16 ms·
Musk Wanted to Spy on Drivers to Defend Tesla from Lawsuits
- JohnFen 3y agoYet another in the growing list of reasons to never buy a Tesla. I would go further, that this is an instinct that Musk has tells me strongly to avoid using anything Musk has his fingers in.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- toss1 3y agoYup. It might be OK if the drivers could also spy on Tesla's development, or at least the internals of it's cars, but Musk would certainly go into a rage against that... On avoiding anything built by Musk, agree that is a hard NOPE. And I've defended Musk's accomplishments on here multiple times, but before he revealed his technical cluelessness and authoritarian sympathies. Sad, really.
- oh_sigh 3y agoWhen I learned about that interior camera in my Model Y, this is exactly what I thought might happen. But, I didn't want to cover it, because I wasn't sure if that would look suspicious in the case I was in an accident.
- wasdfff 3y agoNothing like buying yourself a telescreen
- tw04 3y ago> I wasn't sure if that would look suspicious in the case I was in an accident. No reasonable person would fault you for covering the camera. Assuming you still have the car, you have endless ammo for doing so. Including the fact that tesla employees were caught sharing video that was supposedly private. https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- toomuchtodo 3y agoPeople complain that Tesla doesn't do enough to prevent humans from defeating driver assist systems and then also complain about the privacy issues. Can't have it both way. Internal cameras are used to confirm you're attentive and eyes are on the road. Tesla employees being overprivileged with regards to consumer data access is a corporate policy, legal, and governance issue, not a tech issue. Like any other company, if consumer data is accessed in a way exceeding legitimate business purposes, someone should be fired. EDIT: https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/en_us/GUID-EDAD116F-3C73-40FA-A861-68112FF7961F.html https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/en_us/GUID-EDAD116... > The cabin camera can determine driver inattentiveness and provide you with audible alerts, to remind you to keep your eyes on the road when Autopilot is engaged. > By default, images and video from the camera do not leave the vehicle itself and are not transmitted to anyone, including Tesla, unless you enable data sharing. If you enable data sharing and a safety critical event occurs (such as a collision), Model Y shares short cabin camera video clips with Tesla to help us develop future safety enhancements and continuously improve the intelligence of features that rely on the cabin camera. Data may also be shared if diagnostics are required on cabin camera functionality. Cabin camera does not perform facial recognition or any other method of identity verification. To protect your privacy, cabin camera data is not associated with your vehicle identification number. > To adjust your data sharing preferences touch Controls > Software > Data Sharing > Allow Cabin Camera Analytics. You can change your data sharing settings at any time. (own Teslas, you are prompted to agree to different data sharing configurations before it is enabled)
- c22 3y ago"People" are not a unified bloc with a consistent set of non-conflicting opinions.
- _Algernon_ 3y agoThere is a "have it both ways" solution here. Do all the processing of the video feed in the car.
- interpol_p 3y agoYou can have it both ways: the internal cameras can be used to compute attentiveness entirely within the car's local computer, any imagery could be immediately discarded after processing (or better, processed in a way where the imagery and algorithms are hardware-isolated from any computing modules connected to a network or permanent storage). This is similar to how Apple computes a successful face ID or fingerprint scan
- NegativeK 3y agoIt's suspicious if you habitually cover it right before the sensors show you're driving like a jackass. I stuck a sliding webcam cover over it and have had no reason to uncover it.
- FridayNightTV 3y ago> When I learned about that interior camera in my Model Y Wait, Tesla cars video their users? Seriously? I'm gobsmacked users tolerate and agree to this.
- martin8412 3y agoYes, and Tesla employees freely share the video recordings when they find something they find interesting.
- redox99 3y ago> But, I didn't want to cover it, because I wasn't sure if that would look suspicious in the case I was in an accident. Now that's some chilling effect
- mensetmanusman 3y agoAll new cars have cameras, even ones that can see your eyes behind your sun glasses.
- vel0city 3y agoAll new cars made to me Euro standards, there's still new cars made solely for US markets which don't have these features.
- hindsightbias 3y agoCould someone invent a hologram cover for the camera that fools it?
- techdmn 3y agoI covered mine with a bit of post-it note. I'm sure masking tape would do the trick as well.
- rjzzleep 3y agoThat didn't stop people from using Uber did it...
