13 ms·

How the most popular cars in the US track drivers

138 points by arkadiyt 3y ago

blueridge 3y ago
https://archive.is/9IU8W https://archive.is/9IU8W I've got an old (2002) car, I love the buttons and knobs. No cameras, no screens, no key fob, no voice control, no electronic "safety" features, no tracking. The 4L straight six engine is still going strong at almost 300,000 miles. What's funny is watching my friends attempt to back out of the driveway or parking lot without a camera and screen. They put it in reverse and their eyes go right to the center console, expecting a screen, then they dart from mirror to mirror, unsure of what to do or where to look or how to judge, and they keep glancing at the dash, as if a screen is going to magically appear. At no point do they just throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows while keeping one hand on the wheel. It is as if this movement, this posture, is completely new to them. Asking them to use just one side view mirror to back all the way out of a gently curved driveway would be impossible. They need the digital guidance lines on the screen to go in reverse.
- tashoecraft 3y ago
  That’s great for you, but there’s been amazing advances in the world of automobile safety in the past 20 years. I’d rather improve my safety chances in an accident than worry about “tracking”.
  - supportlocal4h 3y ago
    Why is it a forced choice?
  - public_defender 3y ago
    This is a false choice. There is no reason that safety would require commercial surveillance. Also, why did you put the word tracking in quotation marks?
    - xadhominemx 3y ago
      They put it in quotes because no one is using these data to follow any individual’s life or movements. These days are all aggregated and/or anonymized before any detailed analysis.
      - NoRelToEmber 3y ago
        Yeah they put tracking in our cars without telling us, but I'll trust them they won't do individual tracking because they pinky swear it. Unless law enforcement requests that data, but luckily cops only go after bad people, and there's no such thing as politically motivated prosecution.
      - endemic 3y ago
        Then it should be no big deal for a few concerned folks to opt out.
      - Silhouette 3y ago
        Tell that to Jim Farley, the Ford executive who infamously observed, "We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing." He then issued possibly one of the most unconvincing retractions in the history of corporate newspeak the next day.
      - flagrant_taco 3y ago
        How can this days be properly anonymized? Even just knowing where a car is parked every night narrowed it down a good bit in most areas, combiner that with where its parked during work hours and you're almost certainly anonymized. And yes, the analytics do track vehicle identifiers aren't truly anonymous. Many of the services Onstar offers, for example, wouldn't be possible without taking via unique identifier. The same goes for any vehicle that offers 4G/5G, mobile apps, remote unlocking, etc.
        public_defender 3y ago
        I agree with this, and I think it's analogous to the 2021 Catholic Grindr tracking saga [0]. It would be difficult to keep this type of data safe (in the sense of not allowing someone to use it to exploit a private person) without all the exigencies of "running a business" in 2023. Once you add those considerations, it seems impossible. Even if GP is correct and companies all anonymize the data before analysis (which I absolutely do not believe), I am still concerned with: 1) Sale to outside parties including government, 2) Rogue employee with a grudge or a side business, 3) Data breach, 4) Internal policy change (juice revenue with DTC marketing?) [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/22/data-phones-leaks-church/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/22/data-ph...
  - voz_ 3y ago
    Agreed. I don’t understand the privacy obsession at the cost of all other comforts and features.
    - FollowingTheDao 3y ago
      Maybe you should read a bit more about why the lack of privacy is a risk. I would start by searching YouTube for “don’t talk to the police”.
    - c22 3y ago
      I guess that's how they get ya!
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - flagrant_taco 3y ago
      The opposite can be argued too, I don't get the obsession with convenience above all else. Personally I'd rather know that the government and private corporations can't track everything I do and decide that I should no longer have the right to drive my own car.
- diydsp 3y ago
  2010 car here. Maintaining it well to reach >=300k. New cars also have oil-burning issues and I anticipate difficulty of obtaining parts due to large, diverse BOMs from all those useless features.
  - tashoecraft 3y ago
    The scrap yards are very efficient at pulling out all those parts and selling them. Any reasonably popular vehicle you shouldn’t have a problem sourcing parts.
- rconti 3y ago
  To be fair, they probably don't realize you can see out the back. On most modern vehicles, you simply can't. Reversing is very easy thanks to side mirrors, but you can't see the kid you're about to run over.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  2005 CR-V coming up on 230K miles and still runs like a top. I did add a CarPlay-capable head unit that has a connection for a rear-view camera (which I haven’t gotten and probably won’t). Wireless CarPlay is pretty big usability and modest safety improvement (to have a 7” map display and voice control instead of futzing with a phone to get GPS guidance).
  - WirelessGigabit 3y ago
    My car has wireless CarPlay, and ONLY wireless. I hate it. I can not share my data with my wife while I'm connected to CarPlay.
- foobarbecue 3y ago
  Do you know if your 2002 has side-impact anti-intrusion bars in the doors? I loved my 1999 Isuzu Amigo, and was sad when I was rear-ended in 2017 and had to get rid of it, but that fender bender probably saved my life. I replaced the Amigo with a 2014 Outlander Sport and in 2019 I was t-boned at an intersection, with the other car driving directly into my driver's side door. I was amazed to find that I escaped without a scratch. I did some research and found that the Amigo had terrible side-impact safety ratings; if I was still driving the Amigo I probably would have been crushed. In 2007 (effective 2009), the NHTSA mandated that all new vehicles have anti-intrusion bars in doors. That bar saved me. I think there's a sweet-spot in the mid-2010s when vehicles were being built with efficiency, safety, and durability in mind and weren't yet being festooned with computerized junk.
  - alejohausner 3y ago
    You're leaving out the punchline of your reply: those side-impact bars protect passengers better, but they also make the car windows higher, and reduce visibility. It's harder to see out the back of modern cars when you simply turn your body around and look behind you. That's why backup cameras are becoming mandatory in new cars.
    - foobarbecue 3y ago
      Interesting. I didn't know that. Before the accident, I would have taken bigger windows over the side-impact bars if I'd been presented with the choice. And now I'm thankful to the regulators for taking away that freedom of choice. Odd.
      - rideontime 3y ago
        A teaching moment. Sometimes the regulators actually do know what's best.
        mech7654 3y ago
        I am often frustrated at the poor visibility out of modern cars and I wonder how many crashes are caused by the poor visibility. It is the other side of the tradeoff that crash survivability data will not show- how many crashes would have been avoided altogether with better visibility.
