Instead, US senators will rail about the security risk of Chinese vehicles while refusing to provide competitive alternatives.

What do Chinese vehicles have to do with this, or the ability of US Senators to "provide" alternatives? Sorry wasn't aware that the Ford family has someone in the US Senate.

If the US Senate can't effectively set industrial policy, then they don't deserve to call themselves oligarchs.

They can and do though, and they are.

https://www.peters.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senato...

Okay fair enough, I didn't realize that that's what you meant. I agree, there should be a more coherent industrial policy that's nested with some specific national objectives. I too am very concerned about the lack of industrial capacity in this country. Feels like the lead up to WWI, in many ways.

No device should be allowed to be sold without the ability to function without telemetry or sale of data to third parties. And it should be opt in, as part of configuring the thing the first time. With a one click opt out of all.

Default Opted Out

Opt In should NOT be required to enable features.

Features should not be rented, and should be delivered as purchased with the car. Shipped but disabled features that take up additional vehicle weight (relative to lacking the feature) should not be allowed. (This phrasing is precise, to allow for silicon and software enhancements which are not a material change to vehicle manufacturing / design.)

Setup processes should always empower the user. If there are multiple choices or paths a default may be indicated, but alternatives MUST NOT be in other locations, and MUST be displayed with equal prominence in a logically adjacent section of the dialog.

Example from a website: 'Paperless' should not be force enabled by default; the ability to have paper or paperless billing should be radio boxes next to each other. Additional benefits (E.G. higher account interest rates) should not be tied to either selection.

Although I'm generally pro coming down hard on dark patterns, I'm uncomfortable with that last example. To me, it's just differentiation. You can have the bare-bones service (digital only) with a higher interest rate, or the deluxe service (paper statements, in-country phone support, etc) with a lower interest rate. That doesn't seem inherently bad to me, it seems like a company offering two different products.

Devils advocate here

If this made it more expensive, because having cars that are physically different is harder, would you prefer that?

Why can't I simply not care that I don't get something I've not paid for and there's a doodad in the car that's capable of it?

If the alternative is having to buy that feature or pay more for a car that doesn't have it, that sounds like a bad outcome.

It's a question of ownership. If I see fit to modify something I own, as has always been done, why am I not free to utilise a particular piece of my purchase?

If I'm not free to do so - then do I actually still own my own product? Or is it now a lease?

Why should the era of rebuilding your car simply end? There are already safety regs you need to comply with. The average hotrod modifies a considerable proportion of the car. Reusing the majority of the structure in ways the manufacturer did not intend.

I think you're talking about something related but not discussed here, which would be making car modifications illegal. Let's say BMW make heated seats an optional extra, which it already is. What if they also install them in every car because it's cheaper to have one build, and subsequently are able to sell them more competitively - none of that would require making it illegal for you to get the seats working yourself.

Not illegal, in so far as I don't believe it's been tested in court - but it is an explicit breach of the giant terms and conditions contract that they require you to sign, when purchasing the vehicle. There is an attempt to prevent you from doing so.

Expand this to any product. I should be able to use ANY product fully, without maintaining some kind of communication channel to and/or from the product's manufacturer. When I buy a hammer from Home Depot, I take it home and hammer with it. The manufacturer doesn't know I have it, doesn't know how many nails per month I hammer with it, how many swings it takes on average for me to drive in a nail, how often I use the claw side. They don't know if I use it for other purposes besides hammering nails. They don't know if I lend it to my neighbor. I can sell it to someone else without the manufacturer's permission.

Somehow hammer manufacturers can live with this. Why can't automakers, tech device manufacturers, and software developers live with this?

Because they make products that are harder to replace with a better alternative. (they have a moat/lock-in).

Anyone that has built a moat/lock-in will, sooner or later, screw you over.

Hammer manufacturers would too, if they could. But hammers are simple devices.

Just wait....

