Hacker News Reader

Comment by greyface- | Hacker News Reader

It'll go in the car's event log and be available for inspection by insurance companies, courts, police, dealerships, etc. Repeat offenders might receive a court order mandating it be switched from 'passive' into 'active' mode, similar to ignition interlock devices today.

View on HN

I absolutely refuse insurance company monitoring devices. There is no way in hell I would buy a vehicle with one built in.

Realistically how would you ever know, if there's simply an agreement that you let the car collect "some telemetry" and simultaneously allow the manufacturer to share that data with "their partners?" If you say it's because you read agreements like that before buying a car, I just don't believe you. Look at all the things Toyota and Subaru have done in this arena over the last few years.

Unless there is legislation to prevent it we will reach a point where at the very least private insurance companies will have access to this data, provided they are willing to buy it. In an even worse scenario we'll have courts and law enforcement with access to this as well.

This is why my next car is hopefully going to be my last one. I have my eyes on an ND Miata. Tried researching the privacy aspect and found one reddit comment from 69 days ago saying the infotainment system is old enough to not do this crap. Does anyone have more info on that?

This sounds atrocious, I hope it never catches on and that people strongly resist this.

Aside from it's a new restriction upon you, why is this atrocious?

I can see a safety-related argument that you may need to briefly accelerate to get out of a sticky situation. I cannnot see a safety-related argument wihch says BuyMyBitcoins needs to be allowed to drive 10mph or 20mph above the posted limit for an extended duration of time.

I expect ISA in active/enforcing mode is coming, and it's just a question of whether new cars have it in 5 years or in 30 years.

Because the people who support this are also the ones who hate drivers and do crazy things like impose 20mph (30km/h) speed limits in cities on the main roads. The point is to degrade the quality of life and force everyone into public transport slice by slice. But the HN crowd is disproportionately made up of those who think this way.

If speed limits were set to the natural safe speed the road was designed for people would be far less cynical about these things.

Maybe the road would be safer (or just as safe but more efficient) with a posted limit 20mph above what it is. But the pearl-clutching mothers of the world can't imagine a scenario where you can drive 50mph on a suburban street without killing half a dozen people so we'll never know.

Quite frankly it’s even more tracking under the guise of public safety. So now I’ll have some sort of driver permanent record that needs to be hooked in to some system that needs to know where I am so it can say whether or not I’m speeding. Not only can I not turn this off, it’s a trove of data that can incriminate me in other unrelated ways. That data can be monetized as well. In this premise the insurance agency is already looking, so why can’t other data brokers?

Here’s where I think you’ll disagree with me the most. Speeding is bad but it doesn’t warrant having some big brother system to keep track of everytime someone has ever gone 10-20 over. People die because of speeders, yes, but not enough to warrant this kind of surveillance.

We still have other ways of enforcing speed limits and enhancing public safety on the roads.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com