[Chutzpah]

I feel bad for Tamieka, she bought a GM product and they betrayed her (as well as countless others). Clearly she takes pride in what she owns and I’m sure she’s worked hard for it. Now she has to work even harder to maintain her lifestyle. I have no idea how much greedy GM is/was selling our data for, but probably far less than the annual premium increase for Tamieka. Way to go GM.

Gm preaching “customer trust” and Lexi’s Nexis extolling how valuable driver data is to the “consumer”. Both of which are outright lies for the vast majority of consumers.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

I’m full of nonsense because I’m not paying attention to what olrocker is saying.

Soon as you mentioned reading the manual I knew I was done. You don’t even get what you’re saying yourself.

When you buy a car do you read the owners manual before you buy it?

When you buy a used car and it doesn’t have a manual should you be required to buy one before the state issues the title transfer to your name?

Dude, you’re not even on the same room as I am in this discussion. Just stop.

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Soon as you mentioned reading the manual I knew I was done. You don’t even get what you’re saying yourself.

When you buy a car do you read the owners manual before you buy it?

When you buy a used car and it doesn’t have a manual should you be required to buy one before the state issues the title transfer to your name?

Dude, you’re not even on the same room as I am in this discussion. Just stop.

You clearly have no experience or knowledge in such matters. Probably just read a news article and decided to become infuriated.

If OnStar makes you that mad and if you disagree so hard with what I said, you really should also look into what your cell phone is tracking and all the things you actually do consent to simply by using the product.

Try taking some personal responsibility and learning about the things you use. OnStar is a communications and tracking system. Did you think it makes toast?

[arpad_m]

At times it feels like Evergreen6 is Number 3's brother in disguise...

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

Perhaps you'd like to argue with me over what the owner's manual states about what the car records and shares while you drive it. It's why they advise you read the manual before operating the car for the first time. See the section about Onstar, and privacy.

OnStar changed their privacy terms back in like...2011? To say that even if you don't have an OnStar account, the car still shares data about itself and how it's driven. And vehicles have been recording crash data since 30 years ago, typically on a device in the car or in the airbag module itself. Those devices are sometimes subpoenaed in high profile collisions.

The difference between you and me is I'm aware they're collecting data, and I bought the car anyway. My cell phone, smart TV, and so much of what I do is already tracked. The car doesn't really concern me. I work with technology all day.

The piece that does concern me is the automatic re-enrollment in Smart Driver. The lawsuits need to get to the bottom of that. When I say no to something like that, I mean it forever until I change my response. I've explicitly stated my non-consent in exactly the way their program requires.

I'm not sure what you think the government is doing with this data or why they'd purchase it, pay to store it, or what they'd do with it. People are really boring. That gets a little tinfoil-hatty. The government has way more interesting data about people. Unless you're not a boring person and maybe you're worried your car will tell a secret?

The problem (well, one..) with America is this knee-jerky, make-up-the-law reaction to everything, rage-du-jour populist BS. Sick the law on things we don't like, but repeal it in the name of freedom when it's not convenient or we don't like it.

I work with technology all day, too, and I'm afraid you're reading the room wrong, this isn't about people preferring to be luddites. No, we don't want to stick the law on everything we don't like, far from it. What we want is a small, understandable, enforceable, non-lawyer-feeding set of basic laws that are rooted in absolute, God-given morality (not the other way around, treating laws themselves as elemental and self-evident).

Simple things like do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness instead of living in a place of perpetual violation because of the sheer mass of crazy legislation. And within these boundaries, everyone can do whatever they want, whether I like it or I don't. Now, is there some complexity and several edge cases, sure, there always are, but very far from the extent that would justify the insanity of today's legal environment.

So, as you partially conceded, it's not okay if a company collects and sells our data without consent. Opt out by default aka implied consent is basically cheating, because there is no way people can be expected to cope with the mass of fine print and legalese in almost every product these days that is more complex than a butcher block.

Also, today's "boring guy" is tomorrow's political opponent, and today's innocent "secret" is tomorrow's fodder in frivolous lawsuits interpreting immutable past actions against perceived present standards, leaving everyone exposed to potential legal abuse. That's at least one reason privacy is important.

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

At times it feels like Evergreen6 is Number 3's brother in disguise...



I work with technology all day, too, and I'm afraid you're reading the room wrong, this isn't about people preferring to be luddites. No, we don't want to stick the law on everything we don't like, far from it. What we want is a small, understandable, enforceable, non-lawyer-feeding set of basic laws that are rooted in absolute, God-given morality (not the other way around, treating laws themselves as elemental and self-evident).

Simple things like do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness instead of living in a place of perpetual violation because of the sheer mass of crazy legislation. And within these boundaries, everyone can do whatever they want, whether I like it or I don't. Now, is there some complexity and several edge cases, sure, there always are, but very far from the extent that would justify the insanity of today's legal environment.

