to ideals, who gives a fuck if you lie, cheat, drive
| recklessly, cultivate morbid sexuality, or worse, as you're being
| monitored the whole time and nobody is doing anything about it,
| so there are no consequences, and even when there are, they are
| random. It's the social equivalent to being in a jail.
| Surveillance has become the most socially destructive force in
| our society today.
|
| I'm looking at getting a new truck after driving an old wrangler
| without infotainment or even power windows, and part of that is
| looking for aftermarket services to disable most of this
| distracting and dangerous crap. Maybe that's going to be my next
| product play.
| [deleted]
| cmurf wrote:
| How does GDPR affect this issue for cars bought/sold in EU
| market? Is the opt out complete? Does the right to be forgotten
| after the fact apply?
| Msurrow wrote:
| 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.
| hugoroy wrote:
| My guess is that Mozilla only looked at the US market, and
| the article does not mention that this is US-only.
| Msurrow wrote:
| 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
| lisper wrote:
| > Some of the cars tested collected data you wouldn't expect your
| car to know about, including details about sexual activity, race,
| and immigration status, according to Mozilla.
|
| It's not just that I would not _expect_ my car to know about
| these things, it 's that I cannot imagine how my car could
| _possibly_ know these things. Immigration status? Sexual
| activity? WTF? How?
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| cameras, mics? and/or uploading pics from your phone
| lisper wrote:
| Who uploads pics from their phone to their car??? Is that
| even possible?
| umeshunni wrote:
| I think Mozilla's definition of 'tested' is made up here.
| salawat wrote:
| https://cccis.com
|
| In case you were curious about one of the faces behind the tech
| stacks that specialize in data exfiltration w.r.t your care. They
| pitch as being the source of info for the actuaries of auto
| insurers. Interviewed for them once, and even though the offer
| didn't materialize, I crossed them off my list of people I'd work
| with after putting in some time reading up on their offerings and
| thinking on what you could make out of them.
| godelski wrote:
| This is the first "Mozilla" thread I've seen in awhile where HN
| isn't getting all up in arms about them. So I take it we're cool
| with this type of stuff? Beyond FF? Because honestly I really
| appreciate this work.
| UtopiaPunk wrote:
| Who wants to see my impression of an HN commenter? OK, here it
| goes:
|
| "I'm tired of Mozilla's agenda and politics!! They should only
| make a web browser!!"
| spacemadness wrote:
| OK? I don't think that sounds like an HN commenter at all.
| OnionBlender wrote:
| The other thread delivers.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37406265
| [deleted]
| mantra2 wrote:
| I think I'm alright - I mean - my FJ Cruiser doesn't even have
| carpet.
| alwaysrunning wrote:
| Where is the host file so I can block all this data from being
| uploaded?
| yumraj wrote:
| I'm assuming that this is not an issue if the phone is not
| connected to the car via Bluetooth, yes? The worst they'll track
| is my locations and some other telemetry.
|
| I know this is not ideal, but personally I've never connected my
| phone to the car and I've managed. So maybe that's what I'll need
| to keep doing.
|
| Also, can I not control this via iOS permissions?
| fidotron wrote:
| These cars are simply indicators of what smart homes would look
| like if marketers got their way: mechanisms to capture the
| hormonal state of inhabitants to better advertise to them.
|
| That isn't a joke btw. For example women are far more susceptible
| to advertising based on their menstrual cycle. Gad Saad, of all
| people, wrote a very serious book about basically that.
| temp_gnuser wrote:
| FYI, on many systems you can rip out or otherwise disable the
| lte/sat boards and prevent data transmission. Sometimes it takes
| a touch of soldering.
| mikece wrote:
| 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.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| 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.
| Bilal_io wrote:
| 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.
| darknavi wrote:
| And then you get about six years of SiriusXM mailers because
| they sell your data to them.
| gspencley wrote:
| 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.
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| "Recognized you"
|
| I wonder where they put the facial detection camera
| [deleted]
| jcrash wrote:
| The actual article:
| https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...
| nologic01 wrote:
| 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.
| catlover76 wrote:
| > You can't say: X and Y can milk this, but Z and W cannot.
|
| It is totally doable for the government to regulate social
| media differently from automobiles--it's happening right now!
| [deleted]
| Glench wrote:
| I signed the petition and donated to Mozilla after reading this
| article. This is really important work they're doing.
| https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...
| charles_f wrote:
| Note that this is all based on this source material.
| https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/categor...
|
| I haven't dug too much into the methodology, but it seems like
| it's done based on privacy policies rather than actually looking
| into the car telemetry traffic. It's also written in a very
| caaual and sensationalist "omagad" tone that doesn't serve well
| the seriousness of the topic or findings
| JeremyNT wrote:
| Thanks.
|
| I read the original article and conspicuously absent is the
| actual mechanism of the data collection that is occurring here.
| Some of the claims seem barely believable.
|
| Is data exfiltrated from the phone, via some kind of data
| access loophole in Android Auto / Car Play? Are the microphones
| in vehicles actively listening to conversations and shipping
| them off for analysis? Or is this all purely hypothetical
| (i.e., they say they have the _right_ to use it, so clearly
| they _must_ be trying to acquire it...)?
|
| The only techniques I can imagine that might lead to collection
| of data such as sexual activity are truly egregious indeed, and
| although I have incredibly low trust in auto makers such
| techniques _seem_ like a bridge too far, even for them.
| philsnow wrote:
| > Are the microphones in vehicles actively listening to
| conversations and shipping them off for analysis? Or is this
| all purely hypothetical (i.e., they say they have the right
| to use it, so clearly they must be trying to acquire it...)?
|
| All data that they can acquire will be acquired because data
| can be sold, leading to higher quarterly profits. There are
| almost no other considerations.
| spookie wrote:
| The language also took me by surprise. Not a fan. Really, if
| you want to connect with people on this topic just mention
| "abortions", and "data sold".
| sfaxon wrote:
| I own a VW ID.4. For reasons I wanted to reverse engineer some
| of the API. After authenticating to the account tied to my car,
| the landing page (https://www.vw.com/en/owners.html) makes
| calls to a lot of analytics trackers. I'll just list what pi-
| hole defaults block:
|
| analytics.tiktok.com
|
| sp.analytics.yahoo.com
|
| googletagmanger.com
|
| universal.iperceptions.com
|
| cdn4.userzoom.com
|
| snap.licdn.com
|
| secure-ds.serving-sys.com
|
| bat.bing.com
|
| ct.pinterest.com
|
| adherent.com
|
| And a few others. I would guess the phone app (which has access
| to the car location) has a similar list of trackers. I hope to
| get some time to MITM the app to be able to know for sure.
| creeble wrote:
| Just to be clear, these are trackers from the _web page_ ,
| not trackers called by your car, correct?
|
| I'm never surprised by the web trackers (which my ad blocker
| generally filters too), but 3rd-party trackers called _from_
| devices /vehicles seems more insidious.
|
| Although the car / IoT companies can just as easily outsource
| the data once they have it anyway.
| sfaxon wrote:
| Yes, this is from the web page. Where I can manage my
| vehicle (see VIN, etc) and has my home address, dealer
| information, etc.
|
| I would be interested to hear of a way to intercept
| internet traffic between the vehicle and the internet.
| waterheater wrote:
| If you're being extra paranoid, you'd need to spoof a
| cell tower. Spoofing a Wifi AP and monitoring traffic
| with Wireshark gets you network traffic, but you can't
| know if the vehicle sends certain information exclusively
| over the cell network, short of on-vehicle firmware and
| software analysis. Also, if you wanted to go with the
| Wifi approach, you need to force Wifi connectivity, which
| would probably mean going outside of cell tower coverage
| or unplugging the vehicle's cellular antenna, both of
| which may affect what the car transmits.
| hedora wrote:
| Our GMC's telemetry showed up on the "list of crap you can
| delete" in my unused facebook account.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| They however still have access to the JS context and thus
| the authenticated session when you are on the website. They
| can most likely exfiltrate all the data visible on the page
| and maybe even the auth token for further server-side
| misuse after you've closed the page.
| vannucci wrote:
| The more I read about these things, the more I think I'll be
| driving my 23 year old Toyota 4Runner until the end of my life
| giantg2 wrote:
| 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.
| lost_tourist wrote:
| 2012 mustang here, one reason I got it instead of a camaro
| (which I like better) was because every single camaro I looked
| at had onstar.
| WalterBright wrote:
| My '72 Dodge sez hello.
| uberdru wrote:
| I am still driving my '09 4Runner. Cheap to own/maintain,
| ridiculously reliable. And no touch screen. Perfection!
|
| Anything made after about 2015 feels WAY over-engineered, for
| my tastes at least.
| vannucci wrote:
| 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.
| aftbit wrote:
| 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.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| >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.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| Poor man? Sounds like a happy man to me!
|
| 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.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| 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
| j1elo wrote:
| 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.
| maxwell wrote:
| Also rolled out in London.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_Low_Emission_Zone
| dangus wrote:
| 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.
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/ztpcWUqVpIg
| EricE wrote:
| "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.
| dangus wrote:
| 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.
| geitir wrote:
| In many states in the US if your car lives long enough you
| get rewarded with exemption from emissions requirements!
| graywh wrote:
| but you may be restricted to driving only on weekends and
| holidays
| jancsika wrote:
| Reworded slightly:
|
| If you're poor enough, the US government won't punish you
| for relying on an older car.
| hedora wrote:
| 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.
| vidanay wrote:
| My 2002 Ford Excursion says "What's a SIM?"
| toastal wrote:
| I switched to a motorbike that has almost nothing 'fancy' about
| it--along with public transportation.
| hedora wrote:
| If you have a license plate, then its being tracked with
| cameras when you use it.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Yeah, my bicycle tracks me so little that sometimes I track
| myself just to feel included.
| toastal wrote:
| That was actually adorable. Kudos.
| sharkweek wrote:
| Yo fellow 3rd gen driver!
|
| 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."
| vannucci wrote:
| 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.
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| 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.
| LeSaucy wrote:
| With the next Gen Toyota platforms all coming to market, it's
| the end of an era for sure. I will be driving my 2nd Gen tundra
| into the ground!
| photochemsyn wrote:
| 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.
| TheRealDunkirk wrote:
| A lot of people are making comments about defeating the
| telemetry, but it's not just about selling ads this time. This is
| about actual surveillance and (eventually) control, and the
| governments of the world will make this a requirement, and make
| circumvention of it as illegal as copyright infringement. In the
| US, the government will throw up it's hands and say it's not us;
| it's the "free" market, and this must be what people want, while
| all the automakers collude to do it, collect the data, and either
| let the NSA have it, or don't resist when they tap into it. And
| some people will think this is a good thing, because then we
| could throw literally everyone who was at J6 in prison, but then
| a conservative government gets thrust into power, and now they
| can go after everyone who was present at a BLM protest that
| turned violent (but I repeat myself). Whatever power "we" let
| "them" have will eventually be used against "us."
| EricE wrote:
| just wait until insurance companies demand access to your
| telemetry or they triple your rates.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| I had to go this route already. As a new driver, my rates
| were quite high - and the best option for lowering that was
| letting them track my driving through an app on my phone.
|
| I don't particularly like it, but it's something I'll just
| have to live with.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Why would they triple your rates? Insurance regulators do not
| let insurers increase premiums unless they have evidence
| showing the new data indicates a higher risk factor.
|
| So if you are getting your rates tripled, then you were being
| subsidized by safer drivers before, which seems like
| something that should be fixed.
|
| Dash cams have already probably given insurers a better idea
| on who is a riskier driver and who is not since collisions
| can now be more accurately attributed to the at fault party.
| ReactiveJelly wrote:
| They'll probably increase my rates because if I refuse the
| telemetry, they have to assume I'm a terrible driver.
|
| The fact that I am the most tight-assed speed-limit-obeyer
| I've ever known, with a dashcam, means nothing to them
| since it's my hardware and not theirs.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Oops, I misread the comment I replied to as tripling
| rates because they had access to real time driving data.
| eclipticplane wrote:
| They already do the opposite. Usage-based insurance gives you
| per-day/per-trip insurance in exchange for tracking
| (Milewise) or to drive discounts off your existing rates.
| (RightTrack)
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| I honestly don't get the hate for modern cars that some people
| have.
|
| I recently got a 2023 Corolla, and it's fantastic:
|
| * Android Auto gives me a great GPS to navigate anywhere,
| anytime. It watches out for traffic, accidents, speed traps, etc.
| and keeps me informed and on the fastest route
|
| * I can have my phone's whole music library to listen to instead
| of fiddling with another copy on a USB stick that I'd have to
| keep in sync
|
| * Automatic headlights and brights
|
| * Automatic climate control (no more adjusting!)
|
| * Amazing MPG (I can get 48 on the highway)
|
| * Tire pressure sensors
|
| * Automatic parking brake so I don't accidentally ruin the
| transmission
|
| * Automatic lane centering and adaptive cruise makes hour long
| drives effortless. It's even great in the city.
|
| * All the safety features like brake assist, pedestrian
| detection, etc. It hasn't saved me from an accident yet, and
| hopefully won't need to - but it's great to know that it's there
|
| I basically never need to touch the screen except when initially
| setting up my route. Everything else is on the wheel or sticks.
|
| Seriously. Cars have _never_ been better.
|
| Yes, if you're an enthusiast who wants a fun, sporty and unique
| car you're eating expensive scraps at the moment. But for MOST
| people, it's never been better.
| tredre3 wrote:
| I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, but
| this is an article about how cars collect telemetry. This is
| what everybody is talking about in the comments.
