Interior images, exterior images, facial geometry, voice recordings, location/driving data, "multimedia screen data",
https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230512182022/https://www.toyot...
The EULA for my Honda says that Honda can and will share all available data with itself and third parties, named and unnamed, for any or no reason.
Being a prepper isn't extremist. (Yes, it's expensive, done right, but not necessarily extremist.)
[disclaimer: I live in Los Angeles]
That's a different crowd from someone who is just prepared for emergencies and disasters.
It seems like you have a cognitive distortion to work out. Amplifying an anecdotal sample to classify all people with a shared interest as having other characteristics of your sample is understandable but also misguided.
You, 3 weeks ago.
~~~ Their's is a lot better, does still include Geolocation, audio recordings, navigation usage, however the usage looks limited to just Honda and the obviously required services: ~~~
> We will not use Geolocation Information for our own marketing purposes or disclose identifiable Geolocation Information with third parties (except our service providers) without your consent.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230512194748/https://www.honda...
EDIT: I just noticed the following:
> These companies may use Covered Information for their everyday business purposes, including marketing, customer service, fulfillment and related purposes. These disclosures may qualify as a sale under certain state privacy laws.
Also their definition of "Service Provider" is way too broad (see below comment). So I might need to retract my statement on their policy being good.
Satellite, traffic, and telecommunications companies; Roadside assistance vendors; Contact centers; Research and development vendors; Providers of software integrated into our vehicles and systems; Marketing and non-marketing communications, analytics, and consulting firms; Professional service firms such as attorneys and accountants; Day-to-day business operations vendors such as courier services, facilities management suppliers, and information technology and network support.
Although it's worth mentioning:
> These companies may use Covered Information for their everyday business purposes, including marketing, customer service, fulfillment and related purposes. These disclosures may qualify as a sale under certain state privacy laws.
So I might need to retract my statement on their policy being good.
As for law enforcement:
> We may use and disclose Covered Information and any other information about you to government or law enforcement officials or private parties if, in our discretion, we believe it is necessary or appropriate to respond to legal requests (including court orders, investigative demands and subpoenas), to protect the safety, property, or rights of ourselves, consumers, or any other third party, to prevent or stop any illegal, unethical, or legally actionable activity, or to comply with law.
There's also that little qualifier "identifiable" in there. Companies usually take a very different stance on what constitutes "identifiable" than people think.
What that's really saying is that they will share the geolocation information with third parties without your consent, but they'll probably do a little handwavy "anonymization" thing on it first.
But… it’s just metadata. It can’t possibly be cross referenced, in bulk, with high accuracy, in 5 minutes, right? And even if it could, I bet there’s no money to be made selling people’s data, so there will never be any shadow industry that “brokers data” of regular uninteresting people, that’d be ridiculous!
0 tracking by the manufacturer. No subscription services needed. No annoying beeping when you forget to put on your seatbelt for 10 seconds. No touchscreen, all physical buttons. No Android/Apple spyware. No cameras. No ads on any display. No car-key that can run out of battery.
It's nice.
Literally anything is better than sitting and solemnly spelling out what "will" and "must" be.
It's 100% allowed within the EU, even for OEM licences. There have been multiple court cases about this and microsoft lost every single one. But I guess that's not what you were implying?
Because of some adversarial legal precedent in a major market that would impair them more then the expected benefit.
Microsoft probably is moving away from selling permanent licenses partly due to this, for everything except those to large customers they can individually keep tabs on.
excuse is "games are art, not computer software Oracle vs Usedsoft doesn apply".
> "games are art, not computer software"
That's not the legal interpretation of the topic, no.
This is an absolutely unbelievable level of privacy intrusion IMO. I 100% support very heavily fining this sort of behavior, otherwise it will continue to proliferate.
Not only is this all by design, but in many countries, the "free mandate" - i.e. the notion that the politician can say A before the election and then do ~A after - is even legally codified. In theory, this is supposed to allow the elected representatives to apply their own judgment based on nuances of the moment instead of pandering to the mob. In practice, it means that your representative is free to pander to people other than those they "represent" while still claiming a public mandate based on the votes received.
They're just praying that one will be moderately less terrible than the alternative.
There's never an option to say, "No, none of these power-hungry psychos should get to make this set of decisions on my behalf."
We elect representatives at every level of government. In a country of 335,000,000 people a slow moving central government is a feature. If you really want to make a difference pay attention to your city council.
Note, by the way, that I'm not claiming that changes don't happen in this system. What I'm saying is that changes happen when the ruling class is convinced it's time for them, not when the populace as a whole is - and no amount of voting changes that.
The fewer people each representative represents, the closer it is to an actual democracy, which is why city councils etc generally work better (although they are still far from ideal and have the same fundamental problems I described). But the nature of modern politics weaves local issues into broader ones on higher levels, and what ought to be local politics increasingly becomes national.
Probably when a legislators private graphic videos with an escort or drug dealer or something more interesting gets leaked. Perhaps some government officials data is present in the leak as we speak. It might be harder to spot if not a personally owned vehicle or still cloud registered to a previous owner.
So what solution do you have that doesn’t involve regulation?
CHIPS Act of 2022 allocated money to support US semiconductor manufacturing. Right-to-repair laws have been gaining traction even though it can't benefit any large economic interest directly. Those are two recent examples off the top of my head that aren't a reflection of a government that "only want more control and restriction."
I get that politics is frustrating but this kind of blanket caricature just relieves people of the responsibility for engaging with specifics, and when people commit to it that actually covers and enables real corruption.
> Your Facial Geometric Features will only be stored on your vehicle.
> Vehicles equipped with Teammate use sensor and/or image data from the vehicle’s interior and exterior to evaluate the vehicle’s surroundings
I wonder how that factors into this.
If it's a particularly cheap car I wouldn't even mind if it doesn't have a screen or interface, and just supplies an API to the phone and a holder for it.
Either way would be a million times better than any car made between 2005 and 2015 has to offer.
This is how Apple Carplay works. It just streams the phone to the display, and accepts input from the car's buttons. I think Android Auto does the same.
US lawmakers : you suck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vault_7
you have to wonder how many vehicle 0-days nation state actors have saved up for when they need them, even just displaying the ability would grind the country to a halt because people would be afraid to even drive
Ah, so only Americans are getting shafted.
If companies want to collect such personal data it should not be by default, and each clause should have to be independently validated by the customer including what data, how it's used, where stored, for how long, who it's shared with.
Nobody will accept basically so that says something about the asymmetry here.
> Certain vehicles equipped with an interior, driver-facing camera [...] If you opt-in and link your user profile using the in-vehicle “Setup Face” process, the Face Identification feature may use your Facial Geometric Features and Profile Data... Your Facial Geometric Features will only be stored on your vehicle.
> External Vehicle Video Capture. Owners of certain vehicles equipped with [...] may also opt-in to participate in External Vehicle Video Capture...
> To use the App Suite, you must download the application and accept the End User License Agreement... We will use Voice Recordings to improve our responses and voice recognition. To facilitate functionality of your App Suite and linked third party services, your vehicle may share your Location Data and Voice Recordings transcriptions with your third party services...
(Emphasis mine)