'Car Owners Should Control Data Collected By Cars' (nytimes.com) 97
Bill Hanvey, president and CEO of the Auto Care Association, argues that car owners (or lessees) should be the only ones who can control their car's data. "He or she should be aware of the data the car transmits, have control over it and determine who can see it," Hanvey writes. Many have argued this position for the privacy angle, but Harvey takes a different facet of this conversation, pointing out that carmakers control our data to limit where we get repairs or services done. If policymakers don't act on behalf of consumers, Hanvey writes, car and truck owners may be forced to go to select service centers for repairs, circumventing the more than 180,000 independent repair shops across the country that have all the tools needed to work on today's newest cars, but lack access to the necessary diagnostic information needed to complete the job. An anonymous reader shares the report: Because of the increasing complexity of cars and the Internet of Things, data is critical to repair and service. When carmakers control the data, they can choose which service centers receive our information. They're more likely to share our data exclusively with their branded dealerships than with independent repair shops, which could have the edge in price and convenience. However, independent repair shops currently make 70 percent of outside warranty repairs throughout the country. There are more than 180,000 independent repair shops across the country; most have all the tools needed to work on today's connected and complex cars, and most of today's highly trained service technicians can perform anything from basic tuneups to sophisticated electronic diagnostics. But without access to car data, they're working blindfolded, unable to see the diagnostic information they need. The solution is simple. The only person who should control car data is the car owner (or lessee). He or she should be aware of the data the car transmits, have control over it and determine who can see it.
Digitization of the auto industry is, ultimately, a good thing. Today's connected cars are paving the way for autonomous vehicles and vehicle-to-vehicle communications, and eventually vehicle-to-infrastructure communications making our roads safer. But unlike Alexa and Nest, consumers are unaware of the degree to which their own car collects and processes data. It's clear, because of its value -- as high as $750 billion by 2030 -- carmakers have no incentive to release control of the data collected from our vehicles. Policymakers, however, have the opportunity to give drivers control -- not just so that they can keep their data private but also so that they can share it with the people they want to see it. This will let car owners maintain what they've had for a century: the right to decide who fixes their car.
Digitization of the auto industry is, ultimately, a good thing. Today's connected cars are paving the way for autonomous vehicles and vehicle-to-vehicle communications, and eventually vehicle-to-infrastructure communications making our roads safer. But unlike Alexa and Nest, consumers are unaware of the degree to which their own car collects and processes data. It's clear, because of its value -- as high as $750 billion by 2030 -- carmakers have no incentive to release control of the data collected from our vehicles. Policymakers, however, have the opportunity to give drivers control -- not just so that they can keep their data private but also so that they can share it with the people they want to see it. This will let car owners maintain what they've had for a century: the right to decide who fixes their car.
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You clearly have no clue how much data car makers are collecting on you. Have a relatively modern car with any kind of in-car entertainment system or GPS maps (especially with traffic updates)? That sucker is continually transmitting telemetry back to the manufacturer. And you thought Microsoft was bad with Windows 10?
If only aircraft manufacturers were so hungry for data - we might know exactly where ML370 crashed.
WindBourne just doesn't get it again (Score:4, Informative)
When a plane full of consumer GPS devices becomes "lost", I allow zero fucking excuses for a manufacturer or marketing.
Consumer GPS devices tell you where the satellites are (then you can locally use that info), the consumer GPS devices don't tell the satellites where the device is.
Re:WindBourne just doesn't get it again (Score:4, Informative)
Most, if not all, also issue additional location tracking requests to Apple, to Google, and to other location providers . It's built into their mapping and marketing applications. As I understand the theory, the data is supposed to be anonymized. But many marketing applications tie that location data to their customer personal information, breaking the privacy barrier. It's a source of considerable privacy concern.
Re: (Score:1)
While that may be true, there isn't a lot of wifi signal or mobile data coverage at 30k feet or over the middle of the ocean or at the bottom of that ocean. So it's unlikely to help you find a plane that crashed into the sea.
(Yes some planes will provide wifi etc, YMMV)
Re: (Score:3)
Most, if not all, also issue additional location tracking requests to Apple, to Google, and to other location providers
All of which is turned off on your standard flight. And where are you going to get cell/wifi service over the Pacific? I can't even get reliable data service on the street in front of my office building. Sure, sometimes people can connect to plane wifi, at which point they're piggybacking on the signal that is going out from the plane in the first place, providing no more additional data than we already had with the plane.
Re: (Score:2)
I was merely pointing out that the consumer devices tell _location services_ where the consumer device is, that the location information may be avaialble. I didn't mean to say that the connection to location services is always functional. Apparently two of the 9/11 cell phone calls were successfully made form 5000 feet, according to the report. There was discussion of cell phone connections concerning the Malaysia Airlines flight that went missing, reported at https://wqad.com/2014/04/15/ho... [wqad.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, if Tesla was collecting data to develop autonomous driving, that would be fine.
But who knows what the fuck they are doing with the data. I am sure it is a google-level sell off to the highest bidder. Get ready for personalized billboards, Minority-Report style.