- vic-traill 3y ago
  2005 Honda Civic LX w/ under 100,000 KM on it. In Canada, but first (and only previous) owner spent winter in Arizona and there has been no previous winter driving. Car is a champ. I can adjust everything via tactile controls. Sensors exist, but fewer sensors. (Note, this next sentence is me talking out of my ass) There is a whole industry built on replacing faulty sensors that are not detecting the fault they were designed to test for. Folks may note that a car of this vintage lacks safety features. This car has airbags, ABS and seat-belts. It does not have most of these features [0] built in; the driver is responsible for these features where possible. I'm fine w/ that. Regular maintenance includes oil change and inspection of components due to age. I've got a great mechanic who factors age into his maintenance recommendations. My annual operating cost, including fuel, insurance, maintenance and parking for 2023 YTD is CAD$1880. Mobile phone is used via ear bud. That has its own tracking issues but at least does not correlate to car-based telemetry. [0] https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/guide-to-safety-features/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/guide-to-safety-...
  - Tanoc 3y ago
    There has been a smaller advance in actual crash safety since 2000 than there was between 1980 and 2000. The only big leap forward since then was rollover standards where vehicles above a certain weight must be able to support their entire gross weight on their roof. Essentially any car designed and certified after 1998 is safe enough in an actual impact to prevent death or major injury barring structural failure like rust that compromises the crash cell and crumple zones. Most modern safety features introduced since the early 1980s are actually proactive rather than reactive in that they aim to prevent errant behaviour rather than protect from dangerous situations. Blind spot monitoring, lane change assist, and backup cameras for example are all proactive versus seatbealts, airbags, and crumple zones which are reactive. 2004 is around the last time we had mechanically simple cars with majority reactive safety systems and cars made before that cutoff date are getting increasingly more expensive to both enthusiasts and used purchasers.
- xadhominemx 3y ago
  Why would you you “safety” features in quotes?
  - blueridge 3y ago
    I'm talking about things like: eyesight assists, automatic braking, side view mirrors that flash and light up constantly, etc. My wife has a new car with all of these features, and they're incredibly distracting. The car brakes automatically in parking lots when it sees shadows, beeps endlessly anytime it sees a curb while in reverse, and alarms anytime she so much as scratches her eye while driving because the software decided she's distracted or her eyes aren't on the road. I know a lot of people have different experiences with this stuff, and I'm sure the features have saved asses a few times, but she can't stand it. And for me, when the car is constantly alarming, and I have to constantly look at the screen to figure out why, it makes me hesitate while driving and I feel less confident on the road.
    - pertymcpert 3y ago
      You might have a dud or something because that just doesn't happen in modern cars.
      - DANmode 3y ago
        Interesting that deep in the settings you can find tolerances or thresholds for so many of these, then.
        mrguyorama 3y ago
        Some makes, like tesla, are anecdotally very bad. But on my VW, and my mom's toyota, it only ever warns about anything if you are actually doing something that isn't safe driving. I have had maybe one false alarm in 20k miles. A lot of people are technically awful drivers but haven't been in an accident, so they think they are fine.
        pertymcpert 3y ago
- jklinger410 3y ago
  This is one of the most hacker news comments of all time. Absolutely critical levels of "kids these days." "Driving was better before it was easy!" It must be exhausting to think this way.
- CrendKing 3y ago
  You describe your friends' relying on technology to solve their problems in a condescending tone, yet they simply adapted to a world that is changing. When most of the cars they use already have the digital guidance, there is no point not using them, and still "throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows", which is way less efficient. Imagine you are planning a trip from California to Colorado. Are you gonna study paper maps and remember all the turns before go like old days just in case your phone would die sporadically? No, you don't spend an hour of your life to prepare for an event with 0.01% probability. Same for your friends.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    Maintaining an awareness of your surroundings is a fundamental skill required for driving. If people have become so dependent on technological aids that when they drive a car without them, they fail to maintain awareness of their surroundings, that is a failure as a driver that is fully worthy of condescension. They're exhibiting a laziness or incompetence that puts others around them at risk.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    I've found the backup camera to be such a significant upgrade to backing out. I drive a hatchback, so a smallish car in today's world. When I'm in a parking lot, I'm inevitably surrounded by two giant fuck off bro-dozers that block all possibility of seeing anything around me, while the backup camera is mounted on my car's rear and has a fisheye-esque lens, meaning I can back to just the point where the rear is aligned with the cars around me, and I can see the entire lane of the parking lot, and thus can easily see if cars or people are coming. This is something you just cannot do by "looking behind you" because you are 3 feet forward of that camera. You cannot see the parking lot lane until you are already intruding into it. The awareness you get from that camera is just strictly better than you get from your eyes alone.
- falcolas 3y ago
  > At no point do they just throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows while keeping one hand on the wheel. It is as if this movement, this posture, is completely new to them. As a point of reference, Adam and Jamie of Mythbuster fame both had to be trained in this technique. And they’ve probably been driving longer than many of us here have been alive. In other words, it’s a trained driving position. Some folks learned it early, some late, and others haven’t been trained in it yet. Also, it doesn’t work well in modern vehicles with shorter windows. This last week I couldn’t see the driveway I had to back down by looking out the back window. I could via the camera though.
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    > As a point of reference, Adam and Jamie of Mythbuster fame both had to be trained in this technique. And they’ve probably been driving longer than many of us here have been alive. If I remember right, didn't they have to be trained how to use this technique in a specific scenario that was effectively stung driving? If be really surprised if they couldn't back out of a parking dodge this way prior to training > Also, it doesn’t work well in modern vehicles with shorter windows This is largely by design. Intrusion protection has been prioritized over visibility with cameras filling in the gaps
- haspok 3y ago
  > The 4L straight six engine... Surely the mpg is excellent, and so are the emissions... (And don't call me Shirley!)
  - blueridge 3y ago