|
| I'm sure everybody here enjoys most modern car features you've
| listed. They just don't like being spied on.
| b8 wrote:
| Also as shown in Mr Robot, the LE can remotely stop a car via
| OnStar.
| flangola7 wrote:
| Is that really a thing?
| EricE wrote:
| Just wait until insurance companies demand access to your cars
| telemetry for either a "discount" or even to insure you at all.
| I'm seriously thinking of stockpiling a few extra used "dumb"
| cars. This is beyond nuts.
| Scoring6931 wrote:
| Already a thing in the UK, where the cheapest insurance options
| require the installation of a telemetry black box in the car.
| sedro wrote:
| It's the same in parts of the US. In California, insurers are
| only allowed to collect the mileage.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| I would love it if it was economical/possible for repair shops
| to do "dumb swaps" where they cut out all the "smart" bullshit
| and give you physical buttons and knobs on your dash.
| ReactiveJelly wrote:
| In my moments of programmer hubris I often think, "It can't
| be _that_ hard to make an open-source controller for a Hybrid
| Synergy Drive. It's only two motors and a small engine. Come
| on!"
| bick_nyers wrote:
| Heh. My programmer hubris tells me: difficulty is just a
| function of time and coffee.
| netbioserror wrote:
| 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.
| dmitrygr wrote:
| Find and unplug cell antenna. Plug in 50 ohm resistor. Live
| happy.
| nhance wrote:
| 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.
| Sander_Marechal wrote:
| There probably isn't a physical SIM card anymore. It probably
| just has an eSIM.
| yardie wrote:
| 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.
| glogla wrote:
| Given the Wikipedia page about eSIM says:
|
| _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...
| yardie wrote:
| 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.
| codedokode wrote:
| Shouldn't emergency services be accessible without a SIM?
| On the other hand, using a SIM allows government to track
| car's movement.
| hedora wrote:
| The cell modem has a separate unique identifier, so the
| government should be able to track sim-free devices.
| ben-schaaf wrote:
| Just gotta break out the soldering iron then.
| catchnear4321 wrote:
| 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.
| s3p wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're suggesting here.
| catchnear4321 wrote:
| 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.
| ranger_danger wrote:
| 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.
| catchnear4321 wrote:
| how are they contradictory?
| grecy wrote:
| 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)
| vuln wrote:
| It's an eSim. Not a physical SIM card afaik.
| monkpit wrote:
| Do you have a source for this?
| vuln wrote:
| 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.
| noman-land wrote:
| Check out the manual, find where the fuse is for the cellular
| modem, and remove it.
| bityard wrote:
| There's more than a fair chance that the modem is built into
| or fused along with the entertainment systems.
| orev wrote:
| 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.
| pgeorgi wrote:
| > 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".
| [deleted]
| mindslight wrote:
| 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)
| joezydeco wrote:
| You'd probably have more success finding the external antenna
| and clipping the leads at the sharkfin.
| bbarnett wrote:
| Just make sure you do something, like use a resistor to
| ground the antenna lead, because I did that, and would still
| get connectivity at times.
|
| EG if the cell tower was very close.
|
| Was fine after I used a resistor to turn that power into mild
| heat.
| joezydeco wrote:
| 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?
| r0b1n wrote:
| You could maybe just stuff the inside of the sharkfin
| full of tinfoil.
| ragnese wrote:
| I've tried stuff like that before on other things and
| haven't been very successful. Those damn EM waves really
| like to find their way through.
| TheLoafOfBread wrote:
| If it is similar to eCall in VAG ECUs, then there might be
| internal antenna inside the ECU itself.
| bbarnett wrote:
| This would really suck.
| flangola7 wrote:
| What the fuck
| vorpalhex wrote:
| There's often times a small cellular modem in the sharkfin on
| vehicles but I believe Jeeps still have whip antennas.
|
| 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.
| throw3747874747 wrote:
| I am pretty sure that is (or soon will be) illegal in EU. Car
| needs to be able to call emergency, if accident is detected.
| lost_tourist wrote:
| Is there some EU police that go around arresting people if
| you clip it?
| PrimeMcFly wrote:
| It wouldn't be surprising if there was. Look at how they go
| around enforcing people paying a tax just to be able to use
| televisions they legally own.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| 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.
| flir wrote:
| Frayed seatbelts won't pass an MOT in the UK. (Don't know
| about any other country).
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| What's an MOT? :)
| phpisthebest wrote:
| I have no required inspections here in the US... No
| Emissions, no Safety, no inspections at all
| InitialLastName wrote:
| For anyone from outside the US concerned about this: car
| inspection standards are state-specific. Many states have
| far more stringent standards.
| glogla wrote:
| 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!
| phpisthebest wrote:
| Only 12 states require routine safety inspections.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| The civilized world gets smaller by the day...
| phpisthebest wrote:
| That depends on what you mean by Civilized.
|
| I 100% oppose these inspections, and fully supported the
| initiative to remove them from my state.
| tpmoney wrote:
| 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.
| jibe wrote:
| _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.
|
| 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.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| 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:
|
| 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.
| tpmoney wrote:
| The EPA has a document here https://www.epa.gov/sites/def
| ault/files/2020-12/documents/ta...
|
| 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.
| jibe wrote:
| 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.
| tpmoney wrote:
| 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.
| 5555624 wrote:
| "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...
| jibe wrote:
| EPA defines tampering here:
|
| _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-1
| 068...
|
| 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_080
| 7.h...
| PrimeMcFly wrote:
| What about the the numerous older cars that don't have that
| functionality?
| justinclift wrote:
| "Oops, how did that happen..." ;)
| throw3747874747 wrote:
| 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.
| PrimeMcFly wrote:
| That's just creating a blackmarket for people that can
| crack the DRM without the car losing functionality.
| neurostimulant wrote:
| Wait, new cars in EU are expected to have cellular
| connectivity?
| TheLoafOfBread wrote:
| Yes and no. For eCall the modem will wakeup when crash
| signal is received, otherwise the chipset is disabled.
|
| For Euro7 it will be necessary by design.
| chongli wrote:
| Will it also be illegal to drive an old car that doesn't have
| this telemetry?
| wil421 wrote:
| Removing the head unit and unplugging the "Bordeaux" and violet
| wire[1] may help and be easier to do. It's the LTE and 3G
| antennae wire.
|
| 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...
| swader999 wrote:
| There's likely five Sims at various places and even 3d printed
| into the frame.
| delecti wrote:
| They're eSIM these days, so it's actually zero physical SIM
| cards.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| >The kind of information collected varies from personal
| information like medical data to how drivers are using the
| vehicle itself -- such as how fast they drive, where they drive,
| and even the music they listen to. Both Nissan and Kia are noted
| to allow the collection of information regarding a user's sex
| life.
|
| >Eighty-four percent of the reviewed car brands share personal
| user data with service providers, data brokers, and potentially
| sketchy businesses, according to the report, with 76 percent
| claiming the right to sell that personal data.
|
| >Tesla was the worst-ranked brand in the study, getting flagged
| in every privacy category -- only the second time this happened.
|
| >Alongside the report, Mozilla also published a breakdown
| explaining how car companies collect and share user data. This
| can include anything from the user's name, address, phone number,
| and email address to more intimate data like photos, calendar
| information, and even details on the driver's race, genetic
| information, and immigration status. Mozilla says it also
| couldn't confirm that any of the automakers could meet the
| organization's minimum security standards regarding data
| encryption and protection against theft. In fact, it claims
| dating apps and even sex toys typically provide more detailed
| security information about their products than cars.
| chevyboltowner3 wrote:
| For many cars (like the Chevrolet bolt) the information the car
| collected is available for purchase at lexisnexis
| https://www.chevybolt.org/threads/disable-or-opt-out-of-onst...
| EGreg wrote:
| _Modern cars use a variety of data harvesting tools including
| microphones, cameras, and the phones drivers connect to their
| cars. Manufacturers also collect data through their apps and
| websites, and can then sell or share that data with third
| parties._
|
| Do I understand this correctly? So all my conversations in a
| modern car potentially ARE actually being recorded and sent to be
| indexed and used against me later? Or to sell me stuff based on
| what I said in the car?
|
| Is this like when ISPs sell my data?
| dicing wrote:
| FYI If you don't like that, you can act with Mozilla's petition:
|
| https://foundation.mozilla.org/fr/privacynotincluded/article...
| intrasight wrote:
| I just don't see this issue getting much traction until something
| really bad happens to a large group of powerful people. But even
| then it may not come to light as said people will cut a deal with
| car companies to exclude them from telemetry sighting "national
| security". They of course won't publicize this and when it
| inevitably becomes public they will just shrug.
|
| It won't get traction for the average person because the
| immediate effects are positive (lower insurance) and the dangers
| are very theoretical (a bad actor knowing where my car is).
| People are much more concerned about the near and present danger
| of bad actors hacking their financial accounts and stealing they
| hard-earned money.
| yafbum wrote:
| The article is not very clear about whether this kind of abusive
| data collection is actually happening and they can prove it, or
| whether they found the text of the privacy policies to be overly
| broad. I have no idea how a car would infer my sexual
| orientation.
| drdebug wrote:
| May be if you drive often near bars or places with specific
| orientation?
| bigbacaloa wrote:
| That's easy. But they know that already anyway.
| absoluteharam wrote:
| [dead]
| dangus wrote:
| Bingo. Lawyers write extremely broad TOS and EULAs but it's
| really a mystery whether any of this data is actually being
| collected. Mozilla can't see any of the code so they can't
| really say what's going on.
|
| Yes, it's bad that it's a mystery and it's bad that consumers
| have little control over it. We need more comprehensive
| national privacy laws.
| kornhole wrote:
| I spent a lot of time researching all this a few years ago when
| looking for a new car. Despite the ability to afford any car, I
| am still riding a bike and taking public transit because of what
| I discovered. I know this is a difficult option for people in
| many places, but I am happy. Car makers should take notice that a
| growing number of people like me want a FOSS OS rather than an
| Iphone on wheels.
| redbell wrote:
| > Many people think of their car as a private space -- somewhere
| to call your doctor, have a personal conversation with your kid
| on the way to school..
|
| The above quote was 100% true just a few years ago but it appears
| to be vanishing in speed light as the tech advances and the race
| to collect private data reaches its peak.
|
| I'm afraid we will have to _check_ the "I Agree to Terms and
| Conditions" in our new cars and before even leaving the
| dealership parking or getting the usual message: " _Hey there,
| we're updating our terms and conditions, accept to unlock your
| car_ "
|
| I'm afraid that once we reach fully-autonomous driving, Ads will
| start showing up in the car's digital cockpit and/or head-up
| display.. probably, based on your current location, mood, the
| radio station you're currently listening to.. you name it..
|
| What a time you might not want to live to see!
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| True, although I have some hope -- people have been disabling
| the onstar hardware in cars for decades and I assume this kind
| of thing will expand as these systems become even more
| invasive.
|
| The solutions will probably have to advance. I assume the first
| stage will be just unplugging the telematics ECU (Electronic
| Control Unit). Then the automakers will get wise, and punish
| the driver if that ECU is offline (reduce/remove some unrelated
| features). Then we'll have to make hardware that plugs into the
| telematics and gps antenna connectors that acts like a man in
| middle to ensure only the minimum (and possibly fake) data is
| received by the ECU. Then they'll probably add something that
| calls home every so often and requires a valid response to know
| everything is ok... etc.
| kccqzy wrote:
| Ads in cars are _already_ a thing in China:
| https://carnewschina.com/2021/10/18/does-nio-play-advertisem...
|
| (It has gradually occurred to me that without the safeguards of
| privacy ingrained in western societies, the state of ad tech in
| China has already surpassed the U.S. and Europe in its
| sophistication.)
| renegat0x0 wrote:
| In modern era everything mechanical, or analog is being replaced
| with digital, or with something "as a software". Product is
| replaced with "service".
|
| When everything becomes in the end connected with the Internet,
| everything is dependent... A system crash of AWS, Google, or any
| other monolithic provider will have drastic results. A system
| crash could halt many cars in a country. In the future Hackers
| could stall entire country transportation.
|
| With oligopoly,monopoly the power player can decide with very
| granular precision what you can, and cannot do, where you can go.
| You have no power to object. Even government bodies could be
| against you, or could be too small to fight big corporations.
|
| More
|
| - cameras in cars. What they will detect? If I am drunk, or
| something more? Will there be glitches to record more stuff? Will
| the cars have back doors for governments?
|
| - what kind of data will cars collect? Audio? Video? Biometrics?
| Facial data? Hate speech?
|
| - they can analyze where you go, why you do something, maybe for
| analytics, for governments, or for ad business
|
| - they can define terms of conditions, which of course can allow
| the producers to sell your data to third parties for cheaper
| models of cars
|
| At first you will be able to mitigate. You will be able to buy
| older cards. Eventually we will not be able to choose a different
| life. There is no really opt out if everybody implements techno-
| feudalistic software patterns.
| enriquto wrote:
| > There is no really opt out if everybody implements techno-
| feudalistic software patterns.
|
| I have bad news for you: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-
| to-read.en.html
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > cameras in cars. What they will detect? If I am drunk, or
| something more?
|
| The more would be if you are watching your phone, in 99% of
| cases.
| tristor wrote:
| Of all the horrible things go on with privacy these days, this is
| the one I hate the most. I'm a "car guy", but not the sort that
| obsesses over old cars (although I do love 60s and 80s cars). I
| like new tech, I like the advances in engineering we've made in
| new vehicles, I like EVs even.