- JohnFen 3y agoI don't use Uber simply because I prefer to avoid doing business with companies that gleefully and intentionally break the law. I'm not concerned with what others do. I only have control over my own decisions.
- bigtex 3y agoI am surprised he just doesn't ignore the FAA and launch his rocket anyways. Not like anyone is going to do anything about it.
- haliskerbas 3y agoHe got away with the weed thing which IIUC would have revoked someone’s security clearance. Maybe I’m misremembering.
- marvin 3y agoYou’d lose your security clearance over legally putting a marijuana cigarette in your mouth and demonstratively not inhaling, in the context of an interview made for entertainment purposes?
- jonathankoren 3y agoYes. Possession of any amount is federal misdemeanor with fine up to $1000 for a first offense. Flagrantly violating the law tends to get your security clearance revoked, and rightfully so. You demonstrated you can’t be trusted to follow law. https://www.criminallawyersandiego.com/california-marijuana-business-lawyer/federal-laws-policies/ https://www.criminallawyersandiego.com/california-marijuana-...
- adrr 3y agoIf you own a firearm and smoke weed it is a felony.
- colejohnson66 3y agoYes; that's what a Schedule I drug is. Possession is a federal offense, and the intent does not matter at all. Violation of federal laws can and will get your clearance revoked, even if it's legal in the state where the offense was committed.
- 3y ago
- OrvalWintermute 3y agoWe have cockpit cameras in many vehicles - planes, some trains, other vehicles. If we are going to have 4 cameras doing outward data collection, it makes sense we'd have them facing inward also. The question to me isn't the presence of a camera or not for accident reconstruction, but if it is being actively used when not involved in an accident in a big brother sense, and if user data if being unfairly monetized, and if this permitted a user to disable it in most cases (except accidents), or if the driven is operating in a professional capacity and must have the camera enabled for personal safety reasons. On the other hand I have a number of kids, and we have a plan for our au pair to drive the children. For this, it would be useful if we had in vehicle monitoring and tracking of speed, etc. We don't want an infant being driven to an appointment like the au pair is on the Indy 500.
- toast0 3y agoThose cockpit cameras are in the context of employment and also the context where all incidents are investigated with at least a stated goal of improving safety. Personal vehicle accidents are rarely investigated, and when they are, it's almost always with a goal of assigning responsibility. Why would I pay for something that is going to record me and most of the time be useful most for assigning responsibility to me? If there was a culture that most/all traffic collisions would be investigated and remediations would be taken, then sure. But it's very rare to have an thorough investigation, and it's even rarer for remidiations to be taken. Many locales have 'known dangerous' intersections where there's no consideration of design change. There's no mechanism to provide ongoing training to drivers (in the US).
- yincrash 3y agoWhile avoiding a Tesla will avoid Musk, it won't avoid privacy nightmares - Mozilla did a report on every car brand, and every car brand is terrible on privacy "They’re all bad" - https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...
- JohnFen 3y agoYes, this is why I won't be buying any modern cars. But my stance with Musk is deeper: I won't be buying anything from a Musk-involved company.
- tbyehl 3y agoThey're all bad but I'm reasonably certain that any car company not ran by Musk won't respond to public complaints by combing through my data and publishing whatever they find to Twitter and calling me names.
- katbyte 3y agoMight be all bad but even from your own link some are more bad then others: "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."
- gooseus 3y agoI used to think that Musk and Tesla would die a death by a thousand cuts to their brand, but it turns out that public perception is more of an anti-fragile system, so every scandal they survive only makes them more resilient to the next scandal.
- sircastor 3y agoI've had the same thought about some US politicians recently. I think there's an element of feeling shame that connects public perception about a scandal. More and more we're seeing people who refuse to publicly express remorse, or even acknowledge that something they did was wrong or should be considered wrong. And the way that public perception works, if you have enough "True believers" who shout loudly when someone tries to speak ill of you, it all seems to be just water off a duck's back.
- rchaud 3y ago> More and more we're seeing people who refuse to publicly express remorse, or even acknowledge that something they did was wrong or should be considered wrong. This is because US politicians are loath to take action against their colleagues in legislative chambers, fearing retaliation. So they depend on shame, or "the honor system", hoping that the bad apples will simply step down.
