8 ms·

What? > We know our smartphones, Nests and Alexas collect data, and we’ve come to accept an implicit contract: We trade personal information for convenience. W

by bhauer 7y ago

What? > We know our smartphones, Nests and Alexas collect data, and we’ve come to accept an implicit contract: We trade personal information for convenience. With cars, we have no such expectation ... What carmakers are doing with the collected data isn’t clear. At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. To me, this NY Times article is an argument that smartphones and smart agents should exfiltrate less data than they do. It's the purported end-user value of smartphone and smart agent data collection that I find less credible. Yes, they should collect data, but it's quite unclear why so much of the data needs to be hoarded and used by cloud motherships. That data can be stored and worked with on-device; the premise that on-device computation is too limited is just flimsy. Frankly the value of smart agents as a whole is a bit murky, especially when lined up against full self-driving cars.

danso 7y ago
The data collected by phones are used to train systems like web/voice search, voice translation, and routing algorithms, all which ostensibly (or, at least, purportedly) benefit billions of end users on a daily basis. I don’t see how you can say Tesla’s case is so obviously a more justified example. In any case, this article is about all cars — Tesla vehicles are still a sliver of the user base.
- wool_gather 7y ago
  Maybe (some of) the information collected by the OS vendor is used for these purposes. The majority of it, the stuff sent by third-party SDKs back to that third party, is just to enable customer profiling or "analytics".
  - danso 7y ago
    Sorry, what’s this straw man argument that you’ve attributed to me? That I’ve asserted every piece of data collected by Android goes toward a public good?
- JamesBarney 7y ago
  I think it's more valuable for two reasons. One the end result is more valuables, I'd trade all of those services for self-driving cars. And second I think other types of data are easier to get than driving data.
  - danso 7y ago
    We are not given any evidence or elaboration on how Tesla (or any other company) is using that data toward self-driving, nevermind that the data will be exclusively used for just that and not a myriad of other self-serving purposes.
Animats 7y ago
At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. Musk has claimed that. Whether it's doing any good remains to be seen. Large amounts of data from normal driving are probably good for training lane keeping, but not that useful for handling emergency situations. Teslas are still running into crossing semitrailers after three years of "data collection". Teslas upload about a gigabyte a month.[1] Here's some trip logging data, from 2017.[2] Trips are logged in straightforward XML. Other stuff, not clear. [1] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-autopilot-fleet-data-sharing-policy/e83o48ifz73z/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-autopilot-fleet-data-sharing... [2] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ap2-back-to-using-one-camera-on-2017-32-6-ca28227.96989/#post-2279310 https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ap2-back-to-using-on...
- DuskStar 7y ago
  > Large amounts of data from normal driving are probably good for training lane keeping, but not that useful for handling emergency situations. The supposition I've seen is that they have models running locally to extract the most 'surprising' situations (for example, situations where the driver's inputs and the self-driving algorithm's differ substantially, or where other vehicles do not behave as expected) to send back to the mothership to train on. This would do a ton to improve their ability to deploy actual self driving in the future, and is far more than just 'normal driving' or 'lane keeping'.
mtgx 7y ago
> At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability No, it's also so it can defend itself with the line that "hands weren't on the wheel" whenever an Autopilot-enabled car crashes again. Forget the fact that a malicious actor could probably make it look like that anyway, or even the fact that Tesla's own "hands on wheel" sensor isn't very accurate at all.
protomyth 7y ago
At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. and to make statements to the press during an investigation to blame you for the accident. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-crash/u-s-safety-agency-criticizes-tesla-crash-data-release-idUSKCN1H81IQ?il=0 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-crash/u-s-safety-ag...
- zaroth 7y ago
  As well they should. Until the steering whee is removed, it’s always the driver’s responsibility to operate the vehicle.
  - the_pwner224 7y ago
    Tesla has repeatedly made misleading statements about the ability of their systems, and has intentionally caused these crashes. It is a very well known fact among people working in these fields that a half automated system is a disaster waiting to strike. Human-only controls require the driver to stay focused. Invisible enhancements (power steering) and enhancements used in emergency situations (collision avoidance braking) are just that - enhancements. Fully automated systems also work well. Half-automated systems like Tesla's, where the computer works 99% of the time, cause operators to get distracted - nobody concentrate on watching paint dry for hours on end - and then when the system fails everyone dies in a giant flaming fireball. One can make excuses about how the exaggerated claims about the system's abilities were made by the marketing department (not engineering) or that it says in the manual to stay focused on driving the vehicle. But ultimately it's all BS. Because this: > it’s always the driver’s responsibility to operate the vehicle. Should have been this: > it's always the manufacturer's responsibility to make a vehicle that can be safely operate. And Teslas cannot be safely operated by any human when autopilot is on. There are plenty of people at Tesla that know this. And no, just because marketing went on a giant campaign to show everyone how Teslas drive themselves, does not mean that the organization as a whole is not responsible for those actions and for reining it in. This is no different than Boeing repeatedly misleading the public and regulators about the safety of their planes over the span of many decades in order to shave a few dollars here and there on R&D/manufacturing costs. Boeing is as responsible for those deaths as Tesla is for the ones caused by Autopilot.
JohnFen 7y ago
> At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. Not to me. That data collection is the #1 reason why I would never consider buying a Tesla (and, increasingly, other new cars as well.)
- zaroth 7y ago
  There’s a button in the UI to switch off AutoPilot data collection with no loss of functionality. When you first get the car and enroll I believe they prompt you then as well. (Opt-in!) [1] You can also email Tesla and tell them you want to go dark in which case they shutdown the LTE connection entirely. Then you have to go get firmware updates at the dealer and of course online traffic aware maps, and streaming radio won’t work. [1] - https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-data-autopilot-cameras-fsd-push/tesla-data-sharing-fsd/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-data-autopilot-camer...
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    > switch off AutoPilot data collection Is that the only data collection a Tesla engages in? > You can also email Tesla and tell them you want to go dark in which case they shutdown the LTE connection entirely. But how can I be sure that they've done so? And how can I be sure they wouldn't turn it back on at some point in the future? > of course online traffic aware maps, and streaming radio won’t work. That is actually fine by me, as I wouldn't be using those things anyway.
    - zaroth 7y ago
      If you don’t believe them when they tell you it’s shut off, and you don’t believe the UI when it tells you it’s disconnected, then I suppose you can just unplug the antenna?
      - JohnFen 7y ago
        If, for some reason, I have to own a car that is capable of sending data wirelessly, this is exactly what I would do. I don't see that needing to happen, though. I'm old enough that I can reasonably expect that older used cars will be available to me for the rest of my life. I don't see myself buying a new car at any point, due to these issues.
deogeo 7y ago
> That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. It represents tremendous value for Tesla. But they will do their best to prevent the end-user from benefiting from it, and extract every cent they can: https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-bans-customers-self-driving-tech-revenue-work-uber-lyft-2016-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-bans-customers-self-dr...