|
| Nonetheless I've been in the market for a new car for months and
| haven't bought because it's hard to find any cars that meet my
| requirements (after all most companies primarily make trucks and
| shitty crossovers, not even cars). The two things that
| consistently hold me back are either things like this (crazy
| telemetry / touchscreens everywhere / half-ass safety tech) or
| insane dealer markups. I've pretty much figured out the new
| Toyota GR Corolla is the perfect car for my needs, but you can't
| find them anywhere without a $25K+ dealer markup and many dealers
| won't sell them to out of state residents.
|
| It's truly a crazy time in the new car markets and the used
| market isn't really any better.
| cpursley wrote:
| The touchscreens are really a dealbreaker on new cars.
|
| They're not just prone to quick obsolescence, they're
| dangerous.
| thorin wrote:
| Is this a US thing? I recently bought a reasonably high end
| Skoda (which I think would be made in the same factory as VW,
| SEAT etc). It has a big touch screen in the centre console,
| but that's really only used for the radio / media / phone
| calls etc. This is all non essential stuff and so I can deal
| with it being on a screen. Everything relating to driving is
| an old skool analogue control.
|
| A couple of things I don't like is the pull switch for
| parking brake, it's the first car I've had without an old
| skool handbreak, it feels unnecessary, but ergonomically it's
| fine. Also it's a key less ignition with a button to start.
| Again I don't see why this benefits me, but I can deal with
| it. I do worry about having a smart key though as I'm often
| on the water kayaking/surfing but it's been ok in a
| waterproof case so far.
| Loughla wrote:
| No, it's the same. You can control hidden things from the
| touch screen (like light length when opening the door for
| example) but most cars still have tactile nobs for
| everything outside of radio/bluetooth/media.
|
| There are some cars that have touchscreen for essential
| things like climate control, but those are absolutely in
| the minority.
| brewdad wrote:
| Thing is, those cars with touch screen climate controls
| will let you set a temperature target much like your home
| thermostat. Once you figure out the right temperature,
| you don't really ever have to change it. I haven't
| changed the temperature in my car for months. I'll
| probably adjust it as summer turns to fall but it will be
| a one or two degree change one time and then I won't
| touch it again unless my kid drove the car and messed
| with it.
|
| Putting things like windshield wipers or headlights on a
| touch screen would be a nightmare though.
| ghaff wrote:
| My newish car does have buttons to control the
| temperature and fan. But, yeah, I don't really change it.
| I do use defroster settings in the winter.
| gumballindie wrote:
| For me controlling the radio using a touch screen is an
| issue - i cant take my eyes off the road, and using driving
| wheel buttons that require fiddling is not great either. I
| need buttons and dials that leverage muscle memory.
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| You're old. Almost no one has that muscle memory anymore.
| Hell almost no one listens to the radio anymore, people
| listen to Spotify or podcasts.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I exclusively use streaming, and I still find that I want
| to control the volume, or skip to the next song, etc.
| Thankfully my car has a scroll wheel on the steering
| wheel to do that, or I'd be pretty irritated.
| ghaff wrote:
| Volume should absolutely be a knob or, less ideally, a
| pair of buttons. But does anyone have a physical radio
| dial any longer? (Even my 1998 Toyota with no touchscreen
| I sold last year didn't.) I think at least one
| manufacturer was considering eliminating FM radio all
| together.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >I think at least one manufacturer was considering
| eliminating FM radio all together.
|
| Are you sure it wasn't the elimination of AM radio? I
| have not heard of anyone suggesting to kill the FM radio,
| but I'm not _that_ dialed in
| ghaff wrote:
| Actually I guess it's both.
| https://musictech.com/news/industry/ford-tesla-bmw-am-fm-
| rad... AM radio is sometimes used for information updates
| on roads etc. but I'm sure very few people use it.
| dylan604 wrote:
| interesting. maybe i blocked the FM part out, but i was
| distinctly remember AM. removing radio entirely makes
| sense, as i didn't really think that an FM only radio
| would be any cheaper than AM/FM would be.
|
| >but I'm sure very few people use it.
|
| The conservative side of the spectrum loves the AM band
| ghaff wrote:
| I guess Ford at least is going to keep AM radio after all
| https://www.npr.org/2023/05/24/1177847361/ford-changes-
| direc... with the justification being it's an emergency
| alert system. I assume AM and FM antenna requirements are
| different and that's probably where the cost is.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I remember as a kid being fascinated with the first car
| that I saw that had the radio antenna embedded into the
| windscreen glass. All antennas I had seen were on top of
| houses, rabbit ears, or the long annoying things attached
| to cars/trucks. This tiny thin line that wasn't even
| exposed to air was the antenna? That opened up a rabbit
| hole.
| brewdad wrote:
| Every car I've driven that was made in the past decade
| has volume control as two buttons on the steering wheel.
| There may or may not be a knob but the knob is less
| convenient than using the buttons right next to your
| hands. My current cars will also let you cycle through
| the radio presets using the >> and << buttons.
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| It's the same in the US, you just correctly identified that
| it's not an issue for the vast majority of people outside
| of the data collection concerns (which most people also
| don't care about)
| ghaff wrote:
| Handbrakes were mostly necessary for stickshifts starting
| on a hill but were kept around on a fair number of
| automatics even after they were unnecessary. (Though my
| emergency/parking brake has been a left foot pedal on my
| automatics for decades.)
| tiffanyh wrote:
| Do you ever use your mobile phone while driving?
|
| Call, talk, text, maps, etc.
|
| How is it any more dangerous than how a typical person uses
| their phone today while driving?
|
| For safety: all common systems are accessible on most
| steering wheels (e.g. radio, etc) so that your hands never
| have to leave the steering wheel.
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| Who in their right mind uses a phone when driving ?
| tristor wrote:
| No. Using a phone while you're driving is peak stupid. I
| keep both hands on the wheel unless I'm operating the
| shifter or touching a knob, then both hands go back. This
| is how you are supposed to drive. If you need to take a
| call or change where you are navigating, you pull off in a
| gas station or parking lot for the couple of minutes needed
| before going back on the road.
|
| The world will not end if you are not accessible via
| internet-based communications for an hour or less. You can
| wait to answer that text message.
| scott_w wrote:
| In the UK it's illegal to touch your phone while driving
| (with some exceptions around hands free kits and payments).
| Even for things that are legal, the Highway Code is clear
| that you do not touch your radio while driving. I'd presume
| it would take a dim view of playing with other non-critical
| functions.
|
| So no, just because it's on your wheel, that doesn't make
| it "safe."
| Engineering-MD wrote:
| It's illegal to hold not touch. It is specifically legal
| to use your phone (in a safe manner) in say a wind screen
| mount [0].
|
| [0] https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-
| the-law
| scott_w wrote:
| That's why I mentioned hands free.
| Engineering-MD wrote:
| My clarification was in regards to the word touch, as it
| has very different implications to hold.
| bigbacaloa wrote:
| Not more dangerous than clearly dangerous is a low bar.
| sudobash1 wrote:
| No, where I live it is illegal to use a phone for most of
| those (without hands-free methods). When occasionally I
| need a map with directions, I load it up and set the phone
| in place before leaving, so I never need to touch it.
| Sometimes I ask my phone ("Hey Google") to read my texts if
| I am on a long drive. But other than that, I never use it.
| This is the ideal (and again, the law in many places).
|
| I take your point in that the built-in touchscreen is no
| worse for people who already text and drive, but we
| absolutely should be aiming for better. I certainly don't
| want to be forced to use a touchscreen for changing the AC
| settings, defogging the windshield, etc...
| neogodless wrote:
| We just bought a 2023 Mazda CX-5 Select for $29k. No
| touchscreens in the whole car! And no dealer markup - we paid
| slightly under MSRP.
|
| But... it is certainly satellite connected (you can manage
| locks, windows, etc. from your phone, as well as remote
| start). Wish it was included in this privacy investigation.
| I'd love to know more about what they do with what they know
| about our car and how we use it.
| eulers_secret wrote:
| I have some information on that I ran accross:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/askcarsales/comments/15nkbh3/new_c
| a...
|
| https://old.reddit.com/r/CX50/comments/126aepa/mazda_connec
| t...
|
| There's a few threads linked in the top discussion (you may
| need to expand the massively downvoted responses, and some
| are deleted), but Mazda is known to use tracking data to
| deny warranty claims and share that data with insurers.
|
| I was also stunned to learn salespeople's commission is
| denied if they don't get you on the app! Absolutely wild.
| cpursley wrote:
| I think Mazda is one of the exceptions. Plus, they have
| great driving dynamics in general.
|
| Only thing stopping me from getting a new Miata is all the
| dangerous bro-dozers on the road.
| EricE wrote:
| Meh - with a Miata you just zip out of their way. Miata
| owner since 1998 and I even survived commuting for 22
| years in Northern VA. Life is too short - get and enjoy a
| Miata!
| hibikir wrote:
| I was also a Miata owner: An NB Madzaspeed. A lot of fun
| to drive, and it's nimbleness saved me from a couple of
| crazy accidents. Unfortunately the car has one major
| weakness: It doesn't matter if the car is very agile if
| you are surrounded by vehicles with far worse
| characteristics. The car was rammed 3 times in 12 years,
| either on the side or the back, by people in brodozers
| that either couldn't see it on the side, or had crappy
| braking performance. The person in front of me does an
| emergency-level stop, and with the Miata I stop too, 3
| feet before I hit them. 3 seconds later The brodozer
| behind me, however, has failed to brake, and launches the
| Miata forward. I walk out fine, the car in front of me
| gets very minor damage, as I was stopped and with my foot
| on the brake pedal, but the Miata's frame is bent, and
| the repair estimate is over 5k.
|
| So yeah, hell is other cars
| forgetfreeman wrote:
| I wonder how the car would respond to having the sat
| antenna run through with a 1/2 inch drill bit? Would that
| solve the problem?
| EricE wrote:
| Just unplug the cellular modem. I have three "dumb" cars
| and I'm going to continue to baby the crap out of them. I
| have zero interest in anything new. Maybe a Mazda if push
| came to shove.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| Easier said than done. Where is that located? Is there a
| service manual that explains where that part is?
| toast0 wrote:
| There's a good chance the modem is on its own fuse.
| There's also a good chance the modem is 4g only, so
| whenever that gets shutdown, the car will be trackerless,
| as happened to cars with 2g or 3g modems. :D
| dv_dt wrote:
| I had a close in-law that had a total braking failure with
| their ~2017 Mazda Cx-9, which was one thing, but then the
| dealer was pretty horrible about acknowledging or even
| diagnosing it. In the end, they sold it off early instead
| of continuing to own it with the unknowns on the brakes. So
| it's an anecdote, but one that makes me look pretty
| seriously against Mazda - though maybe it was more the
| dealer than the company.
| neogodless wrote:
| It's hard to say. Of course the OEM should _care_ what
| their dealers do and how they treat customers, but
| ultimately the dealers decide how they are going to
| handle things.
|
| I haven't had any failures on any of our Mazdas so far
| (2013 CX-5, though only had it for 2 years. I change cars
| like clothes, 2014 CX-5 - spouse had for ~70k / 6 years,
| 2015 Mazda 3 - had for 27k / 6 years). Only issue I had
| was a battery that died during the pandemic, and it
| didn't really die - I was able to nurse it back to health
| and then it kept working through when I sold the car 3
| years later. All that to say, I haven't been able to test
| our dealership with a major failure. But the buying
| experience did exceed what we experienced at the other
| dealerships we visited (Hyundai, Chevrolet - lots of
| unwanted sales contact and in person pressure.)
| dv_dt wrote:
| Honestly it could have been something as simple as a a
| missed bleed of an air bubble in the brake lines. But
| this was on a less than 3 yr old car, and its been a
| while since we last discussed it, & I don't recall if
| they had any sort of brake service where that would be a
| possibility - either way after a scare like that, one
| expects your car maintainer (in this case the dealer) to
| be open to a bit of diagnostic work - even if only to
| maintain good relations for future purchases.
| sifar wrote:
| You can disable the connected services from the settings.
| It still has an annoying pop-up every time you start the
| car to enable them.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| More details here, see page 77. PDF warning.
|
| https://www.mazdausa.com/siteassets/pdf/owners-
| optimized/opt...
| gumby wrote:
| I recently rented a cheap sedan and was shocked: there was a
| small screen for carplay that didn't interfere with the
| dashboard and all the other controls (volume, climate, etc)
| had hard buttons. After a couple of days of driving I could
| do everything without looking away from the road.
|
| Meanwhile the expensive cars are frightening to drive as you
| need to look away from the road to do anything.
| gnicholas wrote:
| My understanding is that expensive cars have relatively
| good voice recognition that allows the driver to easily
| access functions that might be otherwise buried deep in a
| menu. This doesn't solve the discoverability issue, but
| it's good from an eyes-on-the-road perspective. I think
| it's also used as an excuse for why you need to pay a
| monthly fee for internet access.
| guestbest wrote:
| I think they put in the touchscreens because it makes
| internationalization easier. No physical labels and OTA
| updates. Personally, I don't think digital
| internationalization is good for the driver since it appeals
| to the lowest common denominator of interface while adding
| another expensive component to replace in case of damage.
| w0m wrote:
| I wouldn't even go that far: It's less wires to run.
|
| Yea; my cars interface has had 3 radical redesigns since I
| got it (which I mostly appreciate), but think of how much
| easier to build a Model 3 is when it foregoes 95% of a cars
| normal physical buttons for a single screen.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| It shouldn't be expensive to make an I2C smart-switch
| that allows you to place as many buttons as you want on a
| single set of 3 wires (or 4 if you want a simpler
| circuit).