"Your hammer has reached its monthly nail limit. Please upgrade to the pro plan to unlock an additional 60 nails"

I'm having a really fun time imagining how a hammer would physically prevent you from hammering a nail based on a subscription.

Handle has retractable spikes (digitally retractable mincers, perhaps?) to promote compliance.

They wouldn't. Instead, they'd try to keep charging you automatically for out-of-plan extra nailing, and if you denied them the ability to charge your CC, they'll put your debt to collections by the end of the month.

Thank you for summarizing my feeling so succinctly.

The simplicity makes me think that law-makers can understand it.

My solution: Buy an old car...

modern cars are unfortunately much safer

I for one am grateful for that fact ;)

To a large extent this depends on the car and depends what you mean by "old". Modern cars vs. 1970s cars? The older cars are completely hopeless. Modern cars vs. 15 year old cars? The older cars may have had things like ABS and side airbags as options rather than as standard, but you can find one that has them that doesn't have cellular telemetry.

Cars from 2010 with optional ABS? Maybe domestic third world sub-$10k tuna cans?

But the larger point is definitely true.

Apparently the 2010 Chevy Cobalt was available without ABS. Definitely in the minority even 15 years ago though.

Nice find!

Although, it seems to have been only available/produced in Brazil, Columbia, Russia, Uzbekistan, which I'd argue is in line with my original sentiment.

That was the second generation which started in the 2011 model year. The first gen Cobalt was made and sold in the US into 2010 (the last year the first gen was made anywhere). That was also the last full year a car without ABS could be made in the US, since 2011 is when it became required by law.

Hmm yeah but anything over 15 years isn't really viable as a daily driver anyway. Then you're getting to the point where you start having serious issues every year at the mandatory mechanical check. Then you're getting into old-timer drive once on a sunny day territory.

I always bought medium sized cars at 10 years when they're already only a grand or two. The smallest ones are made so cheaply that they're already too tired at this age and strangely enough they're more expensive due to the lower road tax. So more people want them.

And then I used to drive them till the maintenance becomes too expensive, for 5 or 6 years or so. And just scrap them then.

I guess if I still owned a car I could still do this for a good while without having to get spyware. But not too long.

>Then you're getting to the point where you start having serious issues every year at the mandatory mechanical check

More like every couple months on the road, from my experience in having driven one. Just this year here are couple of things that have occurred:

>glowplugs burnt out

>air-mass sensor failure

>faulty abs-sensor

>fuel nozzle malfunction

>brake failure

>engine back support failure

>short circuit after worn-out manufacturer divider causing massive sparking, heating and a drained battery

Some additional fixes identified recently not yet fixed:

>faulty brake booster

>moisture buildup(?)in door mechanisms leading to it sometimes not opening from inside

>rust buildup in some parts, needs replacing before reaching important bits

>transient misfire/spray/clog on acceleration leading to computer shutting off engine power

Yeah at that point I'd just go for another 10 year old car.

My last car was a Volvo S40, had really nice leather interior, nearly full option and cost me €2000.

I only had a few brake pads an a broken trunk cable to deal with (super common issue on this model), the latter I did myself for €40 in parts. Ran great for years. But yeah there's an element of luck also.

My previous car was an Octavia, that had more issues. Electric window broke and I replaced it all myself. But it was a pretty nasty job. Eventually the gearbox started whining and when I brought it to the shop it basically blew up. But it had served me 5 years at that point.

What are you guys driving?

20+ years old Volkswagen as a long range vehicle and daily driver. Yearly (preventative) maintenance: $300-400.

I think there have been considerable improvements in basic things like frame materials & airbag placement in the last 15 years. Certainly in the last 20.

IIRC, there is for Europe a directive which requires 60/65% (?) of the force within a crash must be absorbed by the frame/chassis. It came into action around 2015, IIRC.

That's when it became mandatory on all vehicles, not when the first vehicle to satisfy the standard became available on the market.

