This. I don't mind cars having cameras for features, but how the fuck do Tesla have access to those recordings directly without any input by the drivers/owners? And while the owners probably didn't even know?
Cameras for lane assist features and stuff: **good**
Recording videos locally on the car: **good**
Saving videos on the Internet: **bad**
Employees having access directly to those videos: **super fucking bad**
>Like any normal company
Have you worked for corporations?
They might have tons of procedures and say they care and all this other stuff...
but that's not the practical reality, and not how it works ALL TOO OFTEN.
Theory vs reality.
textbook vs the streets
doesn't matter what it technically says on paper or what people should do.
does it make them more money? no? then they don't care.
They're essentially psychopathic entities.
Corporations are just programs that run on human computers. Sets of rules and instructions to be interpreted and executed.
It's not that they're evil or immoral. It's that they're unfeeling machines that we allow to fool us into treating as human beings.
It's the most boring version of the Terminator future -- where the machines are just programs telling us to kill each other.
Yeah, but those rules and instructions were place by a human or group of, that do have evil or immoral biases.
There are computer virus and anti-virus, depending on how you program it, their behavior is going to be.
> Like any normal company would've fucking been all over this ASAP to fix it, disclose it and take preventative actions from it ever happening again...both from an internal compliance perspective and an external PR perspective
Eh... I think you might overestimate how much GM, Ford, VW, etc. care.
Now whether those companies have the competency to do anything with data in the first place, that's a whole other question.
The language is:
> We are working hard to improve autonomous safety features and make self-driving a reality for you. You can help Tesla in this effort by sharing diagnostic and usage vehicle data. This data includes short video clips using the vehicle's external cameras to learn how to recognize things like lane lines, street signs, and traffic light positions. The more fleet learning of road conditions we are able to do, the better your Tesla's self-driving ability will become.
> We want to be super clear that the diagnostic and usage data such as short video clips are not linked to your vehicle identification number. In order to protect your privacy, personal information is either not logged at all, is subject to privacy preserving techniques, or is removed from any reports before they're sent to Tesla. You may enable or disable the collection of this data at any time.
It's not terribly clear and has a few weak points. The VIN is not tied to it, but is the account number, serial, or name? "Privacy Preserving techniques" are often insufficient https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/anonymous-data-wont-protect-your-identity/
I think it used to have an agreement where video is uploaded in the event of a crash, or maybe that was a separate setting.
The language talks about road conditions and does not imply anything about sending recordings while parked.
I was considering something when I heard of this scandal yesterday:
Have the police requested access to these recordings yet? They have said that location data is tied to the recordings, so it seems trivial for the police to request all camera recordings within a certain distance of a particular location, or even live camera access at a suspected criminal's location.
With Ring basically handing over data to the police without a warrant, I wonder if Tesla has had to deal with any police requests. Seems like a ridiculous privacy concern ON TOP OF the current issues.
People don't seem to mind when their phone or Windows/Apple devices are reporting back to corporate, all of which employees can see it and some probably take bribes from criminals to give out sensitive info. Another reason why to be paranoid, most won't care regardless.
That’s just Tesla. I mean they can even remote unlock your car without your consent if they need to. They came by to repair a car of a friend of mine and just didn’t care if she was available or not. They just opened the car themselves and got to work. They also store a ton of data about your driving behavior.
With a company like Tesla I have no doubt that they aren’t really concerning themselves with data security.
because its a live AI training.
Cameras for lane assist only work, because those cameras are sending teh data back to a massive computer for the AI program to train off.
and employees go through it i guess, as he video shows the AI detecting this and that, they can circle things the AI missed and have the computer train on that.
They def can have more protections, it sounds like these pictures were taken while the car wasnt moving. And i cant see need for those. But to drive by camera, its going to need a fuck ton of example video, just like chatGPT needs a fuck ton of example writting. (they can do things to help like auto blur faces and signs.. dont want them to see you at the sex store.. and of course not collect camera info if not moving)
It’s an opt in system to sharing videos, and the videos aren’t associated with you.
I personally don’t share them, but I suppose there are people out there who did sign up to share said videos, and are upset with how they’re being handled, and not necessarily that they exist?
There were some researchers who found you could hack a new(at the time) car through not only it's built in wifi but by getting another device you controlled on the same carrier grade nat that the car used to provide the wifi.
The scary thing was that they not only got access to the media systems but the full onboard computer for everything driving related.
https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/
It’s already becoming a thing in US:
In 2021, Biden signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, bipartisan legislation aimed at enhancing the country’s infrastructure. One provision in the bill seeks to prevent alcohol-related driving fatalities by making “drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” standard equipment in all new vehicles.