| owenmarshall wrote:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_bus
|
| Modern cars do it with two wires.
| mschaef wrote:
| LIN bus also https://www.csselectronics.com/pages/lin-
| bus-protocol-intro-...
| marcosdumay wrote:
| Hum, it's terminated with resistors on both sides, so the
| boxes need power. That makes it 4 wires.
|
| I imagine there's very little difference on cost between
| 3 or 4 wires. But the number of nodes described is not
| really compatible with making each button its own node.
| fossuser wrote:
| I know people on HN make a big deal over this and it's easy
| to make an argument for tactile buttons, but when it's a
| quality interface (like on a Tesla) it's really a non-issue.
|
| It reminds me of the complaining in the early iPhone days
| about lack of a physical keyboard.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| I was riding in a friend's Tesla where the screen crashed
| while we were on the road. Just a black screen for some
| amount of time and had zero insight into the state of the
| car.
|
| That just does not happen with physical controls.
| [deleted]
| ajross wrote:
| > That just does not happen with physical controls.
|
| I was driving a car once where the handle to the stick
| shift literally popped off in my hand. So... no, that's
| just silly. Stuff breaks. Important stuff breaks. You
| deal with that with careful design and redundancy[1], not
| whining on the internet about touchscreens.
|
| [1] Like how in the Tesla all the driving controls are,
| in fact, NOT connected to the touchscreen controlled by
| the MCU but to the AP computer.
| mohaine wrote:
| Physical controls are just inputs to some computer in the
| car. The risk of a reboot is still there and I'm guessing
| on many newer cars, the computer the physical controls is
| wired to is actually the same one that controls the touch
| screen. This would be needed so you can control the same
| item via voice/remote app, even if you never use this.
| Kirby64 wrote:
| Sure it does. Gauges are almost all driven electrically
| these days and not directly connected to a speed readout
| mechanically. If you have a problem with the gauge
| cluster, it's very common to have gauges malfunction.
| Sometimes they read incorrectly. Sometimes they read 0.
| If it's one of those multifunction displays, you could
| just have that display "crash" too.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| There is still going to be significantly better isolation
| than if it is all behind one pane of glass. If the radio
| is on the fritz, the hard-wired speedometer and
| windshield wipers should still be able to operate and
| accept commands.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| A modern digital cluster is pretty much all operated off
| one little computer. Nobody's used hard wired
| speedometers in probably 20 years or more. And I can tell
| you that even back when we _did_ have such things, it
| wasn 't unheard of for the cluster to freak out. Had a
| ground wire crack on my '95 car and the gauges all
| started making very random readings. Some even looked
| plausible at first glance, which meant it took two trips
| to the dealer before they realized it was an electrical
| problem and not an actual malfunctioning cooling system.
|
| In the case of the Tesla, BTW, the infotainment is 100%
| separate from the computer that controls the car. E.g.
| you loose the turn signal sounds, but the signals
| themselves work, etc. AP will continue to function, but
| you can't turn it on without the infotainment screen
| running. You can reboot the infotainment as you're
| driving down the street without it affecting your control
| of the car.
| ghaff wrote:
| There's probably some truth in that. Admittedly, it's a
| self-selected group to some extent, but the couple people I
| know who own Teslas basically tell me the controls are
| fine.
|
| The reality is also that, in my Honda, a bunch of the
| buttons that aren't on the steering wheel/column are things
| I touch once in a blue moon and there are probably buttons
| I haven't touched since I initially set up the car.
|
| And I don't actually want to navigate using my phone which
| is precariously hanging off an air vent using some some
| accessory clamp. Or by all means go old school and navigate
| using a map open in your lap.
|
| (That said, I do think a lot of car manufacturers should be
| more thoughtful about preserving certain tactile controls
| however.)
| ghostpepper wrote:
| Even if the controls are "fine" that doesn't mean they're
| not worse than physical controls. Just because they
| haven't caused a problem yet doesn't mean they won't
| under less than ideal conditions.
| ghaff wrote:
| I guess it depends? If it's something I fiddle with all
| the time while moving (volume, wipers, lights, etc.) then
| sure. (Though does anyone put those controls on the
| touchscreen?) Probably environmental. But lots of
| settings are basically set and forget. My car has
| physical buttons for various modes that I _rarely_ touch
| and would likely never touch while driving at speed.
| bodge5000 wrote:
| The entire reason for touchscreens weren't because touch is
| better than tactile, it's because different apps will have
| different UI needs that cannot be predicted by the phones
| manufacturer. Steve Jobs says as much in the original
| keynote.
|
| Cars don't really have this problem because they only have
| one primary job, and all other functions (eg climate
| control) are easily predicted by the manufacturer.
| ragnese wrote:
| > It reminds me of the complaining in the early iPhone days
| about lack of a physical keyboard.
|
| I totally get that. People will always complain about some
| new design fad, whether it's actually good or not.
|
| However... we're talking about heavy vehicles traveling at
| high speed with humans inside. You simply don't have to
| takes your eyes off the road as long with tactile controls
| as you do with touch screens.
| fiddlerwoaroof wrote:
| Having driven a Tesla for three years now, I basically
| don't use the screen while driving. The controls I
| actually use are on the steering wheel or column (cruise
| control settings, music control, turn signals) and I have
| never had a significant issue with leaving wipers, lights
| and climate on auto
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I mostly agree, but it's that time of year again when I
| question my life choices. The rain has started, and
| suddenly I'm reminded how stupid the wipers can be. Elon
| keeps promising over and over that they're just about to
| fix them, but it never happens. It absolutely will be a
| factor in whether I buy another Tesla.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| My only experience with touchscreen cars is with the
| Model 3. You don't need the screen for operational stuff
| needed for driving. Off the top of my head, these are all
| on the steering wheel/stalks:
|
| - Blinkers
|
| - High beams
|
| - Gearbox
|
| - Climate control temperature up/down
|
| - Cruise control enable/disable, speed change
|
| - Media volume, media next/previous
|
| - Phone call answer/hangup/volume
|
| - Windshield wipers
|
| On the next Model 3 version, they are moving the gearbox
| controls over to the screen. I have my doubts about that,
| but I'll complain once I have driven one.
| liminalsunset wrote:
| The primary issue with the touch screen in the Model 3 in
| my opinion, is actually the climate controls. You could
| argue that these aren't necessary to adjust while driving
| because the car is supposed to do it automatically,
| and/or you can use the admittedly terrible voice command
| system, but things like the recirculate button (I know
| I'm not the only one that uses it, my friend keeps
| tapping the physical button in his Honda and doesn't have
| to look at it to do this) are particularly annoying.The
| climate controls are in a _drawer_ that is opened by a
| swipe up, and until the latest update, the recirculate
| button would highlight but not activate /toggle if
| pressed slightly off centre.
|
| The other situations involving wipers are also annoying
| when the auto windshield wiper sensor becomes invisibly
| dirty. The wipers will activate nonstop during Autopilot
| or just on auto while driving in daylight sun,
| particularly at sunrise and sunset. It is an extreme
| frustration to have to look at the screen to click the
| slider to turn them off.
|
| As of the current software version, the way the buttons
| on the stalk or the wheel work is they either activate
| something one off e.g. high beams for a moment, or wipe
| once, and/or they pop up a little menu on the bottom left
| corner of the screen where the media controls are, and
| you have to use the touchscreen to activate them.
| Recently a mechanism to press and hold the steering wheel
| scrollwheel to activate a menu was added, but it's just
| impossible to use without looking. I am not sure if I am
| special and/or are using it wrong or something, but the
| menu pops up in a location that is obscured normally by
| my arm/the wheel when holding the steering wheel at a
| normal and designed position with both hands. Annoyingly,
| this is also where the "Apply slight turning force to
| steering wheel" nag prompt appears, which is a terrible
| and unnoticeable place to put a safety related alert that
| is actually designed to have you keep your eyes on the
| road. This really should have the option to be an audible
| and friendly chime.
|
| The lack of a turn signal sound when the computer
| crashes, is, by the way, another omission in my opinion,
| because the turn signal stalk is only a momentary button.
| The turn signals work but you'll have no clue while
| driving if they're actually on, without the screen and
| the sound.
|
| I mean, maybe these are all normal and maybe I'm just
| really picky about things. I really do like the overall
| experience of using the large screen, as the GPS is much
| more glanceable with this setup and passengers can route
| plan or discuss the route. The apps are all terrible
| though, like Spotify/Apple Music, and they're
| unnecessarily slow and buggy with small touch targets as
| if they want to trick you into keeping your eyes off the
| road for more than a fraction of a second.
|
| The UI design is kind of mixed, tbh. I'm sure some of
| these issues can be resolved by software, but at least
| there are the "S3XY Buttons", a third party accessories
| with a set of BLE buttons that you can stick anywhere you
| like that activate things using CAN bus injection.
|
| Of course, that might (not sure, dont have this
| accessory) create synchronization bugs like (annoyingly,
| sometimes the car saying it is in reverse when it is in
| drive), but these happen anyway by itself.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| > It is an extreme frustration to have to look at the
| screen to click the slider to turn them [wipers] off.
|
| No need. Push the button on the left stalk, press the
| left scroll wheel to the left for a couple of seconds.
|
| > Recently a mechanism to press and hold the steering
| wheel scrollwheel to activate a menu was added, but it's
| just impossible to use without looking
|
| I have mine configured for climate control temperature. I
| don't look at the screen. Long press, two clicks up or
| two clicks down.
|
| > The lack of a turn signal sound when the computer
| crashes
|
| If you mean that the turn signal has no sound, you are
| mistaken. The turn signal has a sound. I have no idea,
| though, if it sounds when the computer crashes; mine
| never did.
| scott_w wrote:
| > No need. Push the button on the left stalk, press the
| left scroll wheel to the left for a couple of seconds.
|
| Wait until you see how easy it is in older cars...
| loueed wrote:
| From what I've seen, they include a fallback set of gear
| shifter buttons below the centre console. These work even
| if the screen is black.
|
| I do see a lot of praise for its ability to auto shift,
| basically it should predict the direction of the vehicle
| based on the surrounding environment.
| ragnese wrote:
| That's great that Tesla puts those (physical) controls on
| the steering wheel.
|
| But, think about this comment in context.
|
| As a reminder: I was replying to someone who was arguing
| that the anti-touch-screen crowd is not justified in
| their hatred of touch screens in cars. My position is to
| agree with that crowd that touch screens in cars are bad
| UX.
|
| With that in mind, your comment actually vindicates my
| position. Touch screens are dangerously stupid UX in a
| car. So much so that Tesla--which has an image of being
| futuristic, sleek, and minimal (aesthetically)--not only
| has the necessary-for-driving controls on the steering
| wheel, but also _non-essentials_ like media controls. If
| touch screens weren 't objectively worse than physical
| controls, is it too far of a stretch to think that Mr.
| Musk would've wanted them in the touch screen for even
| more sleekness and minimalism?
|
| In any case, I think we're all agreeing in this thread
| that touch controls for these things would be unsafe and
| worse than physical controls.
|
| The case now needs to be argued that touch screens are at
| least equally good as physical controls for those other
| operations in cars. But, I don't see how that line of
| argumentation can possibly go well after we've
| established that the important controls don't belong as
| touch buttons.
| jamesboehmer wrote:
| There's a gigantic difference. You stare at a handheld
| device when typing. When you're driving you need to feel
| what you're touching, otherwise you have to take your eyes
| off the road.
| bboygravity wrote:
| Actually...
|
| I don't stare at my Unihertz Titan as I'm typing this.
| I'm looking around me.
|
| Physical button are superior. At least to me obviously.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| > It reminds me of the complaining in the early iPhone days
| about lack of a physical keyboard.
|
| This is so not the same thing.
| fossuser wrote:
| It really is imo. Good touchscreen UI is superior in many
| ways (though not all) to fixed control buttons. It's why
| it dominates phones and why it's winning in the market
| for cars as well (Model Y was top selling car on earth
| for Q1 2023).
|
| Bad touchscreen UIs suck, but that's also true of phones.
| Good tactile controls have some advantages, but
| ultimately they're minor and worse on net than a good
| touchscreen interface.
|
| People on HN will disagree (like people here disagree
| about everything), but the market will settle it.
| TwentyPosts wrote:
| The iPhone works because it's a device you'll look at all
| the time while operating its touchscreen.
|
| The car touchscreen doesn't work since you need to
| operate buttons without directly looking at them, purely
| by tactile feel.
|
| This is not a problem touchscreens we're able to fix so
| far, and I don't think this will change any time soon
| since there's just not enough ways for a touchscreen to
| provide this level of tactile feedback.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| >It really is imo.
|
| It really is not IMO.
|
| A touchscreen UI is a _visual_ medium. That is _not_ what
| you want /need while operating a vehicle. You should be
| able to change the AC by feeling for the button and not
| taking your eyes off the road.
|
| This isn't just HN being HN again. Driving enthusiasts
| are pushing back on touchscreens.
| fossuser wrote:
| I'd bet most people look at the tactile buttons when
| adjusting them, to see the temperature, fanspeed, etc.
| and that the difference between this and swiping on the
| tesla display isn't an important difference.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| I bet they don't. Muscle memory is a thing. Do you look
| down at your blinker lever to change it? How about your
| wipers? If you have controls on your steering wheel, do
| you look at those to press them?
|
| I bet not.
| fossuser wrote:
| The stuff on the steering wheel no, but the stuff on the
| dash (radio, aircon, fan, etc.) I did look at when I had
| tactile controls (this is primarily the stuff that's
| moved to the touchscreen, the wheel controls/levers let
| you do tactile actions without looking for more common
| stuff).