As another example, side impact airbags have been mandatory in the US since 2013, but the Volvo 850 had them in 1995 and they were present on something like half of new cars a decade before they were mandatory and >97% of new cars three years before the mandate.

There are “modern” cars (~5-10 years old) that fit most of the modern safety standards and are effectively not transmitting things due to 3G no longer being much of a thing, coupled with automakers being glacially slow at replacing certain electronic components.

definitely

And in 10 years time what’s your solution?

Well my 10 year old car had 3G, which is now defunct.

I'd hope in 10 years 4G and maybe be 5G would also be defunct with their networks turned off.

I believe my new car has a fuse you can pull to disable the remote telemetry. However, it disables some useful features, like being able to set valet mode from the Toyota app (useful because some dealer service departments will take cars joy riding) and track the car usage. it also tracks tire pressures. sure the tire pressure can easily be checked manually with my Slime gauge but having it on the phone is handy.

I've read disabled cellular modem on toyota prius also disables the microphone for bluetooth phone calls / handsfree commands. funny that.

I pulled the DCM fuse on my GR Corolla. I can confirm that it disabled the microphone. One of these days I might get around to pulling the car apart and popping in a resistor in place of the antenna.

heh I have the same car. was thinking of doing the same.. but like mentioned earlier I want that valet setting feature and stuff. tough choice.

I'll never trust some rando working at a valet to treat my GRC right. I've seen too many dashcam horror videos of even people working at dealerships failing at manual and safe rev temps.

oh i’m not saying i’d use valet mode for literal valets.. but even when the car is at a shop for work.

Beyond any reasonable doubt any verbal conversation you have in your Toyota is being parsed by one or more LLMs. Anyone who believes otherwise is either room temp IQ or severely autistic.

  https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/toyota/

Both of those features were available on cars before cellular connectivity.

and?

And that means Toyota is choosing to link those features to cellular connectivity.

You can't see the tire pressure on the dash?

yeah, you can. but I work from home and don't drive every day. sometimes I want to make sure I don't have a slow leak or something.

Why would turning on the heating require cell service? If you’re out of key fob range do you really need to pre-heat the car?

The only possible use of cell service is for infotainment and even that’s questionable in a world of ubiquitous cell phones.

I like the 'call emergency services on airbag deployment' too, on the fence about removing it, I guess if I had an apple watch that could do the same thing but then I'm just moving the surveillance from one ecosystem to another

Schedule heating etc through their app

The car can't keep time? How is the dashboard clock always right?

That's two different components, so they're made by two separate cottage industries in two different states to make sure you have leverage on more politicians. Connecting the two would increase the BOM by $0.1, which means a $1000 increase in retail price, and customers don't want to pay that, so clearly everything is the customers' fault.

(/s)

All the clocks in my BMW were synchronized.

It can keep time, but how can you schedule remotely?

>If you’re out of key fob range do you really need to pre-heat the car?

Yeah, that can save 15 minutes of scraping the windows for snow and ice in the morning and afternoon.

Sure that takes a lot of time but why would the car be out of fob range? If you care about 15 minutes of scraping snow why is the car parked out of fob range and also still in cell service somehow?

I live in an apartment building on the side that faces the woods. I obviously have to park on the other side, and my fob doesn't reach. I don't care about remote start anyways, but there are absolutely situations where fobs can't reach but cell service can.

People hating having to scrape their car in the morning doesn't help them getting a parking spot closer to their work place or their home.

If they had a garage next to their house to park their car they wouldn't need either. However there are lots of situations where the car isn't close yet it need pre heating. For me this is driving the car to and from work in the winter, and certain one off situations (going home from the hospital, picking up the car after avriving at the train station).

I do this all the time. Don't even have a fob to begin with but it's very convenient when you're in a shopping mall and are going to make your way back to the car, for example.

Also handy to find your car if you manage forget where you parked for some reason. Or to set a destination for GPS navigation.

