8 ms·
The next law I want passed: The "Cars can't require a network connection" law: Any external network connection must be disclosed to the user. The car must come
by exabrial 3y ago
The next law I want passed:
The "Cars can't require a network connection" law: Any external network connection must be disclosed to the user. The car must come with instructions how to disable it, (which must be a user serviceable physical hardware switch, fuse, jumper, etc). All functions of the car must remain permanently operable with no nagging of the user to reconnect, other than an optional initial prompt to inform the user of the change. 0 repercussions may be brought on the user for disabling the network connection, such as 'we can't diagnose/fix your steering because it can't connect to the network' or 'we can't update your infotainment system with your network connection disabled', as those updates could easily be done via the OBDII port.
Hell while we're at it, pass this same thing for robot vacuums, garage door openers, and 1000 other "smart" devices.
- kube-system 3y ago> Any external network connection must be disclosed to the user. The car must come with instructions how to disable it > All functions of the car must remain permanently operable I think this needs to be refined a bit. As phrased, you're just making any features that use network connections illegal.
- CarVac 3y agoBut conveniently, automakers may find that every feature uses network connections.
- asimovfan 3y agoYour legislator can disagree and enforce his/her will. Usb c for apple as an example.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoHonestly, I see exactly zero features that would require network connection that make sense to be offered by the car maker directly. So let's refine it to "All first-party functions of the car ...", and add some provision to prevent bundling and un-commoditizing third-party networked additions.
- Arainach 3y agoIn-car Wifi, Spotify on the car radio, OEM maps with traffic.... you see zero?
- smolder 3y agoIt's fine for those functions to be a casualty of the owners choice to turn off the network, just like with a phone. If automakers want to use a cellular connection in your car for non-critical functions, it should come with a legitimate user-uncontrollable off switch, just like airplane mode on a phone.
- brewdad 3y agoRight. We're trying to stop the world of heated seat subscriptions with a remote license verification at startup before it gets a foothold.
- Arainach 3y agoRight - but as the parent said, the proposed language of "all car features must keep working" isn't compatible with that. Defining a law that allows those features to be turned off and yet disallows "data is broken, heated seats are disabled" is very difficult. After all, heated seats aren't an essential safety feature.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoYes. In-car WiFi should obviously work even if the network connection break (remember, we're talking about working without Internet, not disallowing Internet at all) - WiFi is a local wireless network protocol, not magic Internet summoner. With actual Internet connection down, it should still maintain the local network for connected devices. As for the rest, none of those look like they should be first-party features. "Spotify on the car radio" is a third-party integration to a system that should also work off-line, e.g. for playing music off removable storage, casting from your phone (via WiFi, without Internet), or, you know, working as an actual radio. OEM maps with traffic is something hardly anyone wants anyway, because they universally suck relative to some TomTom screen, or even Google Maps.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> As phrased, you're just making any features that use network connections illegal. Just as planned.
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoYou do see how proposing banning maps with traffic updates tanks the whole concept, right?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nulbyte 3y agoI wouldn't want this built into my car. The list thing I want is to pay yet another fee for something I already have. I'll stick to plugging my phone into the vehicle for this feature.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> wouldn't want this built into my car I wouldn’t either. But I don’t think that means I should mandate my preferences be extended to all by banning the damn thing. Simpler: mandate a network kill switch that doesn’t unnecessarily compromise functionality. (You would have to be creative about anti-theft tracking functions. But this is solvable.)
- treyd 3y agoWhy can't I just use my phone for this?
- deadmutex 3y agoI think the issue is that some people have different preferences.
- littlestymaar 3y ago> You do see how proposing banning maps with traffic updates tanks the whole concept, right? You have it on your phone already, the car has no reason to have its own, with its own network connection.
- jchw 3y agoIt's a damn car. Maybe that's how it should be.