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I'd take that bet. The only controls I use muscle memory
| for are some of the steering wheel buttons (not all, e.g.
| I still have to look for the cruise control on/off for my
| F250) and the stalks. And even then, when I switch
| between cars I sometimes have to glance to remind myself
| which functionality the right stalk has. For climate
| controls and such, I pretty much always glance. The only
| knob I can reliably hit without a glance is the volume.
|
| Maybe I've just been driving so long that the variety of
| cars has impeded my ability to develop muscle memory. But
| I doubt it.
| tristor wrote:
| I hate them so much. Otherwise great cars are completely
| ruined by touchscreens. What was wrong with tactile knobs you
| could operate one handed without looking? You're driving for
| fuck's sake.
|
| It's why things like the GR Corolla are nearly miraculous in
| 2023, it even comes stick shift only.
| stanski wrote:
| I assume it's a cost thing.
|
| Slapping a tablet everywhere and letting the code monkeys
| figure it out is probably cheaper than making various knobs
| and buttons.
|
| I dread the day I have to get a new car. Even Subaru, who
| are usually behind the curve, have gone all touch screen.
| darkclouds wrote:
| Volvo, the vehicle company that started out making
| bearings, used to make a big selling point in the 80's
| about their knobs, switches and buttons were good enough
| for people wearing gloves in the middle of the
| Scandinavian winters and intuitively placed for drivers
| to use without taking their eyes off the road. Saab were
| the same, but fast forward to today and the lunatics are
| calling the shots.
|
| Even the flappy paddle gearboxes still have a weakness,
| namely they dont have a clutch peddle to dip when the
| traction control/esp decides to have a nightmare and ends
| up trying to cause accidents, where oil, ice or snow
| removes the grip and temporarily freewheeling is the
| fastest way to get the vehicle back under control before
| reengaging the drive system.
|
| And these tablets like displays ruin the night vision, I
| actually liked the old Saab displays where you could
| press a button and it switched the lights off to loads of
| buttons and gauges for night driving.
|
| Cars have got noticeably worse with these tablet
| displays.
| Phrenzy wrote:
| I learned that very thing setting up my home automation.
| I was originally planning on designing and printing some
| sort of button arrangement. But I ended up buying a bunch
| of cheap Walmart tablets.
|
| Easy to set up and keep updated. But... I'm not driving
| 70mph when I'm trying to dim the living room lights.
| Digory wrote:
| The feds have mandated a screen (for backup cameras).
|
| Then the makers try to minimize costs by having the
| screen do everything.
|
| I'd like to say I'd pay more for real buttons, but I'd
| never buy a new car.
| ghaff wrote:
| It's probably true that once you (more or less) need a
| screen for a decent backup camera and most people like a
| screen for at least GPS, it must be pretty tempting to at
| least think about what physical buttons can reasonably be
| eliminated given that the touchscreen is a given. And I
| do think a lot of designs go too far.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >and most people like a screen for at least GPS
|
| personal anecdotes, but the vast majority of me being a
| passenger to someone else's driving, they all used their
| mobile device for GPS. even the couple of cars i owned
| that had a nav system, the GPS came from the mobile
| device. it required their app to be installed to input
| the destination, making the internal unit just a second
| screen for your mobile.
| toast0 wrote:
| From my experience with two cars with factory nav, it's
| nice because it will show the next instructions in the
| the dash area, so when you're looking down to check speed
| you also get that. And, one of my cars has an option to
| show the next several instructions (Ford Sync2, which
| everybody hates because the UI is really slow, and kind
| of ugly). On the other hand, pay to play for data updates
| sucks. And most importantly, safety requirements mean you
| either have to yell at the car and deal with dated voice
| recognition or stop to adjust things; even if you have a
| responsible passenger who could use the touch screen.
|
| Mostly, I just use my phone. It's simpler and faster. My
| cars are too old for carplay/android auto, and my
| experience with android auto was that it was worse than
| the phone in a clip or a cupholder, but carplay seems
| nice. For longer drives to unfamiliar places, I'll put
| the address in the car too, sometimes the phone gets
| tired of listening to GPS.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >sometimes the phone gets tired of listening to GPS.
|
| I'm sorry, what?
| toast0 wrote:
| I was recently driving to visit a friend near Mt Baker,
| WA. and about 10 miles out, in a not particularly wooded
| area, the phone said 'lost GPS signal' and just assumed I
| had stopped moving, and wasn't able to pick up GPS again
| for the rest of the drive. Not a huge deal, because I was
| just following the road and only had one last turn to
| make, and I had directions from the car's nav anyway.
|
| GPS seemed to work ok on the return trip. And I was
| getting an LTE signal for most of the drive too (gets
| pretty spotty at my friend's house, but I was streaming
| music when the GPS stopped, and that kept working)
|
| Sorry, I don't have a debugging tale here; almost all of
| my excursions into figuring out why an Android device is
| doing something wrong leave me wondering if the device is
| doing anything right, and usually without any more
| insight into the original problem. Not going to try to do
| it, unless it's important, and probably not on a
| vacation.
| ghaff wrote:
| I use CarPlay if I'm actually navigating, not the built-
| in Garmin. But it's an improvement over looking at the
| phone awkwardly clamped to an air vent.
|
| I suspect most people don't use most of the native
| manufacturer apps even if they sort of need to provide
| them. Aside from rarely changing some settings, my
| touchscreen is mostly just a screen.
| lief79 wrote:
| My dad, who's a fairly recently retired techy, is the
| only exception I know. I'm assuming it's based on
| perceived safety and less need to take his eyes off the
| road.
|
| Granted, he took a long time getting a smart phone
| because they weren't allowed in his secured office, while
| dumb phones with no camera where allowed longer. On the
| other hand, he's also automated his home (a few times
| with updates), so it's really the one weird outlier.
| Kirby64 wrote:
| That's because in car GPS tech has historically been
| absolutely atrocious. An example: 2008-2012ish Toyota
| Camrys had a GPS system that used a DVD for map data. Not
| only was it out of date immediately (and cost $150 per
| new DVD from the dealer), it was insanely slow.
|
| Nowadays, there's a few companies that actually seem to
| do a decent job of GPS in the car itself: Mercedes has a
| good tech in their new EVs that seems smooth. Android
| automotive (not auto) cars have built in Google maps such
| as Polestar, the new Cadillac EVs, and some other Chevy
| products do well. Although it's not much different than
| just having an android phone with android auto. And, of
| course, Teslas own system which is all inhouse.
|
| There's little reason to use a phone in the traditional
| phone holders if you own one of those cars.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| The backup camera screen compliance was solved early on
| by just putting a 2-3 inch screen in the regular rear
| view mirror. There's no legal requirement to make it a
| big screen in the dash, that is 100% a design choice by
| the manufacturers unrelated to the backup camera.
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| > I assume it's a cost thing.
|
| Is it though? It's not like they have to reinvent the
| button each time. Buttons that last a decade or three
| have already been designed.
| masklinn wrote:
| Buttons are not just design, it's more parts and
| assembly. On the high end it's also a "less clean" look,
| unless you're high enough for truly luxurious buttons and
| knobs' designs and materials to be justifiable.
| kuboble wrote:
| I don't have the source but I read that in the process of
| designing a car there are different teams that design
| outer look, inner look, the actual functionality and at
| the time of designing interiors it isn't known where or
| how many buttons you need.
|
| By having a huge touch-screen instead of knobs there is
| much less need to synchronize between the teams because
| the inheritor design team just needs to place the screen
| somewhere. And it's easy to imagine that it can
| significantly shorten the time to delivery and the costs.
| globular-toast wrote:
| Definitely. That's why so many cheap electronics come
| with touch sensors instead of buttons these days.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Absolutely.
|
| Automotive grade controls are pretty expensive (it's not
| unreasonable to expect them to be operative from -40 to
| 140f, UV resistant, dust and vibration resistant, etc.),
| and as with all hardware, BOM cost is king. Even if the
| button can be stolen from an existing design, it still
| costs real money, and adds manufacturing labor costs.
|
| The button then has to be tested, and kept in stock for
| service purposes. What if the button has silkscreen
| printing on it? It might be the same hardware button for
| the traction control and the trunk open button, but now
| they are different SKUs because the label is different.
|
| So let's say I can eliminate 10 $1 buttons (that is an
| extraordinarily cheap button) by moving functionality to
| a touchscreen that is going to be in the car no matter
| what. I reduce the BOM cost by $10 per unit. That's a
| bunch of buttons that also aren't going to have warranty
| issues either. The wiring can all go straight to the head
| unit in a single bundle as well, and there are ten less
| connections for the assembly line to make. If I do that
| on a popular platform like the Corolla selling 750k units
| per year, I have just reduced expenses directly by 7.5
| million, plus the cost of install, and simplified the
| supply chain.
| ilikehurdles wrote:
| Auto margins are ridiculously thin, and if a manufacturer
| can trim 17 cents off a car's manufacturing cost by
| removing a button, they usually will.
| nojvek wrote:
| You have a source for that?
|
| I wish dealership margins were that thin.
|
| Cars are much more expensive post pandemic than pre-
| pandemic.
| ilikehurdles wrote:
| https://csimarket.com/Industry/industry_Profitability_Rat
| ios... has some good data, as you see we're talking mid
| to low single digits net, low teens gross. To your point,
| this is an increase that happened during the pandemic,
| interestingly.
|
| Dealership margins, as I recall, are 10-20%, also not
| great.
|
| Mfg margins have come up during the pandemic,
| interestingly, but historically have been very low[1]:
|
| > While estimated aggregate industry operating profit
| margins are 6 to 7 percent (Exhibit 1), large variations
| in profitability exists across companies. For instance,
| some European niche, luxury companies make double-digit
| margins more akin to those of high-tech players, while
| mass-market (or value-focused) OEMs make 4 to 5 percent.
|
| [1]: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries
| /Automot...
| wyre wrote:
| Your post under says margins of 6%? 17 cents over a 6%
| margin on a $30,000+ purchase would be like McDonalds
| charging for extra salt on their fries.
|
| I'd guess it's an ease of design and manufacturing
| decision when you can eliminate so many buttons so
| easily.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _would be like McDonalds charging for extra salt on
| their fries._
|
| Aren't they? I had a vague impression it happened. And of
| course, some McDonalds' locations charge you something
| absurd for an extra ketchup packet.
| nawgz wrote:
| I took advantage of the used car market to upgrade my
| 2021 Subaru to a 2024 (same car, better trim), there's
| actually MORE physical controls in the 2024 - hope isn't
| entirely lost!
| dylan604 wrote:
| How did you find a 2024 model car on the used car market?
| alwaysbeconsing wrote:
| I think they mean that the used car market gave them a
| good sale price on their 2021.
| dylan604 wrote:
| ah, after re-reading, i can see that as well
| [deleted]
| sergiosgc wrote:
| As an European, where we drive mostly stick, it's funny to
| observe the newfound US love for stick shifts. It's funny
| because it happened almost exactly when automatics became
| good!
|
| Good dual clutch gearboxes are amazing, but even "classic"
| ones like BMW's ZF6 or ZF8 are really close. ZF8 is so good
| BMW uses it in the M3, instead of a dual clutch.
|
| With these options, I'd never go back to stick shift. This
| after having half a million km driven on manual
| transmissions.
| justin66 wrote:
| > newfound US love for stick shifts
|
| That is something that exists entirely in the minds of
| auto journalists. The number of manually-shifted cars has
| been in steady decline for decades. These last several
| years, it went from something like 3.7 % of new cars to
| 2.4% to 0.7% to 1.9%. You can see how a deceptive
| headline could be manufactured around the last two years
| of data.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > As an European, where we drive mostly stick
|
| Enjoy it while it lasts. As of a couple years ago, more
| than half of all new cars sold in Europe are automatics.
| That doesn't seem too surprising, I imagine the same
| logic that made manuals appealing in the past is why
| automatics are appealing today.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Automatics are more fuel efficient, and govenment keeps
| raising the efficiency requirements. Automatics do this
| by having a lot of gears and changing up very
| aggressively. It would suck to drive a 7 or 9 speed
| manual (maybe truck drivers feel differently; I think 5
| is optimal for a car) but automatics can manage it and
| squeeeze out another tenth of an MPG.
|
| I love manual transmissions and will never buy an
| automatic unless forced to. I'd rather buy a used car
| with a manual than anything new.
| stork19 wrote:
| Noooo. Manuals are on average much more efficient. I
| drive a 1st generation Honda Insight, and the manual
| version gets ~10 mpg more than the automatic.
| dekhn wrote:
| Automatics have been more efficient (given their
| additional mass) than manuals, for all but the most
| skilled drivers (top 1% of manual drivers) for several
| decades already.
| briffle wrote:
| Modern pickups have 8-10 speed transmissions. They do a
| better job of keeping you in the power band.
|
| In addtion, no heavy duty pickup comes with a manual
| anymore, but the ones that did years ago, de-tuned the
| engines in the manuals, so people didn't burn up the
| clutch. Modern Diesel Heavy Duty pickups only put their
| full 1000 ft/lbs to the wheels in 3rd gear or higher,
| something they can't enforce in a manual. Also, in most
| manuals (granted, its been a few years since I drove one)
| with turbos, pushing the clutch stats unspooling the
| turbo, where in most automatics, it does not. (since its
| knows your shifting, and not just coasting)
|
| Yes, these are all related to driver skill, and a skilled
| driver will not cause problems. But I wouldn't want to
| warranty the systems on an 'average' driver..