    Oh the MPG is bad, emissions pass every time I renew! It's just a workhorse of an engine. It always starts and even in its old age has never left me stranded.
bnjmn 3y ago
Are there any new cars / car brands that credibly promise not to track their drivers? Any car with a network connection for software updates seems likely to be harvesting driver data, or is at least capable of doing so.
- moonterrace 3y ago
  I HIGHLY doubt there are any that make that promise.
- passwordoops 3y ago
  Are there any industries/companies who don't somehow track users these days?
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  Essentially, no. Your best bets are the German manufacturers, some of whom (e.g. Porsche) have data opt outs for all services and exist within a legislative framework that's at least mildly protective of consumer privacy. Even then you should be wary about cars built for export to other markets like the US. It's common for the regional manufacturer to be a separate legal entity, with separate backend services, delivering cars with different configurations and software. For American, Japanese, and Korean manufacturers? You should just assume they're harvesting all the data they can get on you. GM's recent decision to ditch Android auto and Carplay was motivated in large part by their desire to better control and monetize user data collection.
  - Klonoar 3y ago
    Japan's privacy laws are fairly strict and, to some degree, interoperate with GDPR. For context, I've a Toyota GR86 where opting out of data sharing can be done via an app. (Edits for some extra context) https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/images/doc/Toyota%20-%20Connected%20Services%20Terms%20of%20Use.pdf https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/images/doc/Toyota%20-%20Co... > (i) the Connected Services Privacy Notice located at www.Toyota.com/privacyvts (“Privacy Notice”). Carefully review the Privacy Notice as it applies to your personal information and Vehicle (as defined below) data that we collect, use, store, share and secure to provide the Services. Please note that your Vehicle comes with a data communication module (“DCM”) that enables the Wireless/GPS Technology, as described in Section 11(a), and allows for the collection of data from you and your vehicle (e.g., location, health and driving data). BY DEFAULT, THE DCM IS ON/ACTIVE WHEN YOUR VEHICLE IS DELIVERED AND WILL REMAIN ON/ACTIVE (AND CONTINUE TO COLLECT DATA FROM YOU AND YOUR VEHICLE) UNTIL YOU CONTACT US AND REQUEST THAT IT BE DEACTIVATED. > (b) DCM. If you cancel your Service Plan, we have the right (but, unless you ask us to, not the obligation) to turn off your DCM as of the effective date of cancellation. Once your DCM is turned off, the Vehicle will not send any data to Toyota. Depending on the connectivity to your Vehicle, your DCM may deactivate immediately, or it may take up to several days. The GR86 forums have a few people also looking at ways to outright disconnect the hardware for this kind of stuff entirely, but I believe that's slow going - haven't kept up on it. I just have the above saved since I look at this stuff when buying any new car these days. The obvious disclaimer applies that you may enter warranty hell if you're disabling it, because it's 2023 and I guess society is fine with this level of default tracking. You should confirm how it affects you before changing anything. Otherwise, hope people find it helpful!
moonterrace 3y ago
2019 car here, equipped with a rear camera. Been driving for 43 years and I refuse to use the cam. The thing that bothers me is now I have to check the mfg connectivity TOS and must opt out instead of opt in to what data is transmitted - it’s ridiculous. Don’t get me started on the ever increasing software subscription services these manufacturers are trying to levy on consumers.
- hgdcbbc 3y ago
  Aren’t rearview cameras required now for new cars in the United States for safety reasons? Hope you don’t live around anyone too short.
  - xyst 3y ago
    TIL: https://www.thedrive.com/news/20612/rearview-cameras-are-now-required-on-all-new-cars-sold-in-the-u-s https://www.thedrive.com/news/20612/rearview-cameras-are-now... In the good ole USA, vehicles are also getting larger (massive market to satisfy the insecurities of millions of Americans) and manufacturers are pushing them down American throats to get around the CAFE regulations. [1] Since they are getting larger, this means the view from the front is obscured. In most SUVs and trucks, 8-9 children can be sitting in front of a modern truck or SUV before you see a child's head. There's been some talk about forcing FRONT view cameras as well. [2] It's absolutely disgusting. I hate cars. I hate how transportation is largely car centric. [1] https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/04/04/buttigiegs-new-emissions-standards-fail-to-close-the-infamous-light-truck-loophole https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/04/04/buttigiegs-new-emissi... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-are-getting-bigger-are-front-blind-zones-children-rcna52109 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-ar...
    - switch007 3y ago
      Children should obviously carry a 10ft orange flag whenever they’re around cars. If not, it’s their fault if they get hit. /s
- Tarball10 3y ago
siegecraft 3y ago
Can you not just physically disconnect or shield the network antenna (assuming you own the car outright, i suppose if it's financed it might be trickier to do that legally)?
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  The same pipe that exfiltrates tracking data is bringing in the data for all the connected features of your car. That would include things like satellite radio, onboard navigation/GPS, software updates/recalls, and concierge/safety services (e.g. OnStar). In some cases, the same data is being used to both track you and provide the service, because the collection is happening somewhere on the backend. I wouldn't be surprised if many cars eventually broke in strange ways or displayed dashboard errors when you did this. The network connection is a pretty fundamental part of the vehicle software architecture and a lot of things depend on it. If you're lucky enough that your car can continue indefinitely without a network connection, it's possible that you wouldn't notice these features being gone. Realistically though, most people would. The solution here needs to be legislative action to protect consumer privacy. Technological solutions fall short.
  - Silhouette 3y ago
    The network connection is a pretty fundamental part of the vehicle software architecture and a lot of things depend on it. Which is very worrying when you stop and think about it. If anything that actually matters is reliant on anything not travelling with you then that can not be a good sign for the safety and security of the vehicle. For one thing any vehicle that has any open incoming connectivity of any kind immediately has an attack vector for malware. And in this case that could literally be a matter of life and death and it could literally be used to attack thousands or even millions of vehicles simultaneously. The closest I can think of to any legitimate phone home feature is an automatic emergency call function that is triggered by a collision or theft being detected. But of course it's very easy to specify that those features may only be activated from the vehicle side and may only be used to contact emergency services. Anything else like GPS or infotainment does not need to be integrated at all with the essential vehicle systems or emergency communications functions and can be subject to the usual safeguards like any other device - including an off switch if the owner chooses not to use it and requirements to opt in for any potentially intrusive behaviour.