- mrguyorama 3y agoYou generally won't feel shame about something that you don't believe is wrong, so that gives people mountains of leeway to rationalize whatever they want if they are willing to lie to themselves to get their end goals.
- sircastor 3y agoYes, but in the context of a politician (or another public figure) you have historically been obligated to accept the moral standard of the public at large (because you need their vote.) Even if you didn't believe something was wrong, you'd have to at least feign the appropriate remorse so that people would back you again.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- natch 3y ago[flagged]
- User23 3y agoWhat legally keeps them from just putting that you agree to be snooped on in the Terms of Service?
- malermeister 3y agoIn Europe, the GDPR.
- hammock 3y agoWhat does it cost to import to the US a Tesla made for Europe?
- r053bud 3y agoIt’s already in the TOS that not a single Tesla owner read
- pierat 3y agoYou mean the thing that pops up on the dashboard that threatens to revoke usage of your cellphone-on-wheels if you dont "accept", even after a bill of sale was made with respect to the state?
- unforeseen9991 3y agoI'd be surprised if it's not already there due to the fact there's already internal cameras?
- ilyt 3y agoActual news would be him not wanting to do it.
- kneel 3y agoThere are several videos on PH of ppl doing the deed while autopilot drives the car for them, not saying that excuses privacy concerns but this issue is complicated by a rollout of autonomous features. Tesla wants your car to do most of the work but doesn't want to be liable if you're not paying attention and/or misusing the feature.
- ElectricalUnion 3y ago> by a rollout of autonomous features I thought no car had SAE driving automation 5 (steering wheel optional driving) yet, even thought Tesla specifically sells their SAE driving automation 2 (hands off driving) driver assistance as "Full Self-Driving".
- paxys 3y agoSo every company that ever sells me anything should be able to install cameras in my house, because I could potentially use the product incorrectly and then sue them for it, and they need to protect themselves.
- henry2023 3y agoI bet Meta would love to be an intermediary between your in-house footage and those wonderful and benevolent corporations
- yellow_postit 3y agoWell they did try to sell cameras for video calling into everyone’s home…
- sundarurfriend 3y ago> several videos on PH Philippines? Seems unlikely that Tesla is that common there. Product Hunt? Even if they added a video feature, this seems a weird thing to post there. OH! PornHub!
- neilv 3y agoIt's a little poetic: the techbros got the money to buy those Teslas through worse secret privacy violations of everyone else.
- hoosier_daddy 3y ago[flagged]
- otikik 3y agoYou are talking about what ended up being implemented, the post talks about what musk wanted to do. Different things.
- theultdev 3y ago> what ended up being implemented He's the CEO, what's implemented is what he wants to do. He did what he wanted, which was pitch, listen to feedback, and implement. Like a good CEO.
- doublerabbit 3y agoAnd then use it against the customers for malicious means. Like a good CEO.
- anonymousab 3y ago> listen to feedback, and implement. The whole X debacle has proven once again that Elon will never give up on a bad idea that he has tied his ego to or that was shut down by people he dislikes. These are exactly the kind of idea that he will jump at once the opportunity arises and the pesky naysayers aren't in the room; "why should we have to bother with any of this privacy or informed consent stuff" is where he's coming from. That is his style of CEOing, for better or worse.
- theultdev 3y agoThis event is literally about how he listened to his people. > The whole X debacle has proven I don't understand. What was the "debacle" and how did it "prove" your claim?
- adrr 3y agoProbably shouldn't call it self driving when you its just a level 2 feature that requires full attention of the driver to use safely. See the confusion. When I think of self driving, i think of level 3 or higher standard where i can safely not pay attention to the road. I don't even think any of the other manufactures who have L3 cars on the market call it self driving.
- dmm 3y agoEvery car will soon have inward facing cameras. In the 2021 infrastructure bill, by 2026 cars have to include technology that must “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired.” The most straightforward way to implement this is with driver-facing cameras: "Sam Abuelsamid, principal mobility analyst for Guidehouse Insights, said the most likely system to prevent drunken driving is infrared cameras that monitor driver behavior." https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-technology-business-health-068ee87392b0cca1444053b854a514dd https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-te...