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > Modern pickups have 8-10 speed transmissions. They do a
| better job of keeping you in the power band.
|
| This is so true. As someone who owns a fairly modern
| truck (2019 F250) that missed the good transmission by a
| single year. My truck would dearly love to have at least
| one more gear between 2nd and 3rd when I'm going up the
| mountain. I end up having to choose between trying to
| keep my inertia high (tough with corners) or give up and
| let it drop down to 35-40 so that 2nd gear isn't trying
| to tear the engine off the mounts.
|
| I may end up putting in shorter differential gears to
| work around that. Don't really want to fork out for a new
| truck.
| [deleted]
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| > Manuals are
|
| > I drive a 1st generation Honda Insight
|
| 1st gen Honda insight is "1999-2006" (1) so this anecdote
| is dated. Manuals _were_ more efficient, but currently
| no, they _are_ not so any more.
|
| Apparently that only changed recently, shortly after this
| time period (2)
|
| 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Insight
|
| 2)
|
| https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1127-m
| arc...
|
| https://www.greencarguide.co.uk/blog/automatic-vs-manual-
| car...
|
| https://www.car.co.uk/media/blogs/fuel-alternative-
| fuels/do-...
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/9kye2h/comment/e72
| qx6...
| ghaff wrote:
| I assume the efficiency requirements are why my car
| doesn't provide a way to permanently turn off the auto
| idle start/stop. The button's to temporarily disable it
| is convenient enough to make it something of a reflex.
| But it's a feature I really don't like when I'm making an
| unprotected left hand turn for example.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| I'm on the side fostering that change. Ever since I got a
| Mini Countryman with a ZF6. I was forced into an
| automatic because the car was a hybrid, and now I
| wouldn't go back to manual.
|
| The car was a little janky from a dead stop, when running
| solely on gas. I probably would miss the precision for
| maneuvering you get with a clutch. I didn't, actually,
| because of the electric motor doing these operations
| perfectly.
| [deleted]
| o0banky0o wrote:
| lol, we've always bitched about automatics in the US too
| ImprovedSilence wrote:
| drivers that enjoy manuals have always been around. We're
| just louder now because they almost don't make cars with
| manuals anymore, so when one does come along we rejoice.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| Genuine question: What exactly do you enjoy? Twenty years
| go, you could do a mountain road engine braking with
| downshifts, getting then the perfect gear for the turn
| apex and coming out perfectly balanced. But cars have
| changed. Engine braking is a lot less effective today
| (different compression ratios, better mechanics).
| Automatics now have more gears and allow you to manually
| select the gear, so you can control available torque in
| the turn.
|
| It seems the advantages of manual transmissions no longer
| exist.
| cduzz wrote:
| I dislike indeterminate lag between input and action.
|
| With an automatic, there's a threshold where the car
| decides to downshift when asking for a particular
| increase in forward velocity; that set point will wander
| depending on current RPM state and velocity and drive
| gear ratio.
|
| Modern cars are bad enough with turbos and fancy valve
| timing and throttle by wire stuff where the behavior of
| the thing is a big stack of jitter, but adding a
| transmission to the mix makes the response times even
| more random.
|
| At least with a manual transmission, the behavior of the
| throttle pedal is far more predictable and direct -- down
| the engine will go faster (modulo the current drive gear)
| and up the engine will slow down and slow the car down.
| Often you're in the incorrect gear for a particular
| desired acceleration but there's a feedback loop that you
| participate in to recognize / avoid the issue (mash
| pedal, not much happens because you're in the wrong gear,
| you get feedback and decide to change gears). With an
| automatic, you're just yelling down to the engine room
| asking the hamster to get on a different wheel.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| That is true, but only in automatic mode. In semi-
| automatic, everything is quite predictable, no?
| falcolas wrote:
| Predictable, usually. Lag free? Not in my experience.
| Most of the time there's a good quarter to half second
| between requesting the shift and the transmission acting.
|
| For me at least, that lag is very effective at
| disconnecting me from the experience of driving.
| sergiosgc wrote:
| Oh, try a DSG from VW. It's freaking instantaneous. 150ms
| for the complete operation is about the worst case
| scenario. I can't shift that fast.
| ghaff wrote:
| I assume a lot of it is a retro thing like film and
| vinyl.
|
| I donated my 20 year old Honda Del Sol two-seater stick
| shortly before the pandemic. It had a lot of miles on it
| and, with no commute, I just wasn't getting the use out
| of it to make it worth keeping. It was fun but there's no
| way I'd buy a stick today even if I were to have a "fun"
| car.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > it's funny to observe the newfound US love for stick
| shifts
|
| Nobody in the US loves or drives stick shifts. There's
| been a steady drop in manual transmissions here from
| about 12% of the market in 2000 to 2% of the market
| today. The noise around them is just a very small vocal
| minority of enthusiasts who pine for the "old days". I'm
| definitely one of those enthusiasts, but I have to face
| reality that they're effectively gone. I haven't had a
| stick for a daily driver since about 2010. I do still
| have older manual sports cars that I can drive and enjoy
| when I wish.
| supazek wrote:
| A few years ago I got a 53 Chevrolet pickup with a 3
| speed (and a nice BW overdrive attachment). Learned how
| to drive a manual in that truck and will never buy an
| automatic again as long as I can choose. Actually
| _operating_ the vehicle is extremely satisfying and fun.
| I'm swapping out the C-4 in my 65 mustang for a T-5 as
| soon as I can spare the cash /time. For me it's
| definitely not a matter of practicality but a "vinyl"
| type of thing. My DD has a CVT but at least emulates
| shifting with paddles
| cpursley wrote:
| Manuals suck in traffic. Americans sit in a lot of
| traffic.
|
| And I say this as somebody who loves manuals (I'm an
| amateur race car driver).
| ImprovedSilence wrote:
| this was always a key point from people who drove
| automatics but claimed to like manuals. i daily drove a
| manual in some of the worst traffic the US has to offer.
| but so what, guess what else sucks in traffic?
| Automatics!! when you're stuck in traffic, everything
| sucks, so you might as well drive something thats
| enjoyable the rest of the time.
| cduzz wrote:
| I've never really seen the issue with "manual in traffic"
| -- there's almost always a gear or two that allow you to
| go a the speed of traffic without tons of shifting. Stop
| and go? 2nd probably goes from "creep" to "moderate
| speed"
|
| Anyhow, electric cars are better all around -- at least
| those with "one pedal driving" where the speed pedal goes
| all the way to zero or nearly zero.
|
| My dislike of automatics is the indeterminate lag between
| request for a particular speed and when the car decides
| to shift to the appropriate gear to get to that speed as
| quickly as I've indicated I want to get there. Plus with
| ICE cars there's all sorts of other tedious inertia to
| contend with around engine RPM and turbo spool state and
| such. At least a manual provides better determinism
| around throttle behavior.
| I_Am_Nous wrote:
| I completely agree with you regarding the power lag on
| automatics. Currently I'm driving a Jeep Renegade with a
| 9 speed automatic transmission, and I live in a really
| hilly area. The transmission needs to downshift
| CONSTANTLY because it's tuned to try to cruise the
| highway at 1500 RPM to maximize fuel efficiency.
|
| If I'm running the air conditioner, it steals enough
| power that it has to downshift an extra time. It's bad
| enough that the constant shifting makes my son carsick.
| Luckily, it has a manual mode I can use to just drop it
| into 5th gear and it has the torque to smoothly climb the
| hills on cruise control that way, eliminating my son's
| carsickness.
| connicpu wrote:
| "Semi-automatic" cars (aka an automatic transmission with
| a manual gear override available) are a nice compromise
| for those of us who want the simple convenience most of
| the time, with the ability to take control when we want
| to. Plus once the order comes in, those servo motors can
| shift the gear way faster than I can depress a clutch.
| foxyv wrote:
| Ahh sweet summer child. Traffic that has a speed isn't
| really traffic in my book. It isn't really traffic until
| you spend more time stopped than moving.
|
| Joking aside, the worst traffic is when you stop every 4
| seconds and then creep forward ten feet before stopping
| again. If I wasn't planning to go car-less I think I
| would buy an electric car for that nonsense.
| neurostimulant wrote:
| I swear my left foot got a little bit more muscular than
| the right foot when I had to go through such traffics
| everyday in a manual.
| cduzz wrote:
| Oh, I live in metro boston and before that lived in the
| slurm of southern california, and have not at any time
| owned a car with an automatic transmission... The
| workload from gear shifting is more than zero, but not
| (for me) oppressively so.
|
| Even "stop and go" traffic eventually has some average
| speed and sometimes it is low enough that you've got to
| clutch in to come to a full stop and clutch out to go
| faster; modern engine management's pretty good at keeping
| the motor from stalling. Probably I annoy people by
| letting the lead in front of me get to be a couple car
| lengths before I decide to go, but that's on them...
| we'll all get there eventually.
|
| Electric cars are the best in that you're basically
| always in first gear, the redline is basically infinite,
| and the car doesn't stall when the engine's not moving,
| so you don't need a clutch.
| mda wrote:
| Automatics suck less. Why am I constantly trying to
| change gears of the transmission system?
| scott_w wrote:
| That's odd because I like the control a clutch pedal
| gives me in heavy traffic. And I drive a 15 year old
| diesel!
| wkat4242 wrote:
| When I still drove I hated the way I had to keep my foot
| on the clutch in traffic jams. Or constantly switch to
| neutral. The clutch on my car was heavy. That's why I got
| an automatic.
|
| But now I live in a city where I can take the metro to
| work and I don't own a car anymore. I hope I'll never
| need to drive again, I hate driving so much.
| BluePen7 wrote:
| I'm only 30, but at this point a 15 year old car still
| feels kinda "new" to me. Up until a few months ago, I
| drove a 2008 Lexus, felt perfectly modern.
|
| But in regards to driving a manual in traffic, does a
| diesel not make it easier? An engine suited to lower
| RPMs, but with more torque, seems perfectly suited to
| clutching in/out to shuffle along.
| scott_w wrote:
| The clutch is heavier in a diesel.
| dieselgate wrote:
| 15 years is almost kinda young for many diesel engines
| scott_w wrote:
| If I showed you a photo of my car, "new" is not a word
| you'd use to describe it.
| foxyv wrote:
| This is the exact reason I bought an automatic. I had a
| 1994 BMW 318is that I loved, but I spent probably a
| couple thousand hours on the 91 freeway in southern
| California pushing the clutch in and out. The BMW
| "sporty" clutch was a leg workout and a half. The return
| spring was super stiff. Sometimes I would play a game to
| see if I could stay in first and just let my lead
| distance increase enough to not have to stop at all, but
| it pissed people off so bad.
| ravenstine wrote:
| Yeah, I certainly wouldn't knock those who love driving
| manual. Part of why I like riding my motorcycle is that
| it's a manual.
|
| But in LA traffic, I'd rather drive an automatic so I can
| put my brain into "autopilot" while playing an audiobook
| rather than have to constantly be shifting by hand. It
| irks me how so many manual-lovers have this superiority
| complex over people who just want a car that will get
| them from A to B. Have fun with your manuals, but don't
| speak as if I'm an imbecile because I don't think driving
| manual is fun in heavy traffic.
| SEJeff wrote:
| Fwiw, teslas support pretty much everything via voice. You
| just press the right button on the wheel and say what you
| want it to do. I'm not disagreeing with your dislike for
| touch screens, but Tesla can do literally almost everything
| hands free using voice if that's an option.
| jsight wrote:
| I'm mostly fine with the Tesla approach. The few tactile
| controls are basically enough for me, especially with the
| last few updates effectively adding more.
|
| However, the voice controls have been basically useless
| for me. I wouldn't want to depend on them.
| SEJeff wrote:
| Fair. I've had a really good experience with the voice
| controls since I read a "cheat sheet" someone posted with
| common control commands.
| globular-toast wrote:
| I think a lot of people miss the obvious reason: it's
| cheaper. People seem to think it's some misguided attempt
| to make things better but really it's just that they've
| identified a way to cut costs.
| barrysteve wrote:
| They are humorously cheaper.
|
| A friend's kia ev6 parked up, I had an instant flashback
| to the electric taxi car Johnny Cab from Shwarznegger's
| Total Recall.
|
| The movie car has this really weak sounding electric
| motor whirr/whine, just like the EVs.
| rolobio wrote:
| Touch-screens can be updated later, meaning you can release
| the broken version first, then get it working after the
| money starts rolling in. Knobs would require they get it
| right the first time. The horror!
|
| I will never buy a car that forces me to navigate a menu to
| turn on my windshield wipers...
| dpkirchner wrote:
| I'm "looking forward" to having manufacturers change the
| location of virtual buttons every few updates.
| deathtrader666 wrote:
| Android Auto has already changed its home row buttons
| three times since 2019..
| cpursley wrote:
| Problem is, they don't actually upgrade the touchscreens.
| At least not after the first couple years. And most
| consumers don't/won't know how to upgrade them.
| EGreg wrote:
| I would loooooove if a Cadillac Ciel convertible from
| Pebble Beach 2011 came out, with the suicide doors, no
| touchscreens, etc. Who's with me?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Ciel
|
| The brands don't often listen to their customers, all of
| whom clamored for this car ever since it was shown. It only
| appeared in the "Entourage" movie and it's a beaut. Nary a
| single bad review on the entire Internet, but tons of
| people begging Chrysler to release it and sites devoted to
| pretending it came out.
|
| Car guys -- what is the closest car one can get to this
| today, in all of human history? Go to Cuba and get some
| gas-guzzling illegal convertible with tailfins?
|
| And please -- no recordings of our conversations and sex in
| the car so they can send it off to others!