OnlineGladiator 3y ago
For many cars it's relatively straight-forward to disable the cellular modem, and sometimes it won't impact the other functionality of the car at all. Chances are someone in a forum somewhere has done the legwork for you. Do a google search and realize how easy (or hard) it is to do for your vehicle. Most of the time it won't even impact your warranty, apart from the modem you've purposefully disabled and no longer care about.
- grugagag 3y ago
  Sure, but once it becomes widespread it will no longer be possible to do so on newer models.
  - LeoPanthera 3y ago
    I don't think this is true. In theory you could embed the cellular modem into the mainboard, or even into the processor, but I would bet for ease of service that the modem will always be on a separate board somewhere that can be cut off. They would never make the car reliant on cellular service or it would just stop working whenever you didn't have a signal - or the modem died.
  - kelnos 3y ago
    How would the manufacturer enforce this? The first time someone gets stranded somewhere because the cellular hardware died and the car refused to start... well, sounds like a huge lawsuit to me.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    There will always be an antenna somewhere. Remove/destroy that, or put a faraday cage around it, and it doesn't matter what the manufacturer wants.
- noman-land 3y ago
  FYI, you can get the user manual of the car and find where the fuses are. One of the fuses will likely control the cellular system. Pull the fuse, no more data.
- 3y ago
voz_ 3y ago
Who cares though? I ask this elsewhere here too, so apologies if I am being redundant. Everything tracks me. My phone, every neighbors camera pointing out toward the street, the eyes in the sky, office buildings, grocery stores. I don’t care though, because I am no one. It’s such a non problem or issue for my day to day, and I couldn’t imagine choosing my car over something like this. However, on HN, I constantly see this privacy obsession in comments. What are you all up to that you care so much? Where’s the paranoia coming from?
- rootsudo 3y ago
  That's the problem, you don't care until you do.
  - voz_ 3y ago
    No that’s not a good answer. It’s a vague gesture at some non realistic threat. When will I care?
    - kelnos 3y ago
      You'll care when the political winds shift in your country and your leaders don't like people of your race, religion, or sexual orientation, or perhaps one of your leisure activities, like the kinds of books you read or email newsletters you subscribe to. Meanwhile, there's all this data floating around that "proves" you the kind of person they don't like. And everyone seems to think this could never happen to them, until it does. Even if you are squeaky clean, the data on you could have errors, and your government -- with the best of intentions, even -- could misinterpret the data in ways that could cause you a lot of trouble. This isn't even a "what if?" type scenario; this sort of thing already happens to people. Edit: your top-level comment got flagged and killed, but I vouched it back to life. I completely disagree with your views here, but I think it's valuable and important that we talk about things like this.
    - NoRelToEmber 3y ago
      When you run for office and realize the party in power knows literally everything about you, and is using it to find dirt on you (and they're free to take all they find out of context), and target you for legal investigations, play six degrees of Kevin Bacon to link you to child molesters, and countless other dirty tricky you didn't even know existed, while you and your upstart new party know next to nothing about your opponents in power. But who needs more than one or two parties?
rektide 3y ago
Computing as a whole has obliterated user agency. This is just one of many manifestations of a system run rampant, where consumers can't even begin to understand what it is their purchasing & using. It's not a free market - the market can't adjust - if buyers can't even learn what they are buying. I do hope some day we can make computing more visible & honest.
- npteljes 3y ago
  100%. And if it's not obscure enough, the ever-connected high-speed internet takes care that it remains so.
randallsquared 3y ago
It's bizarre that a site ostensibly about privacy requires you to disclose the VIN of a specific vehicle to see the make and model privacy notes.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  True. You can randomize the last few digits, though, and it'll still work.
FollowingTheDao 3y ago
What a fantastic dystopian fascist nightmare we’re are all accepting. And it is amazing that you can get some remakes to protest and boycott bud light over some gender bullshit but no one will bother boycotting something as evil as the surveillance state.
hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
It’s becoming impossible to practice what you preach when it comes to data privacy. ‘Don’t like it, don’t buy it’ is difficult to execute unless you don’t mind not having a car, mobile phone, tv, browse the internet or even go out in a public place. There needs to be regulation and at least the ability to at least easily opt out of any of this insanity, but until there’s one (or probably many) widespread data-breaches related to this total abuse of power, so I suspect we’re at least a decade off that, if it even happens at all. Edit: location Australia, where political power is toothless due to the small scale of our country. Maybe we can fall in-line with GDPR or something someday, but currently there’s almost no discourse related to privacy (yet everyone is losing their minds over tiktok)
- javajosh 3y ago
  The EU seems to have it's act together. Things in the US won't change until the elites feel that pervasive surveillance impacts them personally and negatively.
  - vGPU 3y ago
    Did you miss the story about how spying on journalists is OK?
  - cosentiyes 3y ago
    Yes, the EU is doing what needs to be done (criminalizing end-to-end encryption) /s
- paddw 3y ago
  imo, if you don't want the government to track you, the battle is already lost, but there is probably room to limit what private companies are allowed to do on the regulatory front.
  - graftak 3y ago
    The problem here is that governments themselves became dependent on the insane amount of user tracking these companies do, to the point where it is against their own ‘best interests’ to stop these practices. Stuff like this happens all over the place—even the EU—under the guise of stopping terrorism and/or child pornography.
cypherpunks01 3y ago
I think the title may have been altered as it was almost verging upon a garden-path sentence. You could have a bit of fun with the headline "Toyota and Honda Track Car Drivers Driving Driving Alarm"
WirelessGigabit 3y ago
https://archive.ph/9IU8W https://archive.ph/9IU8W
egberts1 3y ago
Cap off the RF connector with a 50 ohm terminator.
dreamcompiler 3y ago
It's essential to disable the "always on" cellular modems in these cars. They're always buried very deep but the antennas have to be near the surface. That's the best attack point.
kramerger 3y ago
They conveniently leave out Tesla. Fun fact: when the Chinese president is visiting an area, all Teslas are moved. Example: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas-beidaihe-district-bar-tesla-cars-driving-july-local-police-2022-06-20/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas...
newacct3 3y ago
[flagged]

