___
https://www.nissanusa.com/privacy.html
Sensitive personal information, including driver’s license number, national or state identification number, citizenship status, immigration status, race, national origin, religious or philosophical beliefs, sexual orientation, sexual activity, precise geolocation, health diagnosis data, and genetic information.
Please make this reach the front page because it’s beyond ridiculous
If you don’t mind, please also highlight
health diagnosis data
genetic information
Because omfg, think about those for a second, and how any data that leaves your control is subject to eventual collection by law enforcement, legal or not, and anyone else willing to pay for it (or steal it):
For example, some bonehead rears your vehicle one day, but your health diagnosis data says you have a heart condition, or maybe just high blood pressure. These conditions can involve occasional lightheadedness, though you know yours is well controlled. You don’t even think about it anymore because you take care of yourself and all your regular tests are good. But suddenly, you’re in this minor accident, not even your fault, and it’s no longer a simple rearending because some asshole has brought your health history into it so that YOU and not he will be on the hook for monetary damages.
(Triple if the bozo who hit you is some lame ass drunk rural county sheriff or elected official.)
And “genetic information” is code for DNA. How they would collect your DNA from your car I don’t know, but do you REALLY want your genetic information associated with your vehicle and outside the confines of GINA* for the convenience of data sellers? I know I don’t. (GINA is also the law that binds companies like 23andMe from selling your genetic data.) But the whole point of trying to legislate personal control over your own genetic information is because of all the dystopian scenarios that can easily evolve from others having it without your consent.
Yet now your car wants it too? Question this. Letting anyone have it by such means does a complete end run around any law meant to keep your personal genetic information private, and guts any rights you may have to your own privacy under the law, because you signed it away. Imagine the billions insurance companies could make, both health and auto, by refusing to pay for this or that because genetically it was a “pre-existing condition” or a “contributing factor” to you getting rearended by a drunk.
I’ve never been so thrilled to drive an ancient beater in my life.
*Note: GINA is weak already, but legislators are trying to weaken it further still: in 2018 a proposed change meant that “Employers would have been able to demand workers’ genetic test results if the bill were to have been enacted.”
I don’t know where you live, but it already illegal to hide any health data from road authorities in many countries like UK. If you get a lightheadedness from a know diagnosis and get into a crash, you will not only be prosecuted for the crash itself, but also for fraud that you’re unfit to drive. Double criminal sentence, enjoy!
To be fair the UK is farther along the dystopian nightmare surveillance state path than the US.
At the very least… cant the US implement one of the basic rules from GDPR?
In simple terms, what data can companies keep?
Data need to have: OK
Data nice to have: Not OK
I’d much rather they implement the right to deletion. I know they will get their hands on a ton of data, regardless of how we write the clause. But at least let me delete that data when I want it gone.
How do they even capture this stuff? Are you expected to write some essays before you can buy the car?
Per the article…
They can collect personal information from how you interact with your car, the connected services you use in your car, the car’s app (which provides a gateway to information on your phone), and can gather even more information about you from third party sources like Sirius XM or Google Maps.
In addition, my car uses text-to-speech to read texts to me and I can even reply to them with speech-to-text. Any data that passes from your phone through your car could easily be harvested. You should also assume that any data on your phone can be harvested by the car’s app if you install it.
How does it know the information is medical or genetic, if it captures text messages?
I have no facts, but I assume via cameras which might record whatever you’re doing in the car.
I got an email from OnStar the other day saying it contacted my bank and updated my card info because I had gotten an old card and hadn’t updated the info, I don’t pay for OnStar but the dealership MAKES you set it up even if you don’t use it.
How the fuck are they allowed to contact my bank and get information like that? Weirded my TF out to say the least.
They did that to me. I specifically gave them a card I knew was going to expire before the trial period was over and they got the new information anyway.
If I remember correctly, it’s a “feature” the credit card companies have so your subscriptions don’t lapse.
This is more based on authorization vs CC details. It’s much safer for a company than holding onto credit card numbers. Creating a subscriptions generates an authorization code which is good for the account, not just a specific card number. Revoking that authorization is a separate call to the bank rather than just having a credit card replaced.
That authorization shouldn’t be indefinite either though. After three years of no activity and a card expiring, OnStar was still able to make a charge to renew that trial subscription.
And looking around the web, there are a few stories from that 2016 time frame to indicate that it was a new-ish, or at least not well known, practice at the time.
Yeah and it’s very useful, looks like this place is just as bad with the kids as that other place.
If I want to keep a subscription going I’ll give them the new CC information myself. Like a responsible adult. Hard disagree on the usefullness.
Not sure what point you’re even trying to make about children and Reddit.
Credit cards have actually been doing that for years. It’s a feature for recurring payments to reduce the amount of trouble users had when their CC number was compromised or it expired.
Yeah, it sucks too. A couple years ago I was trying to get out of a Sirius Satellite subscription I had opted into during the height of the rony 'rona.
Instead of sitting on the phone with CSRs for hours on end while they pass me around and offer me incentives to stay, I thought I’d be smart and report that my credit card was lost. (At the time you couldn’t disenroll online, that changed I happily found out a few months ago)
Joke was on me though. Sirius updated my new card info, and I was without a credit card for ~8 days.