- legitster 3y agoThe guy interviewed about his camera technology was desperately trying to pitch it. But I think this is honestly unlikely - watching driver behavior is probably the worst indicator for drunk driving. You are way better off just using the lane telemetry data.
- dmm 3y ago> watching driver behavior is probably the worst indicator for drunk driving. I think surveillance is (mostly) the point. I guess we'll see. I'd be happy to be wrong.
- legitster 3y agoFor who? The government doesn't specify what technology is required - and most cat manufacturers would probably avoid expensive IR image detection just for compliance.
- jstarfish 3y ago> But I think this is honestly unlikely - watching driver behavior is probably the worst indicator for drunk driving. You are way better off just using the lane telemetry data. Yep. It's the lane drift that would give the cops probable cause to pull you over for DUI in the first place. GPS could attest that you were recently parked at a bar. The most the internal camera might see is an open container.
- legitster 3y ago> By recording driver behavior, Musk could argue that driver error led to the accidents rather than Tesla technology We really need the US government to iron out the liability questions around self-driving. It's kind of a joke at this point. Tesla is offering people the ability to NOT DRIVE. In the case of an accident, they want to prove that the driver was being negligent by NOT DRIVING. Or you can take GM's approach and literally have cameras pointed at your eyes to make sure they are looking at the road and a steering wheel that can tell when you let go. And disable your ability to NOT DRIVE, whenever they detect you NOT DRIVING. In comparison, Tesla is at least being an "honest liar". They are giving you what you want, which is borderline illegal, and will rat you out for using it the first chance they get.
- misiti3780 3y agoI recommend you read the biography and not some blog taking an entire chapter and turning it into a few sentence out of context, there was a lot more nuance in the book
- nanidin 3y agoFSD does use the internal camera to enforce eyes on the road hands on the wheel. It’s actually worse for road-trips on the highway than plain autopilot for this reason, aside from the fact that FSD will automatically pass and change lanes.
- loandbehold 3y agoAutopilot will nag you every 30 seconds if it doesn't detect hands on steering wheel.
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoHilarious typo. I’m imagining the vehicle saying things like “You suck, you’re so lucky I’m the only car that will ever love you.” “
- 3y ago
- _ea1k 3y agoIf you are a driver suing, wouldn't you want this data to prove your case? That the company recognizes it would help their case instead and the accusers wouldn't want it is itself interesting. Also, these cameras shouldn't exist in non-robotaxi use cases. And since Teslas don't exist as robotaxis, that means these cameras shouldn't exist too.
- chihuahua 3y agoWhenever the video helps the company, it will be used in any lawsuit. Whenever the video would help the driver, it was mysteriously lost due to an unforseen technical glitch.
- _ea1k 3y agoAFAIK, these are stored locally. I think some third party shops are able to recover them? At least they can for the other cameras.
- mensetmanusman 3y agoThe government is requiring they exist for driver monitoring.
- _ea1k 3y agoI don't think the government requires storage or transmission. Competing systems don't all do it in as intrusive of a way.
- CP3f6kMA 3y agoI would rather I have control and the data never leaves my possession unless absolutely required.
- _ea1k 3y agoI completely agree.
- travisporter 3y agoI wish there was like a debunking or common counterarguments website or something to everyone who gives the same excuses to forgive this behavior - I have nothing to hide, everyone’s doing it, I’m not significant enough for them to spy on me, they have to make money somehow etc. As it stands, I feel like even if they started live-streaming every camera on YouTube, people would still not care
- throwaway128128 3y agoFrom the book on Musk: Musk was not happy. The concept of “privacy teams” did not warm his heart. “I am the decision-maker at this company, not the privacy team,” he said. “I don’t even know who they are. They are so private you never know who they are.” There were some nervous laughs. “Perhaps we can have a pop-up where we tell people that if they use FSD [Full Self-Driving], we will collect data in the event of a crash,” he suggested. “Would that be okay?” The woman thought about it for a moment, then nodded. “As long as we are communicating it to customers, I think we’re okay with that.” Glad this guy is the richest man in the world, we are in good hands. It's so comforting to see Musk's attitude when he found out about the privacy team and their temerity to bind him with silly "privacy rules".
- hn1986 3y agoCurious why so many people who are sensitive to privacy issues here ignore massive data collection and privacy flaws in Tesla?