138 points by arkadiyt 3y ago

https://archive.is/9IU8W https://archive.is/9IU8W I've got an old (2002) car, I love the buttons and knobs. No cameras, no screens, no key fob, no voice control, no electronic "safety" features, no tracking. The 4L straight six engine is still going strong at almost 300,000 miles. What's funny is watching my friends attempt to back out of the driveway or parking lot without a camera and screen. They put it in reverse and their eyes go right to the center console, expecting a screen, then they dart from mirror to mirror, unsure of what to do or where to look or how to judge, and they keep glancing at the dash, as if a screen is going to magically appear. At no point do they just throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows while keeping one hand on the wheel. It is as if this movement, this posture, is completely new to them. Asking them to use just one side view mirror to back all the way out of a gently curved driveway would be impossible. They need the digital guidance lines on the screen to go in reverse.

tashoecraft 3y ago
That’s great for you, but there’s been amazing advances in the world of automobile safety in the past 20 years. I’d rather improve my safety chances in an accident than worry about “tracking”.
- supportlocal4h 3y ago
  Why is it a forced choice?
- public_defender 3y ago
  This is a false choice. There is no reason that safety would require commercial surveillance. Also, why did you put the word tracking in quotation marks?
  - xadhominemx 3y ago
    They put it in quotes because no one is using these data to follow any individual’s life or movements. These days are all aggregated and/or anonymized before any detailed analysis.
    - NoRelToEmber 3y ago
      Yeah they put tracking in our cars without telling us, but I'll trust them they won't do individual tracking because they pinky swear it. Unless law enforcement requests that data, but luckily cops only go after bad people, and there's no such thing as politically motivated prosecution.
    - endemic 3y ago
      Then it should be no big deal for a few concerned folks to opt out.
    - Silhouette 3y ago
      Tell that to Jim Farley, the Ford executive who infamously observed, "We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing." He then issued possibly one of the most unconvincing retractions in the history of corporate newspeak the next day.
    - flagrant_taco 3y ago
      How can this days be properly anonymized? Even just knowing where a car is parked every night narrowed it down a good bit in most areas, combiner that with where its parked during work hours and you're almost certainly anonymized. And yes, the analytics do track vehicle identifiers aren't truly anonymous. Many of the services Onstar offers, for example, wouldn't be possible without taking via unique identifier. The same goes for any vehicle that offers 4G/5G, mobile apps, remote unlocking, etc.
      - public_defender 3y ago
        I agree with this, and I think it's analogous to the 2021 Catholic Grindr tracking saga [0]. It would be difficult to keep this type of data safe (in the sense of not allowing someone to use it to exploit a private person) without all the exigencies of "running a business" in 2023. Once you add those considerations, it seems impossible. Even if GP is correct and companies all anonymize the data before analysis (which I absolutely do not believe), I am still concerned with: 1) Sale to outside parties including government, 2) Rogue employee with a grudge or a side business, 3) Data breach, 4) Internal policy change (juice revenue with DTC marketing?) [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/22/data-phones-leaks-church/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/22/data-ph...
- voz_ 3y ago
  Agreed. I don’t understand the privacy obsession at the cost of all other comforts and features.
  - FollowingTheDao 3y ago
    Maybe you should read a bit more about why the lack of privacy is a risk. I would start by searching YouTube for “don’t talk to the police”.
  - c22 3y ago
    I guess that's how they get ya!
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    The opposite can be argued too, I don't get the obsession with convenience above all else. Personally I'd rather know that the government and private corporations can't track everything I do and decide that I should no longer have the right to drive my own car.
diydsp 3y ago
2010 car here. Maintaining it well to reach >=300k. New cars also have oil-burning issues and I anticipate difficulty of obtaining parts due to large, diverse BOMs from all those useless features.
- tashoecraft 3y ago
  The scrap yards are very efficient at pulling out all those parts and selling them. Any reasonably popular vehicle you shouldn’t have a problem sourcing parts.
rconti 3y ago
To be fair, they probably don't realize you can see out the back. On most modern vehicles, you simply can't. Reversing is very easy thanks to side mirrors, but you can't see the kid you're about to run over.
sokoloff 3y ago
2005 CR-V coming up on 230K miles and still runs like a top. I did add a CarPlay-capable head unit that has a connection for a rear-view camera (which I haven’t gotten and probably won’t). Wireless CarPlay is pretty big usability and modest safety improvement (to have a 7” map display and voice control instead of futzing with a phone to get GPS guidance).
- WirelessGigabit 3y ago
  My car has wireless CarPlay, and ONLY wireless. I hate it. I can not share my data with my wife while I'm connected to CarPlay.
foobarbecue 3y ago
Do you know if your 2002 has side-impact anti-intrusion bars in the doors? I loved my 1999 Isuzu Amigo, and was sad when I was rear-ended in 2017 and had to get rid of it, but that fender bender probably saved my life. I replaced the Amigo with a 2014 Outlander Sport and in 2019 I was t-boned at an intersection, with the other car driving directly into my driver's side door. I was amazed to find that I escaped without a scratch. I did some research and found that the Amigo had terrible side-impact safety ratings; if I was still driving the Amigo I probably would have been crushed. In 2007 (effective 2009), the NHTSA mandated that all new vehicles have anti-intrusion bars in doors. That bar saved me. I think there's a sweet-spot in the mid-2010s when vehicles were being built with efficiency, safety, and durability in mind and weren't yet being festooned with computerized junk.
- alejohausner 3y ago
  You're leaving out the punchline of your reply: those side-impact bars protect passengers better, but they also make the car windows higher, and reduce visibility. It's harder to see out the back of modern cars when you simply turn your body around and look behind you. That's why backup cameras are becoming mandatory in new cars.
  - foobarbecue 3y ago
    Interesting. I didn't know that. Before the accident, I would have taken bigger windows over the side-impact bars if I'd been presented with the choice. And now I'm thankful to the regulators for taking away that freedom of choice. Odd.
    - rideontime 3y ago
      A teaching moment. Sometimes the regulators actually do know what's best.
      - mech7654 3y ago
        I am often frustrated at the poor visibility out of modern cars and I wonder how many crashes are caused by the poor visibility. It is the other side of the tradeoff that crash survivability data will not show- how many crashes would have been avoided altogether with better visibility.
vic-traill 3y ago