So, as you partially conceded, it's not okay if a company collects and sells our data without consent. Opt out by default aka implied consent is basically cheating, because there is no way people can be expected to cope with the mass of fine print and legalese in almost every product these days that is more complex than a butcher block.

Also, today's "boring guy" is tomorrow's political opponent, and today's innocent "secret" is tomorrow's fodder in frivolous lawsuits interpreting immutable past actions against perceived present standards, leaving everyone exposed to potential legal abuse. That's at least one reason privacy is important.

I'm not really sure what's misunderstood about GM stating they collect data, they do print and display it in plain language.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

You clearly have no experience or knowledge in such matters. Probably just read a news article and decided to become infuriated.

If OnStar makes you that mad and if you disagree so hard with what I said, you really should also look into what your cell phone is tracking and all the things you actually do consent to simply by using the product.

Try taking some personal responsibility and learning about the things you use. OnStar is a communications and tracking system. Did you think it makes toast?

Yep. Number 3’s mini-me.

You still have no clue what I’m talking about.

When you decide to buy a certain car, any car it doesn’t matter who makes it, you go into the dealer with your money or whatever down payment and sign the papers to buy the car right?

[Chutzpah]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

You clearly have no experience or knowledge in such matters. Probably just read a news article and decided to become infuriated.

If OnStar makes you that mad and if you disagree so hard with what I said, you really should also look into what your cell phone is tracking and all the things you actually do consent to simply by using the product.

Try taking some personal responsibility and learning about the things you use. OnStar is a communications and tracking system. Did you think it makes toast?

Oh cmon now, while I understand some of your points… and actually agree with not buying a GM if you don’t like Onstar. The fact is, I won’t buy a GM now, even if it didn’t have Onstar. I have long memory for bad business practices. And this pisses me off.

What people are upset about is the betrayal factor. No one reads the fine print on every single contract, electronic or otherwise. You’d have to be a lawyer to understand the implications of most of them. If GM put in bold letters or explicitly called out “we’re going to sell you driving data to the highest bidder and we really don’t give 2 sheets if it affects you or your insurance premium. As a matter of fact, we wouldn’t make any money if we weren’t stuffing it to you on all sides” Then, there’d be no complaints (or at least there shouldn’t be). But, unfortunately, they sell the product and its use outwardly hidden behind the guise of how it helps make you a better driver. It’s a benefit to you.


And for goodness sakes, please stop bringing up phones. We all know what they can track. Apples and Oranges…

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Yep. Number 3’s mini-me.

You still have no clue what I’m talking about.

When you decide to buy a certain car, any car it doesn’t matter who makes it, you go into the dealer with your money or whatever down payment and sign the papers to buy the car right?

Only if you're arpad's sister, though.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

Only if you're arpad's sister, though.

Oooh wow, that was a zinger.

Come on man, throw something better at me. You’re disappointing.

[RIPws6]

Scotty Kilmer just reported this on his YT channel. Gives a tutorial on opting out via the Onstar app.

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by Chutzpah

Oh cmon now, while I understand some of your points… and actually agree with not buying a GM if you don’t like Onstar. The fact is, I won’t buy a GM now, even if it didn’t have Onstar. I have long memory for bad business practices. And this pisses me off.

What people are upset about is the betrayal factor. No one reads the fine print on every single contract, electronic or otherwise. You’d have to be a lawyer to understand the implications of most of them. If GM put in bold letters or explicitly called out “we’re going to sell you driving data to the highest bidder and we really don’t give 2 sheets if it affects you or your insurance premium. As a matter of fact, we wouldn’t make any money if we weren’t stuffing it to you on all sides” Then, there’d be no complaints (or at least there shouldn’t be). But, unfortunately, they sell the product and its use outwardly hidden behind the guise of how it helps make you a better driver. It’s a benefit to you.


And for goodness sakes, please stop bringing up phones. We all know what they can track. Apples and Oranges…

I think the issue is either consent or non-consent in the way the data was used by a third/fourth party. Is Onstar really liable if an insurer makes a connection between a VIN and some telematics data it bought from Onstar to an insurance policy on that car sold by (insert any insurance company here). Some of that will be determined by the actual data and PII that may have been included with that data for the insurers to make the connection.

So yeah, I hear you, but I'm specifically mad about the re-enrollment in Smart Driver. No means no. That is a very clear violation of consent, if the act was intentional. I do not see anywhere in the app terms of service that says OnStar has the right to re-enroll me and my vehicle in a named "opt-in" data recording program simply because they pushed out an app update.

I bring up the phone issue because it's important. It's even more egregious because the data taken from a phone can be so much more personal than braking hard or speeding in excess of 80mph. Think of the possibilities for that data to be misused or correlated and connected to other data sets like OnStar's data may have been with insurers.