Hacker News Reader

Comment by mc32 | Hacker News Reader

This isn’t a privacy concern, it’s rather a trust concern. He may not trust the mechanics. On the other hand, I can see the mechanics having a privacy concern, unless he made them sign some legalise along the lines of allowing him to record them while they serviced the vehicle.

View on HN

The second half of the article explains the privacy part; the worker deleted the videos taken at the dealership, which meant they had to look through the videos to find the correct one to delete.

I find it interesting, though, that the owner doesn’t worry about the privacy rights of the mechanic to not be filmed on the job.

Based on personal experience I would happily support legislation that allows vehicle owners to record or supervise mechanics.

Pro tip: ask to see any parts that were “replaced” on your vehicle.

They can just show you any part they want as long as it’s plausible. If they’re gojng to be dishonest about parts they might as well have the previous car’s parts avail., or just go ahead say your part is bad even if it’s still got milage on it left.

It raises the bar in a reasonable manner. You’re the paying customer, after all.

Agreed. Now, if I was given any (expensive) parts replaced, then it would be a bit more credible. Otherwise, they could have a whole box of 'replaced parts' that they routinely show customers as a to operate their fraud. But they won't let you take them; their excuse will be that they will be recycled as 'core'.

If you have to ask to see the parts being replaced at a branded dealer, BMW in this case, then you need to find a new dealer. In my experience the big dealers and especially luxury ones do no do this. The ones without a brand in the name and have something like “Luxury Motor” are the ones that do this.

I was quoted $15,000.00 in unnecessary repairs to my BMW by the local BMW dealer. A local shop with a generic name fixed the problem for $200.00. The dealer installed new spark plugs with improper gaps and charged me to replace fuel injectors and coils but the installed parts were revisions that had been obsolete for years. Either the dealer installed the wrong part or did no work at all.

BMW dealers are NOT inherently trustworthy.

Agreed on needing to find a new dealer, I will only buy another BMW if I move to a state with a trustworthy dealer. Unfortunately Washington has none.

BMWs MO has always been to just replace everything vs fixing a part. I had a belt tensioner out and they wanted to completely upgrade the belt system to a newer one that was more reliable. It was a sub $200 part vs a $3000 fix.

Expensive and probably unnecessary but I seriously doubt they would do fishy things to parts that required an inspection by the customer.

You don’t understand. There was nothing wrong with my car. They screeed up a basic maintenance task (new spark plugs) and caused a computer code for a misfire. They misdiagnosed this as a bent valve and told me I needed a new head. In reality I needed two spark plugs gapped.

I understand throwing parts at a problem but they misdiagnosed a simple issue so badly that I suspect malice.

Typically the batteries on these devices don't last very long unless it's hooked to the car battery. There's zero reason for the mechanic to go through the property of a client. I'd sue the hell out of that company for doing that. It would be similar to an employee at a computer store going through your computer looking for racy photos. That's not their job. Disconnecting the camera would make me never bring my car to that place again as I wouldn't trust the mechanic.

Not sure where you work, but would you be ok if your employer wanted to hook up a video camera to watch you work all day?

Even then you need to give your employer consent to record you via whatever contract you sign with them.

Work at a big company?

We have video cameras on every floor, at every entrance, and ones that generally can capture the view of nearly everyone’s desk (one that captures multiple aisles not specific desks).

These are only used if there are “security” reasons to review them, in theory.

Those roll over usually monthly. Mainly entrance exits are actively watched, or those with an “alarm” state. No one will watch those other interior ones unless there is reason to (property loss, altercation, etc., for evidentiary, legal purposes).

You are also made aware of this. It’s not snuck up on you.

I agree it's not snuck up on you.

It's trivial today for those tertiary video cameras to collect meta data directly (Changes) or with inference (facial recognition) to see who goes where.

For you to suggest no one will watch them begs the question that the meta data isn't collected. It may not be, but it might.

So a video camera that's not watched by humans 'wittingly' may still be collecting privacy decreasing data.

i work at a small company and i literally have a camera pointed specifically at my desk (all other desks are monitored as well). it's degrading but i don't think anyone watches the videos unless there's an hr or disciplinary reason to.

Why don’t you ask the people at Bridgewater?

Ok, it’s audio, not video… but it’s still recording.

The FBI used to (and may still) pay Best Buy employees to go through your photos on the offchance that they contqined child porn.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com