2005 Honda Civic LX w/ under 100,000 KM on it. In Canada, but first (and only previous) owner spent winter in Arizona and there has been no previous winter driving. Car is a champ. I can adjust everything via tactile controls. Sensors exist, but fewer sensors. (Note, this next sentence is me talking out of my ass) There is a whole industry built on replacing faulty sensors that are not detecting the fault they were designed to test for. Folks may note that a car of this vintage lacks safety features. This car has airbags, ABS and seat-belts. It does not have most of these features [0] built in; the driver is responsible for these features where possible. I'm fine w/ that. Regular maintenance includes oil change and inspection of components due to age. I've got a great mechanic who factors age into his maintenance recommendations. My annual operating cost, including fuel, insurance, maintenance and parking for 2023 YTD is CAD$1880. Mobile phone is used via ear bud. That has its own tracking issues but at least does not correlate to car-based telemetry. [0] https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/guide-to-safety-features/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/guide-to-safety-...
- Tanoc 3y ago
  There has been a smaller advance in actual crash safety since 2000 than there was between 1980 and 2000. The only big leap forward since then was rollover standards where vehicles above a certain weight must be able to support their entire gross weight on their roof. Essentially any car designed and certified after 1998 is safe enough in an actual impact to prevent death or major injury barring structural failure like rust that compromises the crash cell and crumple zones. Most modern safety features introduced since the early 1980s are actually proactive rather than reactive in that they aim to prevent errant behaviour rather than protect from dangerous situations. Blind spot monitoring, lane change assist, and backup cameras for example are all proactive versus seatbealts, airbags, and crumple zones which are reactive. 2004 is around the last time we had mechanically simple cars with majority reactive safety systems and cars made before that cutoff date are getting increasingly more expensive to both enthusiasts and used purchasers.
xadhominemx 3y ago
Why would you you “safety” features in quotes?
- blueridge 3y ago
  I'm talking about things like: eyesight assists, automatic braking, side view mirrors that flash and light up constantly, etc. My wife has a new car with all of these features, and they're incredibly distracting. The car brakes automatically in parking lots when it sees shadows, beeps endlessly anytime it sees a curb while in reverse, and alarms anytime she so much as scratches her eye while driving because the software decided she's distracted or her eyes aren't on the road. I know a lot of people have different experiences with this stuff, and I'm sure the features have saved asses a few times, but she can't stand it. And for me, when the car is constantly alarming, and I have to constantly look at the screen to figure out why, it makes me hesitate while driving and I feel less confident on the road.
  - pertymcpert 3y ago
    You might have a dud or something because that just doesn't happen in modern cars.
    - DANmode 3y ago
      Interesting that deep in the settings you can find tolerances or thresholds for so many of these, then.
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        Some makes, like tesla, are anecdotally very bad. But on my VW, and my mom's toyota, it only ever warns about anything if you are actually doing something that isn't safe driving. I have had maybe one false alarm in 20k miles. A lot of people are technically awful drivers but haven't been in an accident, so they think they are fine.
      - pertymcpert 3y ago
jklinger410 3y ago
This is one of the most hacker news comments of all time. Absolutely critical levels of "kids these days." "Driving was better before it was easy!" It must be exhausting to think this way.
CrendKing 3y ago
You describe your friends' relying on technology to solve their problems in a condescending tone, yet they simply adapted to a world that is changing. When most of the cars they use already have the digital guidance, there is no point not using them, and still "throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows", which is way less efficient. Imagine you are planning a trip from California to Colorado. Are you gonna study paper maps and remember all the turns before go like old days just in case your phone would die sporadically? No, you don't spend an hour of your life to prepare for an event with 0.01% probability. Same for your friends.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  Maintaining an awareness of your surroundings is a fundamental skill required for driving. If people have become so dependent on technological aids that when they drive a car without them, they fail to maintain awareness of their surroundings, that is a failure as a driver that is fully worthy of condescension. They're exhibiting a laziness or incompetence that puts others around them at risk.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  I've found the backup camera to be such a significant upgrade to backing out. I drive a hatchback, so a smallish car in today's world. When I'm in a parking lot, I'm inevitably surrounded by two giant fuck off bro-dozers that block all possibility of seeing anything around me, while the backup camera is mounted on my car's rear and has a fisheye-esque lens, meaning I can back to just the point where the rear is aligned with the cars around me, and I can see the entire lane of the parking lot, and thus can easily see if cars or people are coming. This is something you just cannot do by "looking behind you" because you are 3 feet forward of that camera. You cannot see the parking lot lane until you are already intruding into it. The awareness you get from that camera is just strictly better than you get from your eyes alone.
falcolas 3y ago
> At no point do they just throw their arm on the backside of the passenger seat, and turn around to look out the windows while keeping one hand on the wheel. It is as if this movement, this posture, is completely new to them. As a point of reference, Adam and Jamie of Mythbuster fame both had to be trained in this technique. And they’ve probably been driving longer than many of us here have been alive. In other words, it’s a trained driving position. Some folks learned it early, some late, and others haven’t been trained in it yet. Also, it doesn’t work well in modern vehicles with shorter windows. This last week I couldn’t see the driveway I had to back down by looking out the back window. I could via the camera though.
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  > As a point of reference, Adam and Jamie of Mythbuster fame both had to be trained in this technique. And they’ve probably been driving longer than many of us here have been alive. If I remember right, didn't they have to be trained how to use this technique in a specific scenario that was effectively stung driving? If be really surprised if they couldn't back out of a parking dodge this way prior to training > Also, it doesn’t work well in modern vehicles with shorter windows This is largely by design. Intrusion protection has been prioritized over visibility with cameras filling in the gaps
haspok 3y ago
> The 4L straight six engine... Surely the mpg is excellent, and so are the emissions... (And don't call me Shirley!)
- blueridge 3y ago
  Oh the MPG is bad, emissions pass every time I renew! It's just a workhorse of an engine. It always starts and even in its old age has never left me stranded.