Now let's extend that to all fuckin' Devices! (Score:1)
Shall we?
It's time for the government to work for the people again (instead of itself) and take a baseball to the kneecaps of all these manufacturers, everything from phones and computers to fridges.
Otherwise this internet of things shit will swamp us all, including top clearance govt employees in their own homes.
Re: (Score:1)
How cute... When has the government ever worked for the people?
Re: (Score:2)
You've highlighted the problem. People have utterly forgotten government *is* the people. Or it is supposed to be.
And no, clearly lawyers are not people.
Re: (Score:2)
If policymakers don't act on behalf of consumers, (Score:2)
ha ha ha ha....
That will be the day... THAT will be the day!
The BEST congress will EVER do is give you a reach around!
You are still going to bend over!
Re: (Score:1)
Ha ha! You think I am a republicunt? Well that explains why are you are a demTARD!
There are only 2 possible choices around here... right?
Re: (Score:1)
Oh noes... I done been caught! How did you find out? Magic 8 ball? You trippin shrooms? What is your secret?
O wait... I figured it out... low IQ!
Control (Score:5, Insightful)
>"He or she should be aware of the data the car transmits, have control over it and determine who can see it,"
I couldn't possibly agree more with this statement. It is not enough to know what is transmitted or who can see it, but have CONTROL over what is collected/transmitted or even opt out, if it is not absolutely essential to the operation of the vehicle.
I hope more and more consumers are starting to wake up to how dangerous it is to having all their devices spying on them all the time and with little or no control and also with fewer alternative options.
Re: (Score:2)
Who bought the car? (Score:1)
Don't like the way a company acts vote with your wallet. Adding more government is never a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
It's fucking 2019 already!
How is it being 2019 relevant?
To be fair... (Score:2)
Most smart cars are smarter than their drivers. Or so my recent anecdotal evidence is showing me.
Maybe the data should be sent straight to their insurance company and the (traffic) police. Get them off the road, poor and/or jin jail ASAP.
Then maybe I wouldn't mind (their) data being hoovered up and sent off to the highest bidder.
Re: (Score:1)
Everyone but me should be surveilled 24/7 and arrested at the first sign of abbherent behavior
Fuck you, asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you run red lights, run into the back of other cars because you're on your cellphone, jump the curb because you want to get around stalled traffic. That sort of thing.
Re:To be fair... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe the data should be sent straight to their insurance company and the (traffic) police. Get them off the road, poor and/or jin jail ASAP.
Whether you realize it or not, that would also include you. Even without knowing a single thing about you, I guaranty that you break two or more significant traffic laws every time you drive. Just like everyone else.
Under your scenario, you would be off the road, poor, and/or in jail quickly. And so would most of the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Out of curiosity, which two laws are you referring to? Most people speed, so I guess that's one... what's the other?
What about data collected by your phone? (Score:2)
Europe has moved the law towards the consumer, but this isn't a trivial question. The data collected is a valuable product.
Unless You're a Teen (Score:2)
From three stories down:
[an optional Chevy feature can] give parents "report cards" tracking a teen's driving behavior.
Presuming the owner is the teen themselves, then they wouldn't control their data collected by their car.
Re: (Score:2)
They almost certainly just licensed that tech. I've seen a zillion commercials for that functionality while watching autoline. Ironically, I can't remember the name of their company! They play the commercial so often (literally during every episode) that the only thing I can remember besides the features of the product, is that the mom in the commercial is hot and in a nightgown. The name escapes me. Maybe it was Borg Warner, I know they're one of the sponsors.
Who owns your data? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Who owns your car? (Score:3)
Ownership is such a 20th century idea. Based on unintelligent systems.
Really, you are only licensing the car, with certain usage rights.
The car is owned by whoever programmed its computers.
Re:Who owns your car? (Score:5, Insightful)
The way manufacturers are trying make things work right now, they're trying to have it both ways. They want to retain all the benefits of ownership, while shifting the costs of ownership onto you. That's a big no-no. Any time you disassociate costs from benefits, you break the fundamental feedback loop which is necessary for the market to create products that customers want, while disposing of products that they don't want.
Re:Who owns your car? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't have a problem with that. But if the company wants to retain ownership of the car or phone, then they should be the ones liable for fixing it if it breaks down....
Oh, they want to be "liable" alright, by being the only shop in town that can fix your car. They want to be exclusively liable. Oh, and their answer to liability is that generous 3-year bumper-to-bumper warranty. Why didn't you lease? I mean after all, that's the "smart" thing to do, and chances are your car will always be under warranty. (Yeah, I know, it's cringeworthy. I keep my cars for a decade and wrench on them myself.)
...Any time you disassociate costs from benefits, you break the fundamental feedback loop which is necessary for the market to create products that customers want, while disposing of products that they don't want.
While I agree with you, I'm not aware of any manufacturer that is truly creating products that customers want. Your average car is now $30,000 because you are no longer given the option of options. All that overpriced shit is standard now, and most of it consumers never asked for, much like the $1000 smartphone. Yes, there have been some obvious benefits (safety features), but let's not pretend profit isn't a motive here, especially when it comes to collecting and selling your digital soul long after the sale.