Putting your PIN on the back of your credit card is the most convenient thing. It is always there when you need it, no need to remember!

Marginal knicknacks vs. serious risks kind of thing here.

The risks are not even comparable, IMO. I would rather take these conveniences because I don't think anyone would care to use that information against me if it was leaked. But many people would gladly use a credit card with PIN written on it.

An analogy does not mean it is around the level. ;D

It wasn't even the point of analogy dear. Help: the benefit/risk ratio is the point.

What you think about using information is different to what criminals think about using the information of anyone using the product. Not you is the point here, wrong orientation again. Everyone have the superfluous knicknacks, and everyone had their data leaked.

Maybe if you think you will not loose your credit card, you are much more organized for that or whatever superpower makes it so, or there will be no-one to take significant ammount from it, then please, write your PIN on the back. For you precious convenience. Better yet, have everyone's PIN written on it!! : /

Sorry for the bitter sarcasm, but I hate so much the self centered reasoning in something that is for everyone, you kind of people ruin things for all of us by allowing, even asking for fiddle-faddle tacky things, that expose all the rest to risks and dangers!

In many (all?) cars with cellular modems you can remove the SIM card to have this effect.

I would love a wiki of vehicles for simply 'how to rip out the SIM card'

I thought I saw instructions somewhere for my 2020 prius but can't find it now. a few reddit threads asking about it, I like the suggestion that even if its eSim or somehow embedded in the cellular modem, "Disconnect the antenna! / shunt the telecommunication modems antenna with a resistor shunt. It will trick the radio into thinking the antennas still connected but won't allow any data to be going out they just won't get signal"

https://www.reddit.com/r/Toyota/comments/1be9zuc/wheres_the_...

In Europe, this is mandated by law.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECall

Just enable it by default and put a warning in big red letters that disabling the cellular modem will also disable the ECall system, which may mean you might not get the emergency assistance you need and therefore die.

That shouldn't have to be linked. You should be able to turn off manufacturer telemetry while keeping ecall. Ecall doesn't even talk to the manufacturer. It just calls the emergency services directly.

Of course when the modem is on you can't be sure that it's not doing that but that's what we have laws for.

Yes and no. Ecall is but telemetry is not. And ecall only makes a call in case of a crash.

The GSM SIM cards, by design, can be remotely updated to do whatever the service provider wants (or asked "nicely", or paid to do).

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/markets/digital-identity-and-...

I know, and they can be hacked too through sms messages.

But the sim card doesn't have access to the car telemetry. Probably even the whole baseband module doesn't. It just gets that data to transmit when an accident happens.

The worst you could do by hacking the SIM is to make the modem send nearby cell data somewhere. Which is serious enough because the rough location can be derived from it. But it's a far cry from what these manufacturers collect.

Or if the service provider is served a warrant, or if they're hacked.

Ecall could/should use completely separate communications infrastructure than the entertainment/vehicle connectivity functionality.

That's difficult because both will need to use the cell network.

But I guess you mean on the car side like two modems? Yeah that would be nice, or at least to mandate the option to turn all manufacturer telemetry completely off. The EU never bothered to do this for computers and phones either though.

In Spain they soon will require V-16 [0] too. Originally it was just a light but then it was improved to use mobile networks to send an emergency call to authorities. And proving, that technically, it is possible to have something like ECall but without deep integration into the car.

No need of having always on connection to the network, only enable on emergencies. No remote hacking of SIM/base band possible at random times. Mechanic or user can check battery periodically, replace if low, just like wiper fluid. Car could even cut all electric systems after deploying the integrated V-16 system.

Car manufacturers deciding to make their ECall implementations complex and privacy invading was their choice.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V16_warning_beacon_lights

This uses the LTE-M network, which is pretty cool. It doesn't do anything until you turn it on.

