Obviously it would be better to have this action be illegal. But with legal privacy protections eroding in the US and other countries, it seems prudent to have a better understanding of the systems involved in the immoral surveillance.
Never underestimate the risks of spousal dissatisfaction.
If your buyer is the end owner, probably increase a little bit unless they are surveillancemaxxing.
Easily reversible mods only affect price for suckers anyway.
Regardless, taping some foil around the connectors with the foil making okay contact with the metal chassis is more than enough attenuation at sub GHz microwave to remove this concern without having to source specialty terminations and crimpers (or worse, non-reversible damage to the OEM cable assemblies by repurposing their terminations). I've done the foil+tape on some of my vehicles, but it hasn't made a difference in binary "does it connect or not?" testing.
If a hypothetical future owner feels strongly about it then replacing a telematics module in the dash is much easier than replacing harness runs. I somehow doubt I would sell one of my vehicles to someone who would do that though.
It's wild how convenience trumps everything and then we look back to say, "we should have done better."
Sometimes it helps to have someone with their priorities in order keeping a reality check on people who don't always stay grounded.
I think maybe being grounded has changed - I would be comfortable doing what I described but I imagine your comfort with your preexisting solution means your ground has shifted and a reality check means you woudl rather give away your data than take the higher friction option?
Yes there are many (maybe most) who will not give up their comforts or risk modifying their vehicle in order to make it more private... but trying to play the judge in a made-up internet game of altruism olympics is not going to convert many people either.
I meant to gracefully share what I did, and hope to have no offended anyone.
It can't. Not realistically.
It can be stopped by legislation. But that would require politicians who have our interests as a priority rather than the various industries. So not going to happen anytime soon.
I don't want to give up my modern conveniences, but I have and will if forced to choose.
Their is a cell modem in the car, so all these features are available anywhere the car has cell service.
Are any of those things more important than your security (e.g., against hackers) and privacy?
Although it wasn’t worth the cost of the 3 year subscription so I now just estimate the charge status based on the charge’s power consumption.
If the car is at 10% battery, it may be worth charging at .15 or .3€/kWh. If it’s at 70% charge, I’ll wait until the price drops to .005€/kWh. The whole thing is automated in HA.
These cars are more software than hardware now. And like everything else in the software industry, every product gets released incomplete and patched later.
Although the correct solution would be a USB port somewhere to insert a patch file rather that over-the-air updates that might happen while driving.
It also seems to conflict with `right-to-repair` laws if the capability is legally required.
The near universal proliferation of owner's associations and management groups and whatnot for developments larger than ~1ac (the EPA threshold, some states/towns have lower) is something you can lay at the feet of the Clean Water Act and it's implementation and precedents over the following decades.
The exact area of the buildings, the driveways, the community park and gazebo, etc, etc, are necessary features of the site plan that makes the math that is required to meet stormwater/environmental requirements. And and some legal entity has to be responsible for that in perpetuity. Enter the HOA. This is also why HOAs often won't allow you to expand your driveway or add a non-permeable patio, it could (prob not, but still) ruin the environmental calculations they're responsible for enforcing as a condition.
I'm not nearly as familiar with car regulatory stuff but I would bet a lot of money that they're using OTA telematics to check some sort of compliance box...
Developers don't do anything that costs money, like set up an HOA, without a reason. The developers create the HOA because you need your >1ac residential development to pass stormwater permitting. While you theoretically could make each individual .25ac parcel you're putting a house on compliant it's infinitely cheaper to just ignore all that, grade everything toward the road, dig a ditch, send the contents of the ditch through your stormwater treatment features, build in a little margin to those items, show the permitting authority the numbers that prove it passes with flying colors and when some jerk says "but what if X Y Z changes" you point to the excess you built in and tell them to GFY.
Now, where it really gets evil is when you start really pinching pennies or where the rules change over the course of the process making your numbers not work. Say you've got a lot of grade, a lot of rainfall, a lot of stormwater you gotta "treat". Well, you start adding rules to the HOA. Require certain parts of the lots remains grass or planter or whatever. Disallow patios, but do allow wood decks because the municipality considers those pervious, etc, etc. Or maybe the results you've got are marginal but you throw the bureaucrats a bone by saying you'll disallow car-ports and sheds in the HOA rules to prevent people from adding impervious surface. Or maybe you're uphill of some wetlands but not close enough to be regulated by default you promise to disallow working on cars and require people pick up their pet waste and not use lawn fertilizer or some other laundry list of certain things in order to make the local town's wetlands people comfortable not raising objection and claiming jurisdiction.
And of course, however these rules and plans shake out, the HOA is responsible for implementation in perpetuity.
In carving up the 5 acres the developer purchased, the 30 houses they squeezed in left some remainder that wasn't buildable or odd shaped, so this now becomes a lame 'park' or some other space that requires maintenance.
I read all my local municipal meeting minutes, and at least around here, permitting and ordinances control all the environmental/nuisance stuff, so I can't really explain why HOAs go beyond the collective expenses into the draconian rules.
Grass is really good at filtering/absorbing/treating stormwater so you might have to force everyone to keep their lawns lawn because the way you've got the lots graded you need that little bit of extra because it lets you make your "shit parcel" where the basin will go a little smaller and squeeze one extra house into the development.
Beyond that I think what a lot of it comes down to is that local governments are invariably run by a lot of the same kinds of busybodies that HOAs attract and the way rules are written these days the "normal permitting process" exists only to let the useful idiots think that just about everything isn't discretionary. There's always some gotcha or twistable phrase so everything goes through a special permit or variance of some sort. That opens up all sorts of off the record dealing wherein the developer agrees to throw everything and the kitchen sink into the initial HOA rules and the Karens in government make sure those things are in there before deciding how to exercise their discretionary approval.
An obvious thing may be to say the software must be published or the spec released, but we've had computers in cars since the 80s. It seems like a tall task but people can and do reverse engineer entire ECU systems (See Trionic Tuning)
Another seemingly very obvious one - requiring manufacturers to publish specifications regarding ALL OBD interface options. Of course this immediately runs into trouble. Saab for example gated features of the security system to prevent key reprogramming, swapping of certain components without a dial out to the internet using specific saab software that runs on a laptop and interfaces.
Strongly. You don't own the thing you purchased if you can't legally repair it or legally obtain the knowledge to repair it. At beat you're paying an overpriced lease and granting a liability waiver.
Unless a new age of unconnected cars becomes a reality in the near future, I don't see this being a long-term solution.