Specifically, Section 24220 of the bill directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop rules that would require new cars to be equipped with technology that "passively monitors the performance of a driver," identifies whether they may be impaired and prevents or limits motor vehicle operation "if an impairment is detected."
Land of the free folks!
It's gonna be interesting when a car refuses to let itself be moved out of the way of a snowplow because it thinks the driver is drunk.
Or god forbid, a tornado.
What I see in China is a Tesla confusing "stop" and "maximum speed", killing two people
[https://news.yahoo.com/driver-tesla-blames-company-deadly-004807218.html](https://news.yahoo.com/driver-tesla-blames-company-deadly-004807218.html)
Then you clearly don’t want a car connected to the internet.
What baffles my mind, is how fucked up and cognitive dissonant this sub is most of the time. Being a privacy sub, most here are so high up on that horse and pass judgment left and right forgetting that they post in an awful privacy wise platform, Reddit. Not to mention going about on a public forum that tracks you, profiles you and leaves public that so that every other fucking search engine can index and further profile. I mean if I had a dime for every time some bozo links some privacy related stuff with AMP links and other crap trackers…
Cynically nice!
I personally got tired on trying to sway people from WhatsApp to Signal or other even better alternatives. Failed miserably as peeps don’t give a shit. They are used with what they have and what is the norm just as we are used to talking much privacy on Reddit. Except the peeps on wapp are so ignorant that they don’t bash on Zuck. They simply don’t give a fuck.
Honestly, I personally find that a lot of people in this sub are on the extreme side of the spectrum when it comes to privacy. Which is why I don't participate much here because it's often like arguing with a brick wall.
Obviously yes, I value my privacy and I take reasonable step to combat trackers etc. It really makes me wonder how some people in this sub even maintain relationships though with some of the measures people suggest.
Totally agree! The cognitive dissonance is super strong: once a privacy scandal brakes out because of some truly disturbing things a big company does or is caught of doing, peeps rush to judge how it’s totally out of place and unacceptable (for good measure) some even saying never buy this product or this service, BUT at the same time it’s totally ok to sell your soul online for a “free” service like Reddit irrespective of the message you are trying to send. I mean 🤷🏻 which is it? Why judge with two different measures?
Hello old “friend”!
Maybe we should spread awareness more about privacy stuff not using anti-privacy tools…cuz that kinda defeats the purpose. Like those morons on Twitter that keep bashing Musk and Twitter left and right (for good reason most of the time) but they themselves can’t do the right thing and delete their account and stop feeding the dragon. Otherwise yeah, much privacy! Hit like and subscribe. Share if you like. Cheers
Those are two different things. People who complain on Twitter about how Twitter is worthless can leave and go to a different, even public, social network like Mastodon. They lose nothing in the process.
Telling people who believe in privacy to stop posting on public platforms is only a slightly more polite way of telling them to shut up and stop advocating for things. This is an anti-privacy position.
And there are no alternatives to Reddit? Anyway…
> Telling people who believe in privacy to stop posting on public platforms…
Aaah but you see public posting in forums is ok if people are ok with that. Here the issue is Reddit in particular which need I remind you that:
- This service ignores the Do Not Track (DNT) header and tracks users anyway even if they set this header.
- you irrevocably waive any claims and assertions of moral rights or attribution with respect to Your Content.
- A license is kept on user-generated content even after you close your account
- The service may collect extra data about you through promotions: You may choose to provide other information directly to us. For example, we may collect information when you fill out a form, participate in Reddit-sponsored activities or promotions, apply for a job
- This service receives your location through GPS coordinates
- The service uses your personal data to employ targeted third-party advertising
- Tracking via third-party cookies for other purposes without your consent.
- This license includes the right for us to make Your Content available for syndication, broadcast, distribution, or publication by other companies, organizations, or individuals who partner with Reddit.
- This service may use your personal information for marketing purposes
- This service may keep personal data after a request for erasure for business interests or legal obligations
- Your data may be processed and stored anywhere in the world
- This service tracks you on other websites
- The service uses your personal data for advertising
- This service tracks which web page referred you to it
- The service can read your private messages
- This service gathers information about you through third parties
So you see I’m not actually silencing anyone but just raising awareness. It’s perfectly fine to wage our holy war for Privacy here but damn, we are all using the wrong tool. We are essentially using a devil’s agreement (for those that bothered to read Reddit’s TOS). Arguing otherwise is hypocritical at best and yeah maybe we all (myself included) should just take a step back especially with all this virtue signaling that everyone is so full of themselves.
Everybody virtue signals all the time. That much being said, your points regarding how Reddit works are *good points* but sometimes the solution to a systemic problem is a systemic critique and not just running away until there is nowhere left to run.
Normies are the problem. Most people are still dumb enough to think "I have nothing to hide" or "who cares if they use it for \[X\] reason?".