by bhauer 7y ago

danso 7y ago

The data collected by phones are used to train systems like web/voice search, voice translation, and routing algorithms, all which ostensibly (or, at least, purportedly) benefit billions of end users on a daily basis. I don’t see how you can say Tesla’s case is so obviously a more justified example. In any case, this article is about all cars — Tesla vehicles are still a sliver of the user base.

wool_gather 7y ago
Maybe (some of) the information collected by the OS vendor is used for these purposes. The majority of it, the stuff sent by third-party SDKs back to that third party, is just to enable customer profiling or "analytics".
- danso 7y ago
  Sorry, what’s this straw man argument that you’ve attributed to me? That I’ve asserted every piece of data collected by Android goes toward a public good?
JamesBarney 7y ago
I think it's more valuable for two reasons. One the end result is more valuables, I'd trade all of those services for self-driving cars. And second I think other types of data are easier to get than driving data.
- danso 7y ago
  We are not given any evidence or elaboration on how Tesla (or any other company) is using that data toward self-driving, nevermind that the data will be exclusively used for just that and not a myriad of other self-serving purposes.

Animats 7y ago

At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. Musk has claimed that. Whether it's doing any good remains to be seen. Large amounts of data from normal driving are probably good for training lane keeping, but not that useful for handling emergency situations. Teslas are still running into crossing semitrailers after three years of "data collection". Teslas upload about a gigabyte a month.[1] Here's some trip logging data, from 2017.[2] Trips are logged in straightforward XML. Other stuff, not clear. [1] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-autopilot-fleet-data-sharing-policy/e83o48ifz73z/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-autopilot-fleet-data-sharing... [2] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ap2-back-to-using-one-camera-on-2017-32-6-ca28227.96989/#post-2279310 https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ap2-back-to-using-on...

