• iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    America sucks. Seriously. I’m just waiting for another country to bring it to the USA, because it seems inevitable.

    People gotta stop putting faith into these ultimately crooked nations.

    • Immersive_Matthew
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Will it be another country though? Seems like the power has shifted and is continuing to shift from the nation state.

  • Rearsays@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    11 months ago

    I mean ok but the fact that your car is spying on you has to break a thousand big tech nda’s

  • NateNate60@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Disappointing result but this seems like something for the legislature to fix. Courts aren’t always the solution, sometimes you have to just fix the damn law.

    • krolden@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is supposed to be covered by the fourthamendment but that’s been meaningless for over 20 years now

      • xubu@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        The “unlawful search and seizure” amendment? Why would that apply here?

        • krolden@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Are you being serious? They release your data to the police if they ask

          • tal@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The Fourth Amendment will affect police, but it won’t restrict a random person who is given access to something from turning over whatever data they want to police.

            Say I hire a painter, and the painter is painting my house’s interior, and sees a bloody knife in my house. He can report that to the police. But, remove the painter from the picture, and the police could not enter to look for such a thing absent a warrant.

            'course, the flip side of that is that if the police get a warrant, then they can enter whether I want them in the house or not, whereas the painter can only enter because I choose to let him in.

            • krolden@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              That analogy is tired in the age of mass data collection without consent

              • tal@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                I’m just telling you that that’s the way things legally are. You’re arguing about how you feel that they should be.

            • gullible@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Not just police, any armed investigatory unit or state sponsored militia. The idea of a “police” force was pretty vague at the time, so the umbrella covers much more than it initially intended to.

          • xubu@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You are implying that any data gathered will be delivered to the government upon request (unsure if you are implying with or without a warrant). If you can show me from this article, or even this case, regarding this privacy case that that happened, then yes I agree with you and the fourth amendment applies.

            But this issue is between private entities which generally precludes amendments from being applicable. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the infotainment systems collected and stored personal data without consent and violated Washington’s Privacy Act.

            • krolden@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I’m not implying anything

              An Annapolis, Maryland-based company, Berla Corporation, provides the technology to some car manufacturers but does not offer it to the general public, the lawsuit said. Once messages are downloaded, Berla’s software makes it impossible for vehicle owners to access their communications and call logs but does provide law enforcement with access, the lawsuit said.

    • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But that would mean the politicians would have to actually work instead of photo ops and promises!!!

  • notannpc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    11 months ago

    I wonder how long until we get to jailbreak our cars just so those cock suckers can’t spy on us.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Technically you already can. I just hope you have extensive programming knowledge because you’re going to have to take an axe to the existing code.

  • kryostar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Well… fuck. More reason to not buy newer cars. At least you Americans are lucky. You can drive a dinosaur if it met with regulations. You technically don’t have to buy new cars… ever.

    • krolden@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Really considering taking out a loan just to fix an old car instead of buying new.

    • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’ve got a 2007 Kia that I’m planning to drive until I can’t fix it anymore

      So far that’s proving to be a pretty easy given the cost and availability of parts

    • bestusername@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      What’s the difference between never connecting your phone to a brand new high tech car and having no tech in an older car?

      • krolden@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        New car is still connected and is monitoring your driving habits, whether you wear a seatbelt or not, possibly recording your conversations, and even keeping track of your weight with the sensors in the seats.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          And monitoring your location, don’t forget about that. You can tell a lot about a person just by seeing where they go every day.

      • Someology@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        In my region, where public transport doesn’t exist much at all, if you don’t drive, you might not eat or work (the lucky few work remotely, but not all).

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          i’m sorry but are you commenting this for any reason other than to make yourself feel better about owning a car? i see people doing this all the time and i don’t get what other reason there would be to bring it up as the immediate response to comments about going car-free

          yes, obviously you can’t live without a car if you need the car to live! but millions and millions of people would actively enjoy life more without a car.

          • Someology@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m sorry, but are you being this snotty for any other reason than to make yourself feel better for being rude?

  • plz1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    One of these companies needs to be beached to prove damages, I guess.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Setting aside questions of legality, it seems kind of like it wouldn’t encourage someone to purchase their cars.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Yeah but the vast majority of car buyers won’t know about this or care. We’re all privacy advocates here but everyone and their mother is on Facebook or Instagram and is happily giving away all their information already anyway.

      We’re all up in arms about this here in this thread, located in a self-selecting micro-community of people centered around a shared interest in the control of our data. If you called your mother and told her about this would it stop her from buying a new car in the future?

    • rentar42@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      That only helps when there’s viable alternatives. Since pretty much all auto manufacturers do something like this it’s not really a distinguishing feature.

      And even if it was: how much worse/more expensive would a car need to be for you to not pick it over one that reads your text messages. And then ask the same question not for “you”, but for the average consumer. Then be sad …

    • Someology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you connect your phone to the car, can it spy on your Signal messages? I mean, they have to decrypt on your end for you to see them, right? Or has Signal taken specific steps to stop this?

      • bitwolf@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        At least with my headunit (2015 Toyota). It cannot read the signal messages. Additionally, I remove contact and text permission from Bluetooth to be especially sure.

  • mat@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I recently found a video talkkng about privacy. One of the topic was that privacy does not ring any bell in people’s mind. Contrary to intimacy. Maybe we should all replace privacy by intimacy so we can tell what is really implied to non software people

    • bitwolf@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      When you connect to Bluetooth, it asks your phone to share call, contact and SMS information.

      Think like the old horrible headunit text implementation, the ability to scan your contact list from the car, and see your recent calls.

  • BlackPit@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    It can’t be illegal because you agree to allow them when you purchase the new vehicle. It’s all there in the T&C and PP, which no one ever reads. Don’t like it? Don’t buy new cars. I won’t.

      • extant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Same privacy policy authorizing them to harvest your data, but older cars have a more limited capability to collect data compared to newer cars filled with sensors, cameras, and phone integrations. Plus older cellular networks are defunct for older vehicles so they can’t just exfil it without you helping or bringing it in to physically access it.

        • Someology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          The issue is that this 20 year old car is not going to last forever or have replacement parts available forever. We need better privacy laws, because time and entropy will eventually force us all into this evil mess.

          • BlackPit@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Agreed! What would be amazing though, is a manufacturer who could make a modern safe bare-bones vehicle that didn’t have the tech installed at all. If you want tech you could BYO.

            • njordomir@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Yes, I drive so rarely I would honestly be happy with any crappy old stereo to save a few thousand bucks. I’m lucky my ~2015 car still has completely separate radio and functions (climate, errors, etc.)

              I would want to put in a good dashcam system though. Give me the bones; then let me DIY