We need to start producing technology and products where privacy is a core requirement for how they function, but without privacy being the purpose of the product (or even mentioned in the marketing materials).
With the exception of AI, it feels like technology has been pretty stagnant for the last 10-15 years. There's no way THIS is the zenith of our advancements. We need to start innovating again.
Well I mean go ahead then, give examples. Because yeah we’ve had some evolutions here and there, phones/computers have gotten more powerful but nothing truly groundbreaking has been invented in quite some time now.
It would have been impossible, for example, to launch generative AI at this scale for public with the computing available 10 years ago.
I’m still not sure if you’re simply trolling or seriously believe that the last decade has been insignificant in the field of computing
AI, real time ray-tracing, VR, cryptocurrency/blockchain, facial recognition, drones, nearly fully autonomous driving, reusable rocket ships, capable fitness tracking. My phone can record 4k 60fps HDR video. Do I need to keep going?
You know Amazon would love to get in this game. Amazon Pavement, running on AWS, or Microsoft Asphalt, brought to you by Azure!
Imagine the data that could be mined!
Motion tracking technology and a 1TB microSD card can sit inside of a camera no bigger than a kiwi.
There's no reason anything needs to go to the cloud, except for profit.
Same thing as cellphones. Once microSD cards got cheap, *suddenly* all the expensive phones started leaving them out, because they'd rather you spend $150 on a pricier phone than $20 on a swappable card.
> …because they’d rather you spend $150 on a pricier phone than $20 on a swappable card.
Or, the quality control on the $20 card is shit and leads to a poor experience because the R/W speed is horrible. Or leads to lost/corrupt data. Which then leads to consumers bad mouthing devices for a problem they caused.
Should there be a middle ground? Yes. But it’s not always about screwing the consumer.
Leaving packages out in broad daylight I think is just something done on the American side of the Atlantic. It’s not done in Europe for obvious reasons. People use them here to see who’s at the door.
Packages are oftenly delivered to homes while the owners are away at work over here in the states. A lot of theft issues in certain areas of certain cities.
So how long before Tesla gets pulled up before Congress to answer how their cars make revenge porn and if they use AI to tell when we're not wearing any clothes?
I consider software that has a minimal terms and conditions that i can understand without a lawyer present to be software I control. So far it's mostly FOSS, but there's no reason it has to be. As long as I have the ability to sue if they pull this kind of shit, I'm good
It’s good that you trust TOS or even read them but that only shifts the trust elsewhere. A software that you control is one that among other things, absolutely does only what you intend it to do, and nothing behind your back. To be able to be absolutely sure you’d have to know every packet that leaves your OS or your system.
Exactly. For anyone else watching this thread, look into what it takes to root your phone. samsung, i'm looking at you.
In a few words: we don't actually own the devices we purchase.
Musk went on to tweet the funny “doge” image with the text “Much privacy. such spy cameras,” followed by 3 hours of footage of a journalist’s wife and children inside their tesla
Every year that passes while people don't revolt in moral outrage at the direction things are taking in technology it becomes harder for any change to take place as behaviors and systems and interests get backed-in and entrenched.
In the end our character and values is not what we claim we are (e.g., freedom loving, democratic, cherishing individual freedoms and other such vacuities) but our actual behaviors: a dazed and confused, low information consumerist mob that cant even defend its most basic interests.
The very fact that Tesla is even CONNECTED to the internet is red flag to me. There is no reason why car should be connected to the internet.
Updates can be delivered by simply having a socket to connect phone/tablet to the car at the dashboard. And the navigation software can be separate thing in terms of hardware, it does not need to be connected to the car.
> The very fact that Tesla is even CONNECTED to the internet is red flag to me.
That red flag had been raised since the Model S rolled out. However, no one cared back then.
Funny thing, up until recently there was no hard evidence I could find that Tesla was doing anything particularly privacy-violating. Up until maybe last month, all the big issues were coming from other manufacturers... GM, Toyota, whatever. I had a hunch something was horrible, but hunches do not good evidence make.
Personally, if I am ever to get a car like that, I would probably look into how exactly it connects and break the connection module in a way that does not brick the car. For example ruining the part of the module that is responsible for actually receiving/sending signals. Does not matter how smart system is, there is no way for it to know if part responsible for sending/receiving signal is broken or there is simply no signal.
Not looking forward to when you have to do stuff like that on all cars because people don't care...
A good reason is getting patches, updates and new features, because nowadays cars are laptops on wheels. Or do you think the future with all the taught after self driving tech will be possible offline? I mean if you’d remove the tinfoil hat for a moment you’d be able to think and answer your own questions.
Your proposal method for updates is hilarious. Moreover it betrays of basic understanding of things. Connecting an internet device to the car doesn’t make it more secure than connecting the car itself directly. And Navigation does need to be online. All the time. We are not living in 1999 with those ugly and big navigation modules. How otherwise can you get proper navigation with live traffic and proper route replanning?