- zerbinxx 3y agoYou could rephrase it as: All functions that a consumer could reasonably expect a car to perform without an internet connection must be operable without an internet connection. All features related to driving the vehicle, including but not limited to steering, braking, using traffic signals, starting/stopping, toggling locks or lights, opening or closing doors or compartments, and other standard features of a non-connected car must not require a network connection. I think it’s probably OK if automakers want to onboard and support network features like maps or outsourced computation/diagnostics, but bricking everything because the company wants to collect user data and they want to opt out is obviously unethical. It’s important for these regulations to include the fact that they cannot be worked around or stapled on by the auto company post-hoc via firmware upgrades or the like.
- troupo 3y ago> All functions that a consumer could reasonably expect a car to perform without an internet connection must be operable without an internet connection. Welcome to "the law is vague and impossible to implement" shouts from HN
- m463 3y agoa network connection is required for headlights to function. The car must determine current headlight laws and comply with any city, state or country requirements. Additionally, there may be headlight safety software updates required, and the network connection will be used to download them. a network connection is required for the windshield wipers to function. (etc)
- antasvara 3y agoWe don't even need to use the word "reasonable." We already have a list of things that need to function in order for a car to pass annual inspection, so why not base the regulation off of that?
- kube-system 3y agoWell, there's a lot of those lists and most states don't test anything other than OBD-II emissions readiness. And I don't really think that the primary concern here is that automakers are going to disable your brakes or legally mandated lights.
- exabrial 3y ago> As phrased, you're just making any features that use network connections illegal I mean, that's not so bad...
- littlestymaar 3y ago> As phrased, you're just making any features that use network connections illegal. No, only features that require network connection. Which is exactly the intended outcome.
- kelnos 3y agoSpeak for yourself. I like being able to lock my car from far away when I've forgotten to. I like being able to remotely start the engine so it's nice and warm inside for meet in the winter. Making these sorts of features illegal is unacceptable and short sighted. What I'd like is to force carmakers to open up the APIs and protocols used to enable these features, and allow me to use my own backend that I run in my own hardware, away from their prying eyes.
- littlestymaar 3y ago> Speak for yourself. I like being able to lock my car from far away when I've forgotten to. I like being able to remotely start the engine so it's nice and warm inside for meet in the winter. > Making these sorts of features illegal is unacceptable and short sighted. Please tell me that this is a parody.
- kube-system 3y agoIf you think that is parody, you might be in an ideological bubble. These features are popular.
- littlestymaar 3y ago> If you think that is parody, you might be in an ideological bubble. Ah yes, the famous ideological bubble of “not being a wealthy American”. Talk about filter bubbles… The topic at stake are freedom and private property: the right to do what you want with your car, and the right to fully own a car without the manufacturer having higher rights than you the owner (including rights to disable features remotely). If you think that “I'm too lazy to get back to my car to lock it” is a good argument in that context, there's not much I can do for you. And “popularity” isn't relevant either, since remotely brick-able and non-reparable shit are selling well too.
- goodlinks 3y agoCan you give an example of a function of a car that should need a network connection. E.g. navigation. Could still work but say cannot load maps. And it could let you download maps to a usb stick if it was actually decent.
- calvinmorrison 3y agoPermanently operable - so, what, the car makers are going to keep 2G wireless going forever for vintage vehicles that have car-talk?
- kbenson 3y agoSome delineation between a core function of driving the car and ancillary services is probably warranted, so things like car-talk and sirius aren't the responsibility of the manufacturer. I suspect the devil's in the details for exactly how that delineation is decided though...
- coding123 3y agoCan we also mandate this for a rented car? A rental user must also have the ability to disable all network connections.
- denhaus 3y agothis is why i still drive my old corolla. don’t have to deal with smart/network/access features, and it’s easy for shops to fix. hope i dont blow a head gasket now that i’ve said that…
- sandworm101 3y agoA blown head gasket is one of the easiest things to diagnose and repair. You can do it in your home garage with basic tools. But finding a faulty temp sensor that is throwing a code that in turn disables throttle response ... that requires a cloud-based network solution to properly lookup the deliberately cryptic error code.