- throwaway128128 3y agoCognitive dissonance
- thegrim22 3y ago[flagged]
- rchaud 3y ago> Musk proposed a pop-up message, informing customers that data would be collected if they used the Full Self-Driving Beta feature. This placated the manager. Anybody building Ublock Element Zapper for TeslaOS?
- mensetmanusman 3y agoFirst they used the data to defend Tesla from NYT reporters: https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/14/elon-musk-lays-out-his-evidence-that-new-york-times-tesla-model-s-test-drive-was-fake/amp/ https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/14/elon-musk-lays-out-his-evi... This is our future unless the govt demands companies stop spying.
- tylersmith 3y ago[flagged]
- mensetmanusman 3y agoThe truth versus abuse trade off is fascinating.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mcpackieh 3y agoDidn't Tesla also use car telemetry data in their feud with Top Gear? I think this goes way back.
- FireBeyond 3y agoAnd to attempt to throw the driver in a fatal collision under the bus, holding a press conference to let the public know the vehicle was warning him about being inattentive, but not mentioning that it had warned him once, and that that was nearly eighteen minutes before the collision.
- malermeister 3y agoThis is what the GDPR is for, the same regulation this site loves to hate.
- pupppet 3y agoIs autopilot really that important to everyone? I can't say I've ever been driving thinking I wish I could be doing absolutely nothing right now.
- jstarfish 3y agoTraffic is a fucking nightmare in Atlanta and Los Angeles, and Atlanta's mass transit sucks bigtime. Having FSD crawl along in low gear while you read the news or finish getting dressed would make for a way more tolerable commute.
- kayodelycaon 3y agoMy car has lane centering and radar cruise control. I use it frequently on dry, well-marked highways. It allows me to drive with less mental energy because I don’t have to steer the car or maintain speed. My hands are always on the wheel and I’m still watching everything as if I was driving. It does a good job under ideal conditions. This may not seem like much but it adds up over a multi-hour trip. In rain or snow, I tend to avoid any automation to keep continuous awareness of how much traction my tires have. Too many people have died when automation hides problems until failure and then squishy thing behind the controls gets surprised.
- yardie 3y agoI use it because the Tesla infotainment system is garbage and quite limited compared to Carplay/Android Auto. And I need to look away and at my phone to use proper apps like Waze, Apple Maps, Overcast, etc. The onboard Spotify app, for example, doesn't do HD audio and doesn't load playlists completely. Tesla, rather than giving customers what they want, would prefer they deal with their limited inhouse system. $12/15k for FSD never made sense to me. Tesla is moving to subscriptions where development comes at $200/mo and customers don't have to assume all the risk.
- cs702 3y agoThe road to privacy hell is paved with... financial motives. (Paraphrasing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with... )
- panick21_ 3y agoIs it just me or is it totally reasonable in a review the cars sensor data in a case of an accident?
- mannyv 3y agoIt's not spying if consent is given. The good thing is that every idea is considered. The bad thing is that every idea is considered. The difference, in Musk organizations, is that ideas are aired out. You might think that's a bad thing, but would you rather have this executives slipping backdoors into your products without anyone knowing? If you notice, the manager in question wasn't afraid to push back on Musk. That's a big difference between Musk companies and your company: in your company a manager would probably fold and just do it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- GaryNumanVevo 3y agoNot to mention Tesla employees were sharing pictures and videos of customer's external cameras. Including Elon's own Tesla. https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- nojvek 3y agoTesla has good ideas, but stupid execution. Comma.ai has driver monitoring, GM cars have driver monitoring, Hyundai/Toyotas and probably many others yell at you if the hands are not on the steering wheel. Tesla pure vision based autopilot makes a ton of bad decisions and sudden turns that no sane human will ever make. Yes, on principle I agree that vision via cameras should be sufficient for perception. However the algorithms and training are not there yet. Kudos to Waymo and Cruise getting license to operate in California without drivers 24/7 and doing 100s of successful rides per day. We can shit on them for using 250,000 lidar rigs that only companies blessed by infinite VC money can afford but they passed that objective milestone. Tesla has not and probably unlikely for next 5 years. Waymo and Cruise have shown that they actually give a fuck about safety, while Tesla has their heads in sand ignoring what their system is actually capable of offloading risk to their drivers.