OnStar

[alpha]

For those who have it, did you read the fine print?

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/21/g...after-you-uns/

Bob

[toolguy1000]

better check the link. the page won't load.

[radhak]

Link worked for me.

I am not a subscriber, and don't know of a situation when I'd be, but I am not surprised at Onstar's over-reach - I would have been surprised if any company does the right thing and refrains from using such data even when available.

FWIW, OnStar seems to have clarified things with their press release. Best one can hope for.

[cabinetman]

Link worked for me too. It's crazy. A lot like tracking cookies. If I had On Star and found out that they benefited after cancellation, maybe a lawsuit would be in order.

.

[JimD]

My opinion may be unique but I am not terribly concerned if somebody knows where I am or how fast I drive AS LONG AS they don't try to do something with that information I disagree with. I think we are fast losing the ability to "be invisible". Cell phones can be tracked. GPS's can be interrogated. Cars have recording capability that can be checked. I think we need to just concentrate on the purposes the data is used for and not worry a lot that data is being collected. That horse seems to be out of the barn.

I don't want to be told by my insurance agent that my claim is denied because I was speeding at the time of an accident. I think there is some risk of this kind of thing. I think maybe that might be OK if I was being really bad and going 50 mph over the limit or something. I think these kind of arguments are coming. I don't see how we are going to avoid it. It is possible for people to know what you were doing when something "bad" happened and there is a reasonable question about whether your conduct afected the "bad" result. Maybe the best we can hope for is that this not get into the technicality area - I am going 7 mph over the speed limit, some idiot hits my car and tries to claim they are not responsible because I am speeding. My "mis-conduct" is not a casual factor but they want to point it out to avoid responsibility. Maybe I am paranoid but I think it is going to come up.

Another way to illustrate my point is airline screening. I am not in the camp that sees it as a significant invasion of my privacy to go through a body scan. I want it to be done quickly and I hate having to take literally every scrap of anything out of my pockets but the fact that somebody scans me doesn't matter. I don't want there to be a database available to perverts or something but I kind of don't care if you want to scan me for things you think are dangerous. I also don't feel it significantly enhances safety, I just don't see it as any major invasion of my privacy for somebody to check if I am carrying prohibited things. But I don't want there to be some massive over-reaction if I forget to take my little leatherman micra out of my pocket with it's one inch knife blade. Take my "prohibited deadly weapon" if you must but don't label me a terrorist for carrying what I think all men should have in their pockets.

My big concern is not with a change in my privacy, my concern is with the decision making of the people who get more information.

Jim

[dbhost]

Nope, no OnStar for me. My Saturn is too old, and my Ford, well, it's not a Government Motors product...

[radhak]

Well, Jim, I am sure there's universal agreement with you on your opinion. ie, the "if they don't misuse it" part. But once such data is captured, then it follows like night-follows-day that the data will be misused, or abused, or used without permission. That's why people with such experience are fighting to stop it at the first point - capture itself.

[Russianwolf]

Nope, no OnStar for me. My Saturn is too old, and my Ford, well, it's not a Government Motors product...

heard of Ford Sync?

Hyundai has a version out now too.

OnStar can now be added to any car.

Any car with GPS in it can be used to collect data on your driving habits. The GPS has to talk to the satellites at some point in order to work.

[atgcpaul]

Nope, no OnStar for me. My Saturn is too old, and my Ford, well, it's not a Government Motors product...

They're selling OnStar as an aftermarket option now. It replaces your
rearview

[cabinetman]

Tracking and help can be a lifesaver in some situations. Here is a good example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0nRvqfiqZI

.

[leehljp]

My opinion may be unique but I am not terribly concerned if somebody knows where I am or how fast I drive AS LONG AS they don't try to do something with that information I disagree with. I think we are fast losing the ability to "be invisible". Cell phones can be tracked. GPS's can be interrogated.

My big concern is not with a change in my privacy, my concern is with the decision making of the people who get more information.

Jim

I know this it taking it slight OT for this specific topic,but it is related to your concern. Last week, or maybe two weeks ago, Google said that in "searches through Google" they consider the one doing the search as the "product", not as their "customer". What is going to happen when insurance companies (auto, medical and other) see what kind of data they can "buy" from Google on us, the product. I don't mind most of it, but there is a line that is about to be crossed when it they start selling privacy information on medical searches.

Their whole point in their android OS is data collection to sell, not the phones themselves. That is their whole basis of existence. We have become their "product".

[dbhost]

heard of Ford Sync?

Hyundai has a version out now too.

OnStar can now be added to any car.

Any car with GPS in it can be used to collect data on your driving habits. The GPS has to talk to the satellites at some point in order to work.

Yep, heard of Sync. Don't have it for a GOOD reason... And yeah, I have seen the "Add In OnStar" recently... I guess if you have to have it. For what it's worth, if you have an OBD II vehicle, which is pretty much everything built since about 1999, there is a recording feature of OBD II that is similar to a black box on an airplane. And yes, law enforcement can tap into that data as well...

My issue isn't that law enforcement shouldn't have access to information on what a person or vehicle is doing, but rather, more along the lines of the fifth ammendment issue. I can not go much further without this going political, so I would rather drop this train of thought at this time...

[JimD]

If you have bluetooth for your phone, the only "new thing" that interests me will hopefully not be necessary but the ability for the car to call for help in the event of a wreck seems like a desirable thing. But it also seems like something a "smart phone" could also do this. It would need to sense the G-force to make the decision. Anybody know of an "app" like this?

Jim

[woodturner]

But once such data is captured, then it follows like night-follows-day that the data will be misused, or abused, or used without permission.

If the data exists, it's likely that production of that data can be compelled.

For example, newer cars have essentially a "black box". Suppose there is an auto accident and someone is seriously injured. The victim's attorneys could compel release of the "black box" or OnStar info, to allow them to determine if someone was speeding, for example. If the person who hit them was speeding - even a mile over the limit - the attorney could argue violation of several other laws. For example, many states have higher penalties for injuries inflicted in the commission of a crime (e.g. speeding).

It appears the issue is more the existence of the data rather than its availability, which can be compelled.

[gerti]

Any car with GPS in it can be used to collect data on your driving habits. The GPS has to talk to the satellites at some point in order to work.

I don't think that is true. The GPS listens to the signals from the satellites, but doesn't send anything back.