- ClumsyPilot 3y agoif only the car contained a computer for diagnostucs and a high resolution dispkay that xould show an error clearly...
- kube-system 3y agoYour faulty temp sensor shouldn't need any cloud-based solution. The SAE J1979 standard (or your part of the world's equivalent) already provides for a way to get that diagnostic data which is mandated by law.
- boringg 3y agoYeah but how would the car manufacturers make any money /S
- forgetfreeman 3y agoaccurate only if you don't warp the head badly enough that it needs to be machined or replaced outright. Even so, crate motors are surprisingly affordable.
- passwordoops 3y agoLove it but then how will the government follow you or engage the kill switch?
- AddLightness 3y ago[dead]
- forgetfreeman 3y agoYou just legislated remove keyless entry, start, software controlled driving assistance anything, and center console infotainment displays out of existence. I applaud your bold vision and anxiously await an opportunity to support it at the polls.
- switch007 3y agoThose huge center screens are massive visual distractions, and tempt designers to put more and more in them (such as AC controls). They tempt your eyes away from the road. Every single car I've driven recently (about 20 different models) had a different way of adjusting the brightness and changing the night/day mode. I drove a new, high-spec BMW recently and it wasn't possible to reduce the brightness manually - the German manufacturer knows better than you, supposedly. Driving assistance such as emergency braking and auto high beam has caused me more problems than not. The UK has narrow streets and many parked cars - the car often thinks you're going to crash in to a parked car. The auto high beams turn off when I don't want them to, and don't come on when I do. Keyless entry was (is?) a total boon for thieves (hello, Jaguar Land Rover)
- qwytw 3y agoIt's understandable that you have a specific set of personal preferences, nothing wrong about that. Wanting to impose them on everyone else, well, you know..
- disposition2 3y agoOddly enough, based on my limited research, OP’s personal preferences aren’t even an option these days. In my limited research, I wasn’t able to find a new vehicle that didn’t include infotainment / advanced safety features, etc. I assume this is what the market desires but I personally would just like to have the option to buy a new car that has creature comforts limited to a basic radio, heating and AC. It was a bit mind boggling that the cheapest base model cars come with an 8” touch screen and all kinds of advanced safety features these days. You seemingly can’t buy just a car these days, it has to be a car with everything added on (whether you want it or not). Kind of like televisions these days, you can’t buy a television that just has inputs, speakers and a tuner. Again maybe this is what the market desires and I’m just an oddball outlier.?
- mulmen 3y agoMy car is 15 years old. I have to go to the dealership to get the infotainment maps updated because the car has no network connection. I agree with you in general but I have no problem with map updates requiring an external wifi connection.
- troupo 3y agoThe only reason you have to do that is because the automaker made it so. Literally no one was stopping them from being able to update maps from a USB stick.
- mulmen 3y agoSure. It actually has that capability to load MP3s. But as a navigation UX it sucks. I’d rather park my car every night and have the latest maps. Banning network connectivity as a feature does a disservice to users.
- decafninja 3y agoI too, want a simple minimalistic car with minimum fancy technogizmodoodats. However that is not what the general market wants.
- Frost1x 3y ago>However that is not what the general market wants. Not sure that's the case. You're seeing enshitification here. We keep pretending demand has a lot to blame but when you see voters opinions like this, it seems a lot more like supply side market manipulation. Now one might argue Maine is an exception to the market and blah blah but frankly I've grown tired of the invisible hand of the market argument. If truly a lot of privatized policy and practice comes to fruition because it's what the market demands then I'm not entirely sure market economics is a great model for humans. There so much consumer hostility and exploitation anymore that I for one am not a fan.
- qwytw 3y ago> We keep pretending demand has a lot to blame but when you see voters opinions like this, it seems a lot more like supply side market manipulation Want incentives do car manufacturers have in doing that if it's not something that most consumers want? I doubt "collecting/selling user data" is the reason if you could charge a $1k+ premium for a "enshitified" car.