AFAIK ECall uses a voice call with data encoded on the audio channel. This is not what telemetry does, it should be doable to leave the voice channel and disable any data connections. (But it's probably very hard to check for someone who has no background in emebedded systems). Plus, in theory an emergency call can be done without even using a SIM card, right (if network allows)?

It's pretty much industry standard for all consumer products to deliver metrics back to home base. Honestly there are many good reasons to do so and it does result in finding real problems and solving them. While I understand the argument that we did fine in these products for decades without them, the complexity of the products was also a lot less back then. Finding issues via metrics from the production fleet is an incredible tool and anyone who's deployed software to a server probably understands this.

I'd rather focus on standardizing a transparent and privacy safe way to gather these metrics. Consumers would know what metrics are collected and there would be guarantees that privacy is kept. There are ways to accomplish this today.

Providing a way to disable metrics is never going to be sufficient for anyone other than a power user.

Defending this because "it's industry standard" is no better than justifying any wrong practice because "it's always been done this way".

My point is that it's done this way for a reason beyond the nefarious ones that people in hn always seem to assume. Engineers want this data because it helps them do their job, bit because some product person wants to use it to sell it or use it to train an ML model. There is certainly extraneous data collected because the incremental cost of doing so once you've established the pipeline is small and eventually someone does make a bad decision, but that's where we should focus our energy. Otherwise you're just making a lot of folks jobs harder because their software runs doesn't run in the cloud. An unintended consequence of this might be to push even more software into the cloud which would otherwise run on client side.

> I'd rather focus on standardizing a transparent and privacy safe way to gather these metrics. Consumers would know what metrics are collected and there would be guarantees that privacy is kept.

I'd rather see laws to have it disabled by default. People who don't mind can then opt-in again.

If we do that the relative cost of software will increase and reliability will overall decrease. This doesn't sound like a great outcome for end users who will end up dealing with both of these things.

> Honestly there are many good reasons to do so and it does result in finding real problems and solving them.

Honest question, what is a good reason to do this?

My Logitech software sends telemetry to Logitech.

My VW apparantly sends my GPS coordinates.

How is this useful for improving their hardware?

I'm not sure I can defend all choices various vendors make, but there are plenty of signals that are helpful. Precise gps coordinates seem unnecessary, but some sort of region based information can help correlate whether there is a particular problem that might happen at far higher rates in hilly terrain or specific humidity levels. Users also often use products in a way that doesn't line up with how the product owner thinke it should be used. Metrics don't replace interviewing people but it might help you craft the right questions. In the case of a Logitech mouse, it might be useful to understand if people are actually using those extra features you've added or maybe it's worth removing in a future version.

The most obvious metric that everyone wants to know is failure or crash rates. After a software update it's always good to know if those rates went up. Those errors may be recoverable, but it's good to try and understand them to improve reliability. Maybe pairing android auto with specific phone models is more problematic, or maybe trying to pair Bluetooth is particularly bad under specific conditions like high thermals in warmer climates. It's pretty difficult to interop testing with all possible parties in all conditions.

> some sort of region based information can help correlate whether there is a particular problem that might happen at far higher rates in hilly terrain or specific humidity levels.

You know what will help in those situations ? Testing.

It is expensive, i know. Why not skip it and just analyse the KPIs from the telemetry. /s

Testing is not really an economically viable option in all cases. Ecosystems are simply to diverse and products are so complex that covering every case is not really possible. There is likely no software you use today short of projects like sqlite which don't leverage user reported bugs or telemetry to improve the software.

> Honestly there are many good reasons to do so and it does result in finding real problems and solving them.

Tell that to Microsoft. Although their products have telemetry, they become shittier every day.

> We need a way to disable vehicle telemetry

It should have a standard UI for doing so, but if you are technically inclined it is usually trivial to do- pulling a fuse, or changing a setting over the OBD port.

However, you will lose useful features like advanced charging controls, and starting the HVAC remotely on EVs.