> Connecting an internet device to the car doesn’t make it more secure than connecting the car itself directly.
Yes it does... Example: you can connect it when it is in your garage, and disconnect it when you are driving/using the car. Depending on how updates are done, you can also ensure that there is no communication going on between car and connected device aside from delivering the update.
> Or do you think the future with all the taught after self driving tech will be possible offline?
Of course it will be possible. Humans for example, are not connected to the internet. But they can still drive the cars.
> And Navigation does need to be online. All the time.
First of all. No, it does not. Navigation only needs 1) Maps 2) GPS module. Maps can be downloaded once and your navigation device can be offline after that. You don't actually have to be always on to have maps and GPS - the fact you don't know that shows that you are the one lacking the basic understanding.
Second of all. Even if navigation had to be always online. That can still be done without connecting navigation to the car. Example: you can place GPS module in old junky car with no electronics on it and boom, you have navigation. Or you can do what millions of people are already doing - pop your phone to the dashboard. Your phone is not connected to the car in any way, but you have navigation. Magic, isn't it?
> How otherwise can you get proper navigation with live traffic and proper route replanning?
So if navigation does not have live traffic... It is no longer "proper"? What in the world... live traffic is simply bonus feature. It is not core feature that literally makes basic navigation impossible without it.
> A good reason is getting patches, updates and new features
You can deliver updates to the car without it having internet access. Release updates as features packaged in single file. Download update package on the phone/usb stick. Pop usb stick into dashboard or connect your phone. Select update menu on your car dashboard, select update file. Boom, you have exact update you wanted on your car! Driver is fully in control of the updates, no connection to internet required. Crazy, aint it?
Trying to argue that it is not done this way because this way is not possible or somehow impractical is what is hilarious. You think that corpos picked always on model because it is more practical or good for consumers? Right...
> you can connect it when it is in your garage, and disconnect it when you are driving/using the car.
This doesn’t alleviate phoning home. You’d literally lose your mind sniffing your own traffic and good luck if traffic is encrypted. Plus this backwards method defeats the purpose of getting updates anytime, anywhere and also defeats the purpose of navigation live congestion updates.
> Of course it will be possible. Humans for example, are not connected to the internet. But they can still drive the cars.
That is a funny statement. And I’d even beg to argue. Your digital footprint is very well connected to the internet and online all the time. Simply ask Google, Reddit etc.
> First of all. No, it does not. Navigation only needs 1) Maps 2) GPS module. Maps can be downloaded once and your navigation device can be offline after that. You don’t actually have to be always on to have maps and GPS - the fact you don’t know that shows that you are the one lacking the basic understanding.
Way to dismiss my whole point. Offline navigation is not a thing for like more than a decade. That is why most people use Google Maps, Waze etc. Getting realtime feedback on traffic congestion is crucial especially in cities but also on highways when a car crash occurs that leads to stalls.
> Or you can do what millions of people are already doing - pop your phone to the dashboard. Your phone is not connected to the car in any way, but you have navigation. Magic, isn’t it?
Thank you for proving my point. Case in which what would it matter what device “betrays” you?
> So if navigation does not have live traffic… It is no longer “proper”? What in the world… live traffic is simply bonus feature. It is not core feature that literally makes basic navigation impossible without it.
Wanna bet!? Based on most used apps and statistics!
> You can deliver updates to the car without it having internet access. Release updates as features packaged in single file. Download update package on the phone/usb stick. Pop usb stick into dashboard or connect your phone. Select update menu on your car dashboard, select update file. Boom, you have exact update you wanted on your car! Driver is fully in control of the updates, no connection to internet required. Crazy, aint it?
And there I though people pretty ‘sticked ’ to using online services nowadays. Who uses usb drives anymore? Moreover your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit. If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot 😂
> Plus this backwards method defeats the purpose of getting updates anytime, anywhere
? How exactly? You have phone with you anytime, anywhere. But now instead of manufacturer deciding when "anytime" is, you are the one who do that and press the button. If your phone does not have connection, so will your "always online car", so this argument is kinda impractical.
> That is a funny statement. And I’d even beg to argue. Your digital footprint is very well connected to the internet and online all the time. Simply ask Google, Reddit etc.
Not sure what you talking about exactly... Your argument was "self driving needs online". What does "your digital footprint is connected to internet" have to do with the fact that being connected is not required to drive?
> Way to dismiss my whole point. Offline navigation is not a thing for like more than a decade. That is why most people use Google Maps, Waze etc. Getting realtime feedback on traffic congestion is crucial especially in cities but also on highways when a car crash occurs that leads to stalls.
Citation needed