DuskStar 7y ago
> Large amounts of data from normal driving are probably good for training lane keeping, but not that useful for handling emergency situations. The supposition I've seen is that they have models running locally to extract the most 'surprising' situations (for example, situations where the driver's inputs and the self-driving algorithm's differ substantially, or where other vehicles do not behave as expected) to send back to the mothership to train on. This would do a ton to improve their ability to deploy actual self driving in the future, and is far more than just 'normal driving' or 'lane keeping'.

mtgx 7y ago

> At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability No, it's also so it can defend itself with the line that "hands weren't on the wheel" whenever an Autopilot-enabled car crashes again. Forget the fact that a malicious actor could probably make it look like that anyway, or even the fact that Tesla's own "hands on wheel" sensor isn't very accurate at all.

protomyth 7y ago

At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. and to make statements to the press during an investigation to blame you for the accident. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-crash/u-s-safety-agency-criticizes-tesla-crash-data-release-idUSKCN1H81IQ?il=0 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-crash/u-s-safety-ag...

zaroth 7y ago
As well they should. Until the steering whee is removed, it’s always the driver’s responsibility to operate the vehicle.
- the_pwner224 7y ago
  Tesla has repeatedly made misleading statements about the ability of their systems, and has intentionally caused these crashes. It is a very well known fact among people working in these fields that a half automated system is a disaster waiting to strike. Human-only controls require the driver to stay focused. Invisible enhancements (power steering) and enhancements used in emergency situations (collision avoidance braking) are just that - enhancements. Fully automated systems also work well. Half-automated systems like Tesla's, where the computer works 99% of the time, cause operators to get distracted - nobody concentrate on watching paint dry for hours on end - and then when the system fails everyone dies in a giant flaming fireball. One can make excuses about how the exaggerated claims about the system's abilities were made by the marketing department (not engineering) or that it says in the manual to stay focused on driving the vehicle. But ultimately it's all BS. Because this: > it’s always the driver’s responsibility to operate the vehicle. Should have been this: > it's always the manufacturer's responsibility to make a vehicle that can be safely operate. And Teslas cannot be safely operated by any human when autopilot is on. There are plenty of people at Tesla that know this. And no, just because marketing went on a giant campaign to show everyone how Teslas drive themselves, does not mean that the organization as a whole is not responsible for those actions and for reining it in. This is no different than Boeing repeatedly misleading the public and regulators about the safety of their planes over the span of many decades in order to shave a few dollars here and there on R&D/manufacturing costs. Boeing is as responsible for those deaths as Tesla is for the ones caused by Autopilot.

JohnFen 7y ago

> At least Tesla has demonstrated that their data collection is for training their full self-driving capability. That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. Not to me. That data collection is the #1 reason why I would never consider buying a Tesla (and, increasingly, other new cars as well.)

zaroth 7y ago
There’s a button in the UI to switch off AutoPilot data collection with no loss of functionality. When you first get the car and enroll I believe they prompt you then as well. (Opt-in!) [1] You can also email Tesla and tell them you want to go dark in which case they shutdown the LTE connection entirely. Then you have to go get firmware updates at the dealer and of course online traffic aware maps, and streaming radio won’t work. [1] - https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-data-autopilot-cameras-fsd-push/tesla-data-sharing-fsd/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-data-autopilot-camer...
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > switch off AutoPilot data collection Is that the only data collection a Tesla engages in? > You can also email Tesla and tell them you want to go dark in which case they shutdown the LTE connection entirely. But how can I be sure that they've done so? And how can I be sure they wouldn't turn it back on at some point in the future? > of course online traffic aware maps, and streaming radio won’t work. That is actually fine by me, as I wouldn't be using those things anyway.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    If you don’t believe them when they tell you it’s shut off, and you don’t believe the UI when it tells you it’s disconnected, then I suppose you can just unplug the antenna?
    - JohnFen 7y ago
      If, for some reason, I have to own a car that is capable of sending data wirelessly, this is exactly what I would do. I don't see that needing to happen, though. I'm old enough that I can reasonably expect that older used cars will be available to me for the rest of my life. I don't see myself buying a new car at any point, due to these issues.

deogeo 7y ago

> That represents tremendous end-user value, in my opinion. It represents tremendous value for Tesla. But they will do their best to prevent the end-user from benefiting from it, and extract every cent they can: https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-bans-customers-self-driving-tech-revenue-work-uber-lyft-2016-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-bans-customers-self-dr...