bnjmn 3y ago

Are there any new cars / car brands that credibly promise not to track their drivers? Any car with a network connection for software updates seems likely to be harvesting driver data, or is at least capable of doing so.

moonterrace 3y ago
I HIGHLY doubt there are any that make that promise.
passwordoops 3y ago
Are there any industries/companies who don't somehow track users these days?
AlotOfReading 3y ago
Essentially, no. Your best bets are the German manufacturers, some of whom (e.g. Porsche) have data opt outs for all services and exist within a legislative framework that's at least mildly protective of consumer privacy. Even then you should be wary about cars built for export to other markets like the US. It's common for the regional manufacturer to be a separate legal entity, with separate backend services, delivering cars with different configurations and software. For American, Japanese, and Korean manufacturers? You should just assume they're harvesting all the data they can get on you. GM's recent decision to ditch Android auto and Carplay was motivated in large part by their desire to better control and monetize user data collection.
- Klonoar 3y ago
  Japan's privacy laws are fairly strict and, to some degree, interoperate with GDPR. For context, I've a Toyota GR86 where opting out of data sharing can be done via an app. (Edits for some extra context) https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/images/doc/Toyota%20-%20Connected%20Services%20Terms%20of%20Use.pdf https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/images/doc/Toyota%20-%20Co... > (i) the Connected Services Privacy Notice located at www.Toyota.com/privacyvts (“Privacy Notice”). Carefully review the Privacy Notice as it applies to your personal information and Vehicle (as defined below) data that we collect, use, store, share and secure to provide the Services. Please note that your Vehicle comes with a data communication module (“DCM”) that enables the Wireless/GPS Technology, as described in Section 11(a), and allows for the collection of data from you and your vehicle (e.g., location, health and driving data). BY DEFAULT, THE DCM IS ON/ACTIVE WHEN YOUR VEHICLE IS DELIVERED AND WILL REMAIN ON/ACTIVE (AND CONTINUE TO COLLECT DATA FROM YOU AND YOUR VEHICLE) UNTIL YOU CONTACT US AND REQUEST THAT IT BE DEACTIVATED. > (b) DCM. If you cancel your Service Plan, we have the right (but, unless you ask us to, not the obligation) to turn off your DCM as of the effective date of cancellation. Once your DCM is turned off, the Vehicle will not send any data to Toyota. Depending on the connectivity to your Vehicle, your DCM may deactivate immediately, or it may take up to several days. The GR86 forums have a few people also looking at ways to outright disconnect the hardware for this kind of stuff entirely, but I believe that's slow going - haven't kept up on it. I just have the above saved since I look at this stuff when buying any new car these days. The obvious disclaimer applies that you may enter warranty hell if you're disabling it, because it's 2023 and I guess society is fine with this level of default tracking. You should confirm how it affects you before changing anything. Otherwise, hope people find it helpful!

moonterrace 3y ago

2019 car here, equipped with a rear camera. Been driving for 43 years and I refuse to use the cam. The thing that bothers me is now I have to check the mfg connectivity TOS and must opt out instead of opt in to what data is transmitted - it’s ridiculous. Don’t get me started on the ever increasing software subscription services these manufacturers are trying to levy on consumers.

hgdcbbc 3y ago
Aren’t rearview cameras required now for new cars in the United States for safety reasons? Hope you don’t live around anyone too short.
- xyst 3y ago
  TIL: https://www.thedrive.com/news/20612/rearview-cameras-are-now-required-on-all-new-cars-sold-in-the-u-s https://www.thedrive.com/news/20612/rearview-cameras-are-now... In the good ole USA, vehicles are also getting larger (massive market to satisfy the insecurities of millions of Americans) and manufacturers are pushing them down American throats to get around the CAFE regulations. [1] Since they are getting larger, this means the view from the front is obscured. In most SUVs and trucks, 8-9 children can be sitting in front of a modern truck or SUV before you see a child's head. There's been some talk about forcing FRONT view cameras as well. [2] It's absolutely disgusting. I hate cars. I hate how transportation is largely car centric. [1] https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/04/04/buttigiegs-new-emissions-standards-fail-to-close-the-infamous-light-truck-loophole https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/04/04/buttigiegs-new-emissi... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-are-getting-bigger-are-front-blind-zones-children-rcna52109 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/americas-cars-trucks-ar...
  - switch007 3y ago
    Children should obviously carry a 10ft orange flag whenever they’re around cars. If not, it’s their fault if they get hit. /s
Tarball10 3y ago

siegecraft 3y ago

Can you not just physically disconnect or shield the network antenna (assuming you own the car outright, i suppose if it's financed it might be trickier to do that legally)?

AlotOfReading 3y ago
The same pipe that exfiltrates tracking data is bringing in the data for all the connected features of your car. That would include things like satellite radio, onboard navigation/GPS, software updates/recalls, and concierge/safety services (e.g. OnStar). In some cases, the same data is being used to both track you and provide the service, because the collection is happening somewhere on the backend. I wouldn't be surprised if many cars eventually broke in strange ways or displayed dashboard errors when you did this. The network connection is a pretty fundamental part of the vehicle software architecture and a lot of things depend on it. If you're lucky enough that your car can continue indefinitely without a network connection, it's possible that you wouldn't notice these features being gone. Realistically though, most people would. The solution here needs to be legislative action to protect consumer privacy. Technological solutions fall short.
- Silhouette 3y ago
  The network connection is a pretty fundamental part of the vehicle software architecture and a lot of things depend on it. Which is very worrying when you stop and think about it. If anything that actually matters is reliant on anything not travelling with you then that can not be a good sign for the safety and security of the vehicle. For one thing any vehicle that has any open incoming connectivity of any kind immediately has an attack vector for malware. And in this case that could literally be a matter of life and death and it could literally be used to attack thousands or even millions of vehicles simultaneously. The closest I can think of to any legitimate phone home feature is an automatic emergency call function that is triggered by a collision or theft being detected. But of course it's very easy to specify that those features may only be activated from the vehicle side and may only be used to contact emergency services. Anything else like GPS or infotainment does not need to be integrated at all with the essential vehicle systems or emergency communications functions and can be subject to the usual safeguards like any other device - including an off switch if the owner chooses not to use it and requirements to opt in for any potentially intrusive behaviour.