Same goes for our appliances. Finding a "dumb" TV these days is getting damn near impossible. That stupidity will continue until it infects every device we own. "OTA must be enabled in the interest of safety, else you void the warranty" will be the standard EULA clause to prevent you from disabling it.
Sadly this really is a losing battle unless we find a way to take back control of our data. Even voting with our wallets is becoming an exercise in futility.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to see a graph of this. It has grown at least an order of magnitude. Does it grow exponentially or linearly?
I agree that would be a cool graph to see, but is your computer really less reliable than ones made decades ago because of transistors? Not really. You're worrying about the 90% of parts that don't generally break. Complexity doesn't always equal unreliable. In fact, it has proven to be just the opposite for me personally.
The overall reliability of cars has actually increased throughout the years. I have purchased all of my cars, do standard maintenance on them myself, and usually keep them for at leas
Re: (Score:1)
It is a bit scary that people who are so opposed to communism gladly cheers on a society where large corporations own everything.
It's like they never stopped to think about what the problem with communism was and cheer on the same society in the name of capitalism.
It's a bit like those who are terrified of sharia laws but fights hard to get the same laws under a Christian name.
Re: (Score:2)
The car is owned by whoever programmed its computers.
Programmers working at a company don't own their own work. The company itself does. One can say that the programmers indirectly do by being a part of the company, but any uppity programmer disagreeing with upper management has no power and is easily fired, at which point they own nothing.
Cars shouldn't collect/transmit *any* data at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's if the manufacturer designed the system to break if it can't phone home. My 2009 Pontiac G6 started having random problems with electronic systems after I pulled the OnStar module. Took it to the dealership and they hooked OnStar back up and everything worked fine again. They are intentionally building in the phone home system into every part of the vehicle. There is a reason none of the infotainment systems can be removed and replaced. They are integrating the radio, the navigation, and everything e
Re: (Score:2)
2. You're implying that if you drive somewhere where there's no cellular coverage (they DO exist) then suddenly your car won't run properly. That's stupid.
Find the antenna. Cut or disconnect the lead. Terminate the transceiver end with a 50-ohm dummy load. Problem solved, no more 'phoning home'.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm suggesting that GM has built a timer into the system where if it hasn't been able to phone home after a certain amount of time, it start introducing minor problems into the system to get you back into the dealership and fix the module. It's not entirely far fetched. I can't guarantee that is what the cause of my problems were, but that little black OnStar box has no documentation on what exactly it does and techs will diagnose that as the source of your problems if you come in with it not functionin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a horrible design. Cars last for decades or more where infotainment systems are obsolete in 5 years or less. My old 1997 Miata has Android Auto in an aftermarket stereo. My 2013 Focus has shitty MyFordTouch which can be swapped with around a 2k conversion kit to replace the car management functions that are integrated into the stereo system for some reason. Or you can do a swap with a newer Sync 3 unit from a later model Focus if you can find the right parts.
How about our phones? (Score:5, Insightful)
How about "He or she should be aware of the data the phone transmits, have control over it and determine who can see it," ?
Why is your car's data more important than your phone's data, or any other data of yours? Why shouldn't we have the same control over all our data? We should, that's why we should be asking for laws similar to GDPR.
unlike Alexa and Nest, consumers are unaware of the degree to which their own car collects and processes data.
This is hilarious. Anyone serious think that most Alexa and Nest owners knew what data these things collect, process and send back to mothership?
FreedomEV project for Tesla addresses this. (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.freedomev.com/ [freedomev.com]
Drivers Will Become Beta Testers (Score:2)
Ownership will disappear (Score:1)
Want to know why car ownership will get much, much more expensive?
Just look at the title.
Ownership: $80000
Rent/Lease: "small monthly payments" - but all your data is belong to us
Better idea (Score:1)
A better idea would be to simply criminalize the placement of any cellular device inside a production motor vehicle for the purpose of transmitting any data related to its operation or care.
While we are at it, require all vehicle manufacturers to provide the end purchaser with a comprehensive service manual, and any and all software required to interact with the on-board computers.
Re: (Score:2)
Your first idea is dumb. That hardware enables real functionality.
Your second idea is great, especially about the software. Manufacturers hold repair and service data hostage. There are many common service problems that can only be fixed by dealers now.
glwt (Score:2)
Automakers have formed two alliances to share autonomous driving data between manufacturers so that they can use it to improve the driving experience. Basically all cars will have Waze-equivalent functionality, and they will use this data to provide it. I double-plus guarantee that they will find a way to control that data completely, if necessary by only leasing and never selling the vehicles. They will claim that they have to have this functionality to operate, which is of course a falsehood, though it wi
forced repair selection (Score:1)
John Deere is already forcing farmers to use their repair service on their farm equipment. There's already an underground source for firmware on the tractors.
Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
But you don't own your cars (Score:2)
If you lease your car, rent your car, use ride sharing, or have a bank loan, someone else owns your car.
They have access to this info, and they sell it.
Pay cash and get clear title.