| dylan604 wrote:
| >Car guys -- what is the closest car one can get to this
| today, in all of human history? Go to Cuba and get some
| gas-guzzling illegal convertible with tailfins?
|
| Maybe not Cuba, but there's a new car restoration series
| on whichever streaming platform, I can't keep up, that's
| located in El Paso, TX. They go across the border and buy
| older cars, then import into the US.
| EGreg wrote:
| Just now, I have found the closest I could find:
| https://megaevluxury.com/rolls-royce-ghost-convertible/
|
| Anything like this but cheaper?
| recursive wrote:
| I'm part of the market segment that demands them. I didn't
| have an opinion, but then I lived with one for a year. I
| don't think I could go back.
| Pxtl wrote:
| I drive a Prius and while the actual implementation of the
| touchscreen leaves a lot to be desired (dodgy software and
| usual issues with obsolescence), I do like the way it splits
| between touchscreen and buttons.
|
| Buttons: all car controls, audio volume and selection,
| temperature.
|
| Touchscreen: GPS, setting radio presets, changing climate
| mode.
|
| Now, it's not perfect -- there are some climate options I'd
| like on buttons. But in general that's pretty good.
|
| The big flaw is the lack of upgradeability. It felt a decade
| old, stylistically, when it was new, and it will never get
| newer. You can't even pop in a new car stereo to replace the
| whole thing anymore - and it's a massive chunk of the dash.
| And has no support for Android Auto.
| [deleted]
| klaussilveira wrote:
| Try Mazda. No touchscreens, no account shenanigans. Make sure
| you decline the app in the dealership, though.
| hedora wrote:
| I was planning to get a Nissan Leaf (worst privacy among all
| manufacturers in the round up) but luckily stumbled on a BMW i3
| instead. They have the best telemetry story by far, and it has
| a well-implemented jog wheel instead of a touch screen. Also,
| it has a carbon-fiber frame. It looks like a tall econobox, but
| handles extremely well.
|
| The i3 has been discontinued and the new models have a touch
| screen in addition to the jog wheel, so it's possible the jog
| wheel on those is poorly implemented, and not enough to
| actually use the car.
|
| I haven't test driven one of the newer models, but I'd
| carefully check the computer UI before purchasing one.
|
| Anyway, I'm hoping BMW succeeds with their contrarian approach
| of having physical controls, and not treating their customers
| terribly, and that the other manufacturers follow their lead.
| brandonagr2 wrote:
| If you want best in class safety tech and no dealer markups,
| you can just order a Tesla online
| r2_pilot wrote:
| Not to mention the occasional automated drive into stationary
| objects. Guess that's partly why they have the "best in class
| safety tech".
| cortesoft wrote:
| You don't have to enable self driving.
| r2_pilot wrote:
| As much as they charge for it, I would want to use it if
| I had a Tesla. But since I have severe trust issues with
| Tesla, I would never* buy an electric car from them
| anyway. * at least for the next 5 years, probably longer.
| I'm just glad I live far away from the places self-
| driving cars are common, for now.
| hoot wrote:
| I'm not an Elon hater but Tesla is the worst offender on
| Mozillas privacy study.
| mytydev wrote:
| The report specifically says Tesla is not the worst btw
| redwasp wrote:
| Surprising, since Mozilla's article(https://foundation.mo
| zilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...) does place
| them dead last, right behind Nissan. Granted, it'll be
| hard not to buy a car on that list!
| dataminded wrote:
| This is me. I bought two new cars every 2 years like clockwork.
| We replaced one car because we NEEDED a larger family car and
| have gone without the 2nd for over a year.
|
| It feels impossibly hard to buy a great car today.
| yafbum wrote:
| Kia driver here. There is a screen in my car, but also actual
| knobs and steering wheel controls for everything I might need
| (audio controls, climate controls) and when I use the screen to
| project my phone, almost all functions there can be activated
| through voice control.
| spacemadness wrote:
| These markups are insane, and I wonder if anyone actually gets
| anywhere near paying them. I don't really see the point since
| for those markups you can just get a nicer car. Unless car
| collectors really are that out of touch and flush with cash.
| Animats wrote:
| Dealers being able to insist on those huge markups ended a
| few months back. Overall, US auto dealerships now have more
| cars in stock than usual. Don't take those markups seriously.
| seattle_spring wrote:
| Unfortunately lots of people are happy to pay the markups.
| Some subreddits, including /r/rav4prime , will ban you for
| speaking negatively about dealer markups or those who pay
| them. Here's their hilariously condescendingly worded rule 4:
|
| > No demonstrations of economic illiteracy. No negativity
| regarding markups. You are encouraged to post about current
| prices and markups and your dealership experiences, but
| please DO NOT express moral value judgments about markups or
| their absence (except those involving bait-and-switch).
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| It's a fair point though.
|
| The markups are a function of demand and are totally normal
| and expected market behavior. People who complain about it
| are almost exclusively people who don't understand how
| markets work. It's tiring listening to uneducated people
| constantly coming through and complaining.
|
| If dealers weren't marking up the price, there would be no
| car at all available for sale. People mistakenly think that
| if there was no markup, they could buy the car at MSRP. No.
| There would be no supply at all. They would be sold out and
| you'd be on a waiting list at best.
|
| This is the same dynamic as GPUs of 2021 and perpetually
| with concert tickets (venues will always have fewer seats
| than the number of fans in the area).
| EricE wrote:
| As dealer inventory starts to pile up, car prices are
| finally coming down. Anyone paying a markup in today's
| market just isn't doing their homework. I've yet to pay
| MSRP or beyond for a car and I don't intend to start now!
| troyvit wrote:
| I have to agree, at least to a point. Nine times out of
| ten a person buying a car doesn't need it right away.
| Therefore if they don't like the mark-up they can just
| come back later when the market changes. If everybody did
| that then demand would go down and then so would the
| mark-up.
| tristor wrote:
| > The markups are a function of demand and are totally
| normal and expected market behavior. People who complain
| about it are almost exclusively people who don't
| understand how markets work. It's tiring listening to
| uneducated people constantly coming through and
| complaining.
|
| 1. I'm not uneducated or economically illiterate.
|
| 2. A 50% markup on an economy car, even in an upgraded
| trim, is absurd. This is not even remotely representative
| of "market conditions".
|
| 3. Inflation + supply chain issues provided a pathway for
| greedy businesses to justify price-gouging customers.
| There's a difference between supply/demand driving
| pricing and price-gouging, and it's pretty obvious the
| direction this went in the car market. There's a /huge/
| difference (not just in dollars, but in percentage of
| MSRP) between a $5k or even $10k markup and a $25k markup
| on a car with a $50k MSRP. This is especially absurd when
| you consider MSRP went up across the board due to
| inflation at the same time. This is dealer's just trying
| to get an extra slice of pie.
|
| Maybe don't boot-lick price-gougers and learn how
| supply/demand /actually/ works, and consider not calling
| people who understand economics "uneducated".
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| But the rub is that people are actually paying these
| marked up prices...
|
| Complain all you want about how obscene, unethical,
| malevolent, greedy, gouged, or deranged these sellers
| are, but the fact of that matter is that they are making
| sales at those prices. The market is indeed supporting
| them.
|
| I'm sorry, but if cannot grasp that something is worth
| what someone will pay, you do not in fact have a good
| economic grasp. If nothing else, at least be pissed at
| the buyers who are willing to pay those prices.
| abecedarius wrote:
| Isn't it illegal in many/most states for a manufacturer
| to sell direct, not through a dealership? I read
| something like that when Tesla was starting to sell cars.
| It didn't sound like a "true" free market.
| gottorf wrote:
| > It didn't sound like a "true" free market.
|
| Very few things are in a "true" free market. But
| considering cars are (or should be, at any rate)
| substitutable goods, for most people, it should be pretty
| close to a free market.
|
| I live in a small city (population under 200k), and
| there's five Ford dealerships, five Chevy, four Toyota,
| etc. So it's certainly not a free market by any
| definition if you want a very specific car, but if you
| want a certain category of car, the forces of competition
| will work for you.
| tschwimmer wrote:
| I'm pretty sure most of the car subreddits are managed by
| dealership employees who benefit from markups via increased
| commissions. The fact that they make reference to
| complaining about price markups as economic illiteracy
| increases my confidence in this hypothesis.
|
| I'm tempted to go make a post about rent seeking,
| deadweight loss and price collusion in oligopolistic
| conditions but somehow I feel my economic literacy will be
| found wanting.
| OGWhales wrote:
| /r/whatCarShouldIBuy is a pretty decent sub. Comparing
| answers there to /r/askCarSales is pretty funny, such
| different advice.
| gottorf wrote:
| > complaining about price markups as economic illiteracy
|
| I mean, I hate dealer markups as much as the next person,
| but it is true. It's just supply and demand. Dealers
| wouldn't charge crazy markups if enough car buyers
| weren't out there paying them; and like another commenter
| said, in these supply-limited conditions, if price wasn't
| able to rise to a market-clearing level, you'd have
| shortages instead, and people would complain about that.
|
| > rent seeking, deadweight loss and price collusion in
| oligopolistic conditions
|
| Can the car market, both at the manufacturer level and
| the dealer level, really be described as an oligopolistic
| one, outside of isolated examples (e.g. you live in Elko,
| NV and there's only one Ford dealer within 100 miles)?
| spacemadness wrote:
| I don't know if it's a complaint, more being awe struck
| by others irrational behavior and how far they'll go by
| overpaying. Censoring that observation is a little weird
| and does seem to favor the dealers grip on a subreddit.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| The touchscreen is great for some things of course, but most
| regular people that comment seem to agree that tactile controls
| for radio and HVAC are their preference. The only explanation
| for why manufacturers are dropping the tactile controls is for
| cost savings/higher profits. Because it sure doesn't seem like
| most people want those items on the screen.
| nilespotter wrote:
| I have a crossover, it's nice
| devilbunny wrote:
| I don't know about their markups, but Mazda has been pulling
| out touchscreens and putting back buttons for audio and climate
| control purposes. Not sure how far it's made it through their
| models.
| for1nner wrote:
| Mazda always refused to go fully touchscreen.
|
| Instead they have somehow rationalized that a control wheel
| and featureless buttons down in the center console are safer
| for people to use while the vehicle is active.
|
| It's idiotic.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| Mazda still has a ton of physical buttons in addition to
| the screen though. The following are all _dedicated_
| buttons / switches / knobs:
|
| - Volume up/down (knob), press to mute
|
| - Hazard lights (button)
|
| - Windshield wipers (stalk) including front/rear, speed,
| intermittent, etc
|
| - Headlights/highbeams (stalk)
|
| - Turn signals
|
| - AC on/off, fan speed, fresh air/recirc, seat warmers
|
| - Temperature up/down is a dedicated, physical knob
|
| - Driver/passenger windows
|
| - Side mirror adjust
|
| - Trunk open/close
|
| - Cycle through backup camera views
|
| - Parking sensor enable/disable
|
| - Cruise control on/off/speed/distance
|
| - Media controls (ff/rw/mute)
|
| - There are even dedicated physical buttons for the
| touchscreen,eg. a button that always takes you to whatever
| map you're using (google/apple), a button that takes you to
| whatever is playing music (spotify/apple/podcast/etc)
|
| Sorry if this sounds like I'm a mazda shill but every time
| this topic comes up on HN I am incredibly glad that I
| prioritized physical controls and IMHO they're really doing
| it correctly.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I've found that the wheel is much easier to use while
| driving than a touchscreen, since you don't have to look
| down or stretch your body away from the steering wheel.
| ghaff wrote:
| A 2022 Honda Passport has physical buttons for pretty much
| everything. The only thing I use the touchscreen for is as a
| display for maps from CarPlay (and the backup camera). So
| reliance on the touchscreen for things like environmental
| controls isn't universal even in new cars.
| foxyv wrote:
| I love Honda interiors. The base models are almost always
| the best with big unique knobs and buttons. However, I'm
| really disappointed on their electrification. I would
| speculate that their misguided attempt to push Hydrogen is
| going to kill the Japanese companies if they don't invest
| in BEVs soon.
|
| I would seriously consider a 300 mile range, electrified
| Honda Fit using Chevy's Ultium platform. But it seems car
| companies are too focused on SUVs and Crossovers to pad
| their nests. Make number go up strikes again!
| ghaff wrote:
| I had a very efficient, fun, and great at squeezing into
| city parking spots stickshift Honda del Sol as a second
| car for about 20 years. Alas, as it got old and I stopped
| commuting, it was silly to pay for keeping a second car
| around for the <2,000 miles per year I was putting on it.
| But Fits are cute little cars. An EV version of something
| like that would make me as least think of using something
| like that for most of my local driving.
| tristor wrote:
| Sadly Mazda doesn't make any AWD cars, only a crossover. AWD
| is a requirement for me. I loved a Mazda 2 I previously had
| and loved the Miata track car I sold when I moved last year.
| Mazda makes great cars but unfortunately none that meet my
| base requirements.
| [deleted]
| alamortsubite wrote:
| I think the Mazda3 has an AWD option.
| whycombagator wrote:
| Mazda 3 can be optioned AWD
|
| Edit: and seeing as you're looking at a performance
| Corolla. You'd probably be interested in the Turbo AWD (250
| hp and 320 lb-ft of torque). Car and Driver has an
| instrumented test. It's not too far behind the GR and
| slightly cheaper
| tristor wrote:
| That's news to me. I'll definitely take a look.
| ranger_danger wrote:
| FWIW Mazda's current lineup allows you to turn off telemetry
| while still allowing emergency calls, and they still make non-
| touchscreen models.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| Including govt wiretapping of those sensors?
| jancsika wrote:
| And don't forget thwarting timing attacks from the
| bazillion cameras aimed at roadways.
|
| Plus satellites.
|
| If the car cannot defend against such basic attacks then
| you're best walking alone under cover of the trees,
| whispering your messages to distant dandelions.
| psyclobe wrote:
| Find a private broker to locate and acquire a car for you
| tristor wrote:
| And how does that result in a more reasonable cost profile
| than paying an insane dealer markup that's half the MSRP of
| the car? A Corolla shouldn't cost $70k.
| MarkusWandel wrote:
| Possibly the high-end ones more so. My new, relatively low-end
| Honda Civic EX-B appears not to have cellular connectivity (no
| HondaLink) and no Wifi connectivity. The only cameras are the
| ones looking out the front and back. Of course it does have an
| interior microphone for the Bluetooth. But all in all the car
| seems "old school" and not spying on me. Am I wrong?
| lapcat wrote:
| It appears that Mozilla simply read the privacy policies of the
| manufacturers and did not actually test any cars.
|
| Features vary widely among models, of course (as the owner's
| manual says repeatedly).
| hashtag-til wrote:
| 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.
| LegitShady wrote:
| I don't think so. tell it to the privacy focused television
| companies.
| quietpain wrote:
| 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.
| throw1234651234 wrote:
| 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.
| hashtag-til wrote:
| 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.
