The decision followed a New York Times report this month that G.M. had, for years, been sharing data about drivers’ mileage, braking, acceleration and speed with the insurance industry. The drivers were enrolled — some unknowingly, they said — in OnStar Smart Driver, a feature in G.M.’s internet-connected cars that collected data about how the car had been driven and promised feedback and digital badges for good driving.
If the article link contains a paywall, you can consider reading this alternative article instead: ‘GM Stops Sharing Driver Data With Brokers Amid Backlash’ on Ars Technica.
IDK, the ability to remote activate climate control, start/stop charging and control charge power to match my solar power are all quite good reasons for me to have my car connected.
We should be able to have nice things without surveillance. We shouldn’t refrain from these things, we should legislate so they’re not allowed to collect data and share it without explicit consent.
That stuff should be operable on a published and standardized protocol that third-party units can easily talk to. Put in your own little control box with cellular transceiver.
Honestly I disagree. That kind of features should absolutely be included and standard. I shouldn’t have to buy 3rd party hardware to modify my car and pay for extra cellular service for it.
Customers would probably like if manufacturers include a unit that uses the standardized protocol, yes.
Are you not paying the manufacturer for the cellular service to run the climate control? That’s nice but doesn’t sound typical to me. I’d like to choose my own, or decline the cell service and have it only available from my wifi.
No, I’m not.
I obviously would prefer open protocols and/or APIs for these things, but it should be possible without modding the car with additional hardware.
Of course you are, either it’s baked into the cost of the car, or you are paying for it in personal data. So it may be hidden, but you’re absolutely paying for it.
Yeah, that kind of goes without saying…
deleted by creator
Agreed. Also it reduces costs significantly if issues can be remotely inspected and fixed. Software updates regularly get sent to new vehicles that would have cost a lot of time and money to do at a dealership.
Yes, they shouldn’t be sharing your data. Yes you should be getting compensated if you opt into data sharing.
No software updates needed if there is no software to begin with…
You can’t have things like airbags, stability control, efficient use of fuel/energy without software.
We haven’t had software-less cars for decades. As someone that works on older vehicles you don’t want to go back to that era.
How far away do you need to start your car? Wouldn’t a regular remote start on a key fob work for most situations? Unless you’re taking the bus to your car.
I start the AC from my office which is probably 2-300m from my car with a large building between. That’s far outside the range of a key FOB, but it’s nice and cold in the summer (or warm on the winter) when I get to it.
You probably bitch and complain about climate change while walking to your car that has been running for 20 minutes too.
In what world does walking 2-300m take 20min? What a ridiculous hyperbole…
If it’s cold outside it usualky takes at least 10 minutes to be warm enough to keep the windshield clear, so not all of it will be walking.
Defrost will have the windshield clear of ice in about 3min on mine.
Mine will too, when it’s reasonably warm out, but not below -15 or so. Below -30 it’s even longer, and might not keep it clear, and I need to open windows just so moisture goes somewhere other than the windshield.,