Posted on 09/19/2024 5:34:27 AM PDT by george76
Governments are pushing the public to switch to smart vehicles to reduce fossil fuel consumption, but there is also a second motive – surveillance.
This September, Ford filed a new patent to eavesdrop on riders. They plan to share this information with third-parties to personalize the advertisements riders hear. Ford will also take the driver’s destination into consideration to determine location-specific advertisements and suggestions. The technology will factor in the weather, traffic, and all external sensors to fine tune when and what to market to passengers.
Advertisements are perhaps the least ominous use of voice data based on the plans that these car manufacturers have. Car insurance rates in the United States spiked 26% in the past year, which is partly due to car manufacturers sharing ride data with insurance companies. Even older cars with basic features like OnStar have tracking devices that report your driving behavior to the manufacturers who share your data with insurance companies and, ultimately, the government. LexisNexis, which tracks drivers’ behaviors and compiles risk profiles, has been sharing individual data with General Motors, who passes that information along to the insurance companies. General Motors.
One driver demanded that LexisNexis send him his personal report, which was a 258-page document containing every trip he or his wife took in his vehicle over a six-month period. LexisNexis said that this data will be used “for insurers to use as one factor of many to create more personalized insurance coverage.” They even reported small issues such as hard breaking and rapid acceleration, according to the report. “I don’t know the definition of hard brake. My passenger’s head isn’t hitting the dash,” an unnamed Cadillac driver enrolled in the OnStar Smart Driver subscription service told reporters.
“Cars have microphones and people have all kinds of sensitive conversations in them. Cars have cameras that face inward and outward,” a researcher with Mozilla Foundation told the Los Angeles Times. In fact, 19 automakers in 2023 admitted that they have the ability to sell your personal data without notice. Law enforcement may subpoena these records as well.
Ford claims that the patent was submitted, but they do not necessarily plan to use the technology. “Submitting patent applications is a normal part of any strong business as the process protects new ideas and helps us build a robust portfolio of intellectual property. The ideas described within a patent application should not be viewed as an indication of our business or product plans. No matter what the patent application outlines, we will always put the customer first in the decision-making behind the development and marketing of new products and services,” Ford said in a statement released to MotorTrend.
Now, the US Department of Transportation is permitted to mandate that certain manufacturers provide them with vehicle data. Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Edward Markey of Massachusetts testified that all vehicles in the United States with a GPS or emergency call system are collecting travel data that car manufacturers have remote access to via the computer chips. The computer chips are compiling data on vehicle speed, movement, travel, and even using exterior sensors and cameras to record the vehicle’s location.
All of this violates the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. These car manufacturers are surpassing what anyone would consider a reasonable expectation of privacy. Governments, third-party advertisement companies, and insurance companies all have warrantless access to personal data, and drivers are largely unaware they are being spied on. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act permits the government to have backdoor access to this data.
The aforementioned senators’ concerns fell on deaf ears at the Federal Trade Commission. The Department of Transportation clearly is not listed within the US Constitution. People are already experiencing stiff consequences from autos sharing data with the sharp uptick in insurance rates. Our freedom of movement is under attack. Our data has become more valuable than gold. The legal implications fall under a grey area as the Founding Fathers never expected their newly created government to turn against their own citizens.
Bluetooth can’t spy on you anymore then your phone already can.
wifi isn’t the transmission signal, it’d be LTE or 5g antenna’s.
Without a modem, my head unit cannot send any info to anyone unless they can pull it via the OBD port. Which considering I service my vehicles at my shop, no one unauthorized is getting at them.
“They do this because it is an extra revenue stream, and they haven’t been called out on it to the point where it hurts the wallet.”
Absolutely, and like Microsoft it is forever theirs and never yours outright. This business model needs to be squashed with mass boycotts and refusal to comply.
Maybe wifi isn’t the correct term, but yes some modern cars have a modem and antenna. Watch Louis Rossman and Lehtos Law for more material on this. They have the links to the technical papers. Some new vehicles even have a GPS tracker on board. This is standard on rentals or payment plan vehicles but one man that paid cash had on in his brand new Toyota truck. His mechanic told him about it and removed it. He called the dealership and asked about why it was in there and they wanted it back. He refused of course. Each year more and more spying will be the norm.
all 2018+ cars have telematics because if I recall correctly, Congress mandated SOS services back in 2017.
The Data harvesting is supposed to assist in offsetting the cost of having to pay for the modem’s monthly costs.
In terms of GPS’s. Rentals I can understand, but there is absolutely no way that anyone will know if a car has a payment when it comes off the lot, unless the paperwork and loans were completed prior to assembly.
Sounds more like the dealers are installing GPS’s, not the manufacturers. If this is the case, the Dealers need to be fined heavily and jailed.
Already happening.
Siri.....
Yeah. Right.
No matter what the patent application outlines, we will always put the customer first
And the "customer" is their advertisers. You, the "owner", are the product being sold.
but they do not necessarily plan to use the technology.
“do not necessarily plan to use” is quite the weasel-worded phrase ...
Everybody’s going to have a surveillance profile. That’s why they’re building all the huge new “data centers.”
“Cars have microphones and people have all kinds of sensitive conversations in them. Cars have cameras that face inward and outward,”
Perhaps you missed the part where GM is ALREADY sharing all their data?
In the meantime, some of us can’t afford these vehicles with all this “communication” equipment. I think some of it can be disconnected as I doubt they are using this to “help” us. I hope somebody (s) gets their butts nailed to the barn door for this intrusion. When information is gathered & used against the car owner, it’s safe to say those who gather it are not completely aware of the situation under which it occurs. Personally, I wish they would go back to the cars that were built in the ‘50s & ‘60s with suitable necessary improvements that actually helped the owner. If the factories actually considered this they might come to the conclusion that it could actually improve sales, even if the cars were sold for less. I see no reason why the consumer should accept “improvements” to help the factor or insurance companies & not the owners.
I don’t by GM products anymore either. My last was a 1971 Nova. I loved that car. I ‘m sure my current Pacifica does but I can’t prove it. I am hoping Chrysler is too screwed up to do something like that on the year I own.
It was the dealer. They all but admitted it.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.