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| 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).
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| 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.
| KMag wrote:
| 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".
| lost_tourist wrote:
| they'd be able to tell by the GPS coordinates, whether
| they bother, who know?
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| They'd be able to tell if the app were to require
| connecting to the car via Bluetooth. That connection
| won't be there when traveling by train.
| PrimeMcFly wrote:
| Uninstall the app?
| toastal wrote:
| You at least bought a burner device to do this, right?
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| I did not install the app.
| ravenstine wrote:
| Won't happen. Not enough people care. Convenience wins every
| time.
|
| The only viable option is to get a used dumbcar and rip out the
| existing head unit.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Maybe this is why Steve Jobs was working on an Apple Car...
| privacy as a selling point!
| Grazester wrote:
| Hope that was a joke.
| Angostura wrote:
| They use privacy as a selling point elsewhere, so it might
| make sense here too
| thegrim000 wrote:
| 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.
| slashtab wrote:
| Open source Car!!
| userbinator wrote:
| The automotive enthusiast community has been building their
| own for decades.
| hashtag-til wrote:
| 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...
| birch wrote:
| Oh, this would be an expensive hobby that I would embrace.
| temp_gnuser wrote:
| The rally fighter and other local motors vehicles are open
| source iirc, but I agree this should be the future.
| BLKNSLVR wrote:
| Name's all sorted too:
|
| The Oscar.
| VoodooJuJu wrote:
| 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.
| morkalork wrote:
| Add analog buttons, knobs and I'm sold!
| bityard wrote:
| 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.
| ravenstine wrote:
| 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?
|
| PinePhone?
| Waterluvian wrote:
| 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?
| empyrrhicist wrote:
| It just seems to get worse and worse. We desperately need a
| consumer privacy bill of rights.
| [deleted]
| madethemcry wrote:
| 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.
| pard68 wrote:
| Things like this are a part of why my newest vehicle is an '04
| Suburban.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| But that won't be an option in a few . How many 2015 cars will
| be on the road and for sale in 2035?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Strongly doubt gasoline powered cars will be street legal in
| 2035.
| justaman wrote:
| They will be rare but do you really think Big Oil's lobby
| will let that one go thru?
| pard68 wrote:
| Highly unlikely in the US as a whole. California, maybe.
| Most other states this won't be the case.
| bob1029 wrote:
| It's always going to be an option if you can afford it.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| "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.
| bob1029 wrote:
| > 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.
| userbinator wrote:
| 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.
| pard68 wrote:
| Or have skills and time
| jollyllama wrote:
| Have you seen what new cars cost? People are paying more
| and getting less, in terms of privacy and simplicity.
| pard68 wrote:
| 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.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| I guess you're all set then and the rest of us are screwed?
| pard68 wrote:
| 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.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| 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?
| pard68 wrote:
| 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.
| jen20 wrote:
| 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.
| pard68 wrote:
| 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.
| jen20 wrote:
| 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!
| userbinator wrote:
| It might actually be less than 1975 cars.
|
| 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.
| pard68 wrote:
| 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.
| kkfx wrote:
| 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.
| bjnewman85 wrote:
| Can't capture audio info when i'm blasting music at max volume
| with the windows down on the highway yelling at my friends.
| Privacy Win!
| hotpotamus wrote:
| My 2016 econobox would email me when a tire is low or it needs an
| oil change. I don't think this is all that new an issue.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| why wouldn't it just show a dash light?
| jmclnx wrote:
| 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.
| freeplay wrote:
| Of all the things that will never happen, this will never
| happen the most.
| artursapek wrote:
| lol
| 0xcafefood wrote:
| How do you buy a car that meets those criteria?
| [deleted]
| bell-cot wrote:
| 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.
| hef19898 wrote:
| 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.
| artursapek wrote:
| you buy a good used car from the first decade of the 2000s or
| earlier
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Is that your solution 20 years from now, too?
| hef19898 wrote:
| 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.
| jen20 wrote:
| 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!
| thfuran wrote:
| You don't.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| 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.
| Angostura wrote:
| I have a 2016 Euro 6 car that has no tracking.
| hef19898 wrote:
| What? Besides Euro-5 emissions restricting access to
| cities in places, thoae cars are, will be, perfectly road
| legal in Europe...
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| What happens at the end of 2024 that your car won't
| operate?
| thfuran wrote:
| Emissions standards change, from the sound of it.
| ghusto wrote:
| Retrofit, that's what I'm planning to do.
|
| 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.
| andreapaiola wrote:
| Fake news?
| [deleted]
| lost_tourist wrote:
| That's one reason I'm saving up for an EV conversion lol. I just
| need a car to go from A -> B. I don't need self driving, constant
| updates, a blackbox, cameras everywhere, etc. Just an EV, with a
| good drive train, decent range, etc. It's the only reason I'm
| still using a dino car. Legislation for privacy will needs a huge
| overhaul in preference to the rights of individuals rather than
| corporations.
| uranium wrote:
| I've been shopping for a new car recently, and got it down to the
| Chevy Bolt and the Hyundai Kona [because I want long-range
| electric and have a narrow garage]. On the Bolt it looks like you
| can just yank a fuse to kill the cellular radio, and on the Kona,
| there's a modem you can remove. I've even gotten the dealer to
| agree to have their shop do the removal, so as not to void any
| warranty =*).
| Androider wrote:
| There's telemetry, and then there's this
| https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/tesla-workers-sh...
| [deleted]
| inemesitaffia wrote:
| https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/08/apple-and-google...
| GoofballJones wrote:
| 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".
| gordian-not wrote:
| Do you know of any similar story at Google since 2010?
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| That will be the norm for all car companies soon enough, not
| just Tesla.
| bilsbie wrote:
| Oven been thinking of getting a pickup truck from the 90s and
| just keep replacing the engine and transmission if needed.
|
| I'm just wondering about the safety.
| mbg721 wrote:
| Having lived through the 90s, I can say it wasn't _that_
| unsafe.
| hn8305823 wrote:
| Most American cars up through the mid 1980's were unsafe and
| crap. By the mid 1990's they were much safer, especially if
| they have air bags.
| jeffbee wrote:
| The funny thing is normally privacy hawks hate google but the
| unified privacy policy of Android Automotive is way tighter than
| any of these. The automakers with their own stacks want to
| collect, use, and sell any and all data.
| sharikous wrote:
| China is now the biggest car exporter, thanks to the electric car
| boom.
|
| Are there state security issues with Chinese cars too?
| [deleted]
| hef19898 wrote:
| 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...
| api wrote:
| 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.
| bradley13 wrote:
| 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?
| verisimilitude wrote:
| 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."
|
| "Fun" right?
| AnonymousPlanet wrote:
| 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?
| alexfromapex wrote:
| This type of authoritarian tracking is extremely egregious but
| the good news is that we are hackers and can detect the RF and
| other signals with detectors and disable them if we really want
| to. At any rate, it's a sad state of affairs.
| bick_nyers wrote:
| "Data signal has been lost for the last 3 days. Disabling car
| startup. Please tow to your nearest local dealership to re-
| activate."
| 9g3890fj2 wrote:
| 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?
| giantg2 wrote:
| 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.
| birch wrote:
| 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.
| pragma_x wrote:
| 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...
|
| 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.
| 9g3890fj2 wrote:
| 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.
| bzzzt wrote:
| 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.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Another reason to do my own service or find a trusted
| independent shop.
| Tangurena2 wrote:
| 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.
| catlover76 wrote:
| 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.
| Grazester wrote:
| 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.
| LegitShady wrote:
| 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.
|
| No android auto required.
| DrThunder wrote:
| I don't think android auto even works on graphene anyway.
| 9g3890fj2 wrote:
| Just regular Bluetooth, Android Auto and CarPlay are no-gos
| for me. I want less connectivity, not more.
| vanilla_nut wrote:
| 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?
| pgeorgi wrote:
| I wonder if phones send out RDS
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Data_System) information
| on the aux jack and your car happens to pick up on it.
| Forbo wrote:
| This sounds like the content recognition they do on TVs. If
| that's the case, this is creepy as fuck.
| stinos wrote:
| 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.
| giantg2 wrote:
| 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.
| flangola7 wrote:
| Audio jack can be used for Square payment transactions so it
| can't be that isolated
| Larrikin wrote:
| 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
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Same on iOS.
| hef19898 wrote:
| 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.
| [deleted]
| bilsbie wrote:
| It would be cool to buy an older car you like and convert it to
| electric yourself. Are there any good services or kits for this?
| codedokode wrote:
| Isn't "free market" supposed to provide a choice between privacy-
| respecting and disrespecting products? No regulation required.
|
| Well, it seems like market forces do not work for minorities.
| kredd wrote:
| Free market can't decide on things it doesn't really understand
| consequences of. Ideally, that's why we would have specialists
| from different fields in the government to make unbiased
| recommendations.
| lefuturiste wrote:
| Get a bike (a muscular one) and problem solved :)
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| 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.
| taylodl wrote:
| This article doesn't go into any benefits to the driver/user, if
| available. With all the cameras and microphones in cars these
| days they can at least send the insurance companies all the data
| when an accident occurred. Were you on the phone? Driving the
| speed limit? Have your seat belt on? Braking hard to avoid (or
| cause) an accident? Heck, give me a monthly riding report with
| information such as how fast I accelerate, how hard I brake, how
| often I speed, and stuff like that. Then provide tips on how to
| improve my driving. At least that would be useful.
| lost_tourist wrote:
| that sounds like a nightmare to me and should have to be opted
| into, I would never purchase a car with that. I'll just get a
| motorcycle and risk my life.
| taylodl wrote:
| Nightmare? It's a black box. It can save your bacon if you're
| falsely accused. Cars have a lot of sensors these days and if
| those two cars get into an accident you can re-create the
| entire accident.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| I have a new Toyota and the owner's manual mentions the car has
| a black box that records a number of parameters.
| eximius wrote:
| I don't understand. This seems clearly illegal to have policies
| like this that claim consent by sitting in the car but the "user"
| has never been presented the policy in a way to consent to!
|
| Is this just a good lawsuit away from being thrown out but no one
| has done it? Is there some particularly fucked up legal precedent
| that makes this tenuously legally stable?
| lelandfe wrote:
| > _You promise to educate and inform all users and occupants of
| your Vehicle about the Services and System features and
| limitations, the terms of the Agreement, including terms
| concerning data collection and use and privacy, and the Nissan
| Privacy Policy_
|
| Similarly, how is this kosher? Do we think anyone, even a
| single person, has ever followed through on this promise
| they've apparently agreed to in using a Nissan?
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| In a small informal survey we found that _absolutely nobody_
| knows about the new intrusive interior and exterior
| surveillance from cars.
|
| https://cybershow.uk/media/episodes/watchers_2023-07-01.mp3
|
| It is, to all moral (if not legal) purposes, covert and
| certainly illegal in the UK on all sorts of grounds that have
| yet to be challenged in court.
|
| The work is in getting the message out to people.
| helf wrote:
| [dead]
| whalesalad wrote:
| I have a RAM 1500 that updates itself with new software over the
| air. Much to my surprise it works pretty well and happens quite
| often. Seeing as this is an FCA/Stellantis product I fully
| expected the first update to completely brick my system. Thank
| you Java for being older and more reliable than dirt.
| Lolaccount wrote:
| Like my TV ... and my phone ... and my ... and my ink pen
| (connected via WIFI) ...
| rabuse wrote:
| This is why I ride a motorcycle.
| 0xcafefood wrote:
| 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?
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| 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".
| seanw444 wrote:
| Considering the government uses the private sector as a cheat
| code to evade our 4th Amendment, this crap needs to be
| addressed.
| mindslight wrote:
| 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.
| hedora wrote:
| 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.
| OnACoffeeBreak wrote:
| I am very unfamiliar with specific state laws regarding this,
| but there's a federal exception for automobiles when it comes
| to the Fourth Amendment:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception
| rtb wrote:
| Probably not, but what can any individual do about it?
|
| It's very difficult to show monetary damages in order to
| actually sue
| giantg2 wrote:
| Yeah, it's pretty sketchy but it seems the courts are allowing
| most it, even for second owner and non-subscribers (OnStar).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-06 20:02 UTC)