OnlineGladiator 3y ago

For many cars it's relatively straight-forward to disable the cellular modem, and sometimes it won't impact the other functionality of the car at all. Chances are someone in a forum somewhere has done the legwork for you. Do a google search and realize how easy (or hard) it is to do for your vehicle. Most of the time it won't even impact your warranty, apart from the modem you've purposefully disabled and no longer care about.

grugagag 3y ago
Sure, but once it becomes widespread it will no longer be possible to do so on newer models.
- LeoPanthera 3y ago
  I don't think this is true. In theory you could embed the cellular modem into the mainboard, or even into the processor, but I would bet for ease of service that the modem will always be on a separate board somewhere that can be cut off. They would never make the car reliant on cellular service or it would just stop working whenever you didn't have a signal - or the modem died.
- kelnos 3y ago
  How would the manufacturer enforce this? The first time someone gets stranded somewhere because the cellular hardware died and the car refused to start... well, sounds like a huge lawsuit to me.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  There will always be an antenna somewhere. Remove/destroy that, or put a faraday cage around it, and it doesn't matter what the manufacturer wants.
noman-land 3y ago
FYI, you can get the user manual of the car and find where the fuses are. One of the fuses will likely control the cellular system. Pull the fuse, no more data.
3y ago

voz_ 3y ago

Who cares though? I ask this elsewhere here too, so apologies if I am being redundant. Everything tracks me. My phone, every neighbors camera pointing out toward the street, the eyes in the sky, office buildings, grocery stores. I don’t care though, because I am no one. It’s such a non problem or issue for my day to day, and I couldn’t imagine choosing my car over something like this. However, on HN, I constantly see this privacy obsession in comments. What are you all up to that you care so much? Where’s the paranoia coming from?

rootsudo 3y ago
That's the problem, you don't care until you do.
- voz_ 3y ago
  No that’s not a good answer. It’s a vague gesture at some non realistic threat. When will I care?
  - kelnos 3y ago
    You'll care when the political winds shift in your country and your leaders don't like people of your race, religion, or sexual orientation, or perhaps one of your leisure activities, like the kinds of books you read or email newsletters you subscribe to. Meanwhile, there's all this data floating around that "proves" you the kind of person they don't like. And everyone seems to think this could never happen to them, until it does. Even if you are squeaky clean, the data on you could have errors, and your government -- with the best of intentions, even -- could misinterpret the data in ways that could cause you a lot of trouble. This isn't even a "what if?" type scenario; this sort of thing already happens to people. Edit: your top-level comment got flagged and killed, but I vouched it back to life. I completely disagree with your views here, but I think it's valuable and important that we talk about things like this.
  - NoRelToEmber 3y ago
    When you run for office and realize the party in power knows literally everything about you, and is using it to find dirt on you (and they're free to take all they find out of context), and target you for legal investigations, play six degrees of Kevin Bacon to link you to child molesters, and countless other dirty tricky you didn't even know existed, while you and your upstart new party know next to nothing about your opponents in power. But who needs more than one or two parties?

rektide 3y ago

Computing as a whole has obliterated user agency. This is just one of many manifestations of a system run rampant, where consumers can't even begin to understand what it is their purchasing & using. It's not a free market - the market can't adjust - if buyers can't even learn what they are buying. I do hope some day we can make computing more visible & honest.

npteljes 3y ago
100%. And if it's not obscure enough, the ever-connected high-speed internet takes care that it remains so.

randallsquared 3y ago

It's bizarre that a site ostensibly about privacy requires you to disclose the VIN of a specific vehicle to see the make and model privacy notes.

CamperBob2 3y ago
True. You can randomize the last few digits, though, and it'll still work.

FollowingTheDao 3y ago

What a fantastic dystopian fascist nightmare we’re are all accepting. And it is amazing that you can get some remakes to protest and boycott bud light over some gender bullshit but no one will bother boycotting something as evil as the surveillance state.

hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago

It’s becoming impossible to practice what you preach when it comes to data privacy. ‘Don’t like it, don’t buy it’ is difficult to execute unless you don’t mind not having a car, mobile phone, tv, browse the internet or even go out in a public place. There needs to be regulation and at least the ability to at least easily opt out of any of this insanity, but until there’s one (or probably many) widespread data-breaches related to this total abuse of power, so I suspect we’re at least a decade off that, if it even happens at all. Edit: location Australia, where political power is toothless due to the small scale of our country. Maybe we can fall in-line with GDPR or something someday, but currently there’s almost no discourse related to privacy (yet everyone is losing their minds over tiktok)

javajosh 3y ago
The EU seems to have it's act together. Things in the US won't change until the elites feel that pervasive surveillance impacts them personally and negatively.
- vGPU 3y ago
  Did you miss the story about how spying on journalists is OK?
- cosentiyes 3y ago
  Yes, the EU is doing what needs to be done (criminalizing end-to-end encryption) /s
paddw 3y ago
imo, if you don't want the government to track you, the battle is already lost, but there is probably room to limit what private companies are allowed to do on the regulatory front.
- graftak 3y ago
  The problem here is that governments themselves became dependent on the insane amount of user tracking these companies do, to the point where it is against their own ‘best interests’ to stop these practices. Stuff like this happens all over the place—even the EU—under the guise of stopping terrorism and/or child pornography.

cypherpunks01 3y ago

I think the title may have been altered as it was almost verging upon a garden-path sentence. You could have a bit of fun with the headline "Toyota and Honda Track Car Drivers Driving Driving Alarm"

WirelessGigabit 3y ago

https://archive.ph/9IU8W https://archive.ph/9IU8W

egberts1 3y ago

Cap off the RF connector with a 50 ohm terminator.

dreamcompiler 3y ago

It's essential to disable the "always on" cellular modems in these cars. They're always buried very deep but the antennas have to be near the surface. That's the best attack point.

kramerger 3y ago

They conveniently leave out Tesla. Fun fact: when the Chinese president is visiting an area, all Teslas are moved. Example: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas-beidaihe-district-bar-tesla-cars-driving-july-local-police-2022-06-20/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas...

newacct3 3y ago

[flagged]