- decafninja 3y agoI disagree in that while I myself don’t like all these technogizmodoodats, I can certainly see how many more people can and do want these features. They do make life a lot easier. Heck, a lot of them I would love too, but not at the cost of over complicating my car. Also remember this is HN. What people often want here is not what the average person wants, whether it be cars, phones, laptops, or many other items.
- yunwal 3y agoThe article is referencing the entire state of Maine, and their preferences, not HN.
- openopenopen 3y agoThe network connection is an excellent point, yesterday Optus, a large telecommunications and Internet provider, suffered a nationwide outage that affected at least 10 million Australians. Imagine if millions of cars failed to function properly because they were linked to network. If there was a natural disaster, this may have terrible consequences.
- thomk 3y agoA “No network required” insignia is in order.
- squarefoot 3y ago> Hell while we're at it, pass this same thing for robot vacuums, garage door openers, and 1000 other "smart" devices. This a hundred times. With electronics and connectivity becoming cheaper and cheaper over time, the temptation to stick it to every possible device in order to take control of it and make it obsolete at will just by turning off a necessary service, or simply collect user data is simply too tempting. I see a sad future in which a technology will be invented with the sole purpose of having every possible object, from shoes to glasses, dentures, bags, umbrellas, walking canes, bicycles, hammers, etc. connected and constantly transmitting something somewhere, outside of any control by the user.
- troupo 3y ago> Hell while we're at it, pass this same thing for robot vacuums, garage door openers, and 1000 other "smart" devices. "Any home device shall not require an internet connection without loss of functionality"
- mrktf 3y agoI would go even further, if car model is sold more than 100k times and more than 5 years (a.k.a reaches "significant" portion of population) car manufacturer (or any other equipment manufacturer) must do following: 1. Wiring diagrams, service documentation, working diagnostic software, firmware blobs must be provided to national archive institution (think archive.org) - and how information is shared is in discretion of this institution 2. In case there are theft prevention or "genuine check" systems (requires keys, codes or whatever) - keys and procedures are given to police (it they job anyway to prevent stealing) 3 Car road worthiness is tested using open (or opened) hardware/computer blocks - car must pass all safety rules and excepted functionality cannot deviate more than 20%. The manufacturer must provide documentation, SDK and calibration procedures, safety tests, but it is illegal to lock functionality by requiring special hardware (if it is secret sauce - provide schematic for alternative hardware which good at least 80% as special). Obvious, it can have proprietary software - it need provide open source alternative implementation. 4. if car is sold, user need to be informed about open hardware and software.
- RecycledEle 3y agoI support forcing all documentation to be released, but be careful of overly invasive laws that help big companies execute regulatory capture because the new guy can not meet the regulatory requirements.
- dawidloubser 3y agoYou make a very good point in general, but at this point cars are already so absurdly over-regulated, it's basically impossible for the "new guy" to break into the market at all.
- userinanother 3y agoEveryone has wire diagrams they just need to release them
- account42 3y ago> I would go even further, if car model is sold more than 100k times and more than 5 years This will just result in a "new" model every year similarly to how (not car) retailers who supposedly offer price matching will often ask manufactures to supply whem with "unique" models of various devices.
- RecycledEle 3y agoI want that kind of law for more than cars. I want it for everything. The problem with that law for cars is the Federal Kill Switch Law that might go into effect in 2026.
- maxwell 3y agoA bipartisan bill confirming our right to also repair our personal electronic devices will be considered in the Maine Senate in January. https://twitter.com/miketipping/status/1722101497683382286 https://twitter.com/miketipping/status/1722101497683382286
- pjc50 3y agoI note that the opposite applies in the EU under "eCall", a remarkably under-discussed piece of legislation. This mandates that your car automatically call the emergency services if involved in a collision. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/ecall-in-vehicle-system-type-approval.html https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/ecall-in-...
- lost_tourist 3y agoThere should be basically an off switch, no GPS, no antenna, no internet connection. I don't care if it's opt in or opt out, I just want a kill switch.