I’m not sure when you purchased your vehicle, but when I purchased my vehicle Dec 2022 I had to do that OnStar setup crap as well and just denied giving them any information. They said I wouldn’t be able to get this or that but I didn’t care so they didn’t get that information. It took about 15 minutes with the person on the other side being a bit confused but just gave up when I said it the like 5th time.
Either way they don’t need that information at any time unless you want their free trials that are almost never worth it.
Weirded my TF out to say the least.
Honestly that shouldn’t weird you out too much, that’s just a convenience feature. And yeah, I know, some people put quotes around the word convenience. But others actually just use the word as is, a convenience.
What should freak the hell out of you is when you and your significant other are in the car talking about buying a new pair of tennis shoes, and then that evening when you’re sitting at home YouTube shows you a commercial for tennis shoes, when you’ve never seen any ads for tennis shoes on YouTube before.
The emergency features are free, they want you to pay for in-car wifi. You also cannot cancel online and have to cancel with a rep over the phone. The service itself is fine, but dealerships requiring you to sign up “even if you aren’t going to use it” isn’t .
Oh really?
One of the most expensive plans comes from OnStar, which charges $29.99 a month or $299.90 a year for its Safety & Security Plan after a free trial period. It’s the least expensive OnStar plan that includes automatic crash notification, which it calls Automatic Crash Response. OnStar says these subscription fees are necessary to pay for the resources used to operate the feature.
“Certain features and services, including Automatic Crash Response, require ongoing updates, network connectivity, staffed call centers, among other recurring costs to operate,” an OnStar spokesperson, Rita Kass-Shamoun, told CR.
Lucky for me I can’t afford a new car anyway. I’ll just keep driving my unconnected car.
No kidding, it’s ridiculous to think they expect us to fork over $25k for cars that will invade our privacy. I have a 23 year old car I’ll drive till it’s dead before that ever happens.
Same here. Its a bit shabby and heavy on gas but I can fix most things on it myself… but at least I dont have this issue
I will drive my 2013 Honda Fit until the wheels fall off. I love it and with a $20 Bluetooth adapter, it has all the amenities I could need. I think it’s insane that people are driving around with a tablet that controls their heat and radio.
Honda Fits are amazing little cars. I only would want them to be able to be modernized to have some of the advanced safety features like Lane keeping assist, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking like in the newer cars, but would require a redesign and additional sensors added to the windshield area.
I’m able to fit a double sided mattress box spring in it which is insane for a subcompact car. It’s a mini minivan.
I knew someone with a newer model (2019 I think?) Honda Fit with the emergency braking feature. It did absolutely nothing to prevent them from running into the back end of a pickup truck that swung out in front of them and slammed on the brakes. Literally it didn’t engage at all.
Also, the interior room on the Fit is terrible post-2013 due to some design changes. My 2010 Fit was a TARDIS - a 6’, 400lb guy could ride (or drive) it comfortably. That same guy riding in the 2019 model was cramped as a passenger. We didn’t try asking him to drive, after seeing how he fit as a passenger.
I did use Onstar, but when my 2013 Volt went offline because of the 3g network sunset, I lost that functionality. Would have loved the ability to upgrade the cellular module in my car so I could have the security and safety features back, but one silver lining is disconnecting :) Of course, GM was going to quietly continue charging me for the same service after the connection died, but I canceled.
Tesla is only the second product we have ever reviewed to receive all of our privacy “dings.” (The first was an AI chatbot we reviewed earlier this year.) What set them apart was earning the “untrustworthy AI” ding. The brand’s AI-powered autopilot was reportedly involved in 17 deaths and 736 crashes and is currently the subject of multiple government investigations.
How utterly unsurprising. Also,
"Consent” is an illusion
Many people have lifestyles that require driving. So unlike a smart faucet or voice assistant, you don’t have the same freedom to opt out of the whole thing and not drive a car.
This is the kicker, many people need cars for unrelated reasons and the fact that ALL car brands abuse our data means there is no alternative.
The first point is beyond stupid IMO when the bar is set at human. I’ve seen no reliable or consistent data that Teslas shitty autopilot is actually worse than a human. I’ve seen wild swings both ways.
The second point is, on point so to speak, and 100% should be addressed.
Thank you for that link and Thank you to Mozilla for doing those tests. I always suspected something like this but it is good to have it tested and in writing.
My only gripe with the article is this:
All of the car brands on this list except for Tesla, Renault, and Dacia signed on to a list of Consumer Protection Principles from the US automotive industry group ALLIANCE FOR AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, INC.
Renault and Dacia aren’t available in the US, so there is really no need for them to sign those principles. Which makes Tesla the only one where this is relevant.
Are there really 0 Renaults in the US? Or I guess maybe just a few imported ones, but like they aren’t officially sold there?
Are any other French brands available? I know at least the Germans are.
I guess French cars are too “sensible” for the US market?
The only French automaker in the US is Bugatti, and it’s questionable how French they are.
I’m hoping the Stellantis merger leads to more French cars here. Peugeot, Renault, Alpine, Citroen, and DS all have cars I’d be interested in.
I don’t know if there are zero Renault in the US but Mozilla themselves say that Renault aren’t sold in the US:
While Renault cars haven’t been sold in the US since 1992, their cars are big in Europe, South and Central America.
So it is kind of strange to hold it against them. On the other hand that doesn’t seem to be too important because nobody cares about what they signed or not.
