4 ms·
That Yes ad raises more questions than it answers. What constitutes mechanical data? Does it include timestamps of when the engine was running and for how lon
by elihu 6y ago
That Yes ad raises more questions than it answers. What constitutes mechanical data? Does it include timestamps of when the engine was running and for how long? Is location data explicitly excluded? What about data that could be used to infer location, like vibration sensors picking up pothole impacts or gravel roads?
It seems simpler to just say: "This bill gives you, the owner of the vehicle, the right to give access to your car's data (that the automobile manufacturers are already collecting with little oversight into how it is used) to a third party mechanic of your choice for a limited time. It does not make this data available to literally anyone who wants it."
(The "for a limited time" concept does appear in the actual text of the bill in section 3 [1].)
[1] https://ballotpedia.org/Massachusetts_Question_1,_%22Right_to_Repair_Law%22_Vehicle_Data_Access_Requirement_Initiative_(2020) https://ballotpedia.org/Massachusetts_Question_1,_%22Right_t...
- Polylactic_acid 6y agoIf you are actually a potential rapist there are plenty of easier methods than setting up a fake repair garage and matching vibration sensors with pot holes. The entire idea is ridiculous.
- elihu 6y agoWell sure, but if the larger point you're trying to make is that sensitive data doesn't get into the hands of the wrong people, "the data isn't actually sensitive data" is a weaker argument than "random people can't access your data without your explicit permission, and then only for a limited time." The creepy "no" add is implying that your car's data is just available on some website for anyone to look up. That's a pretty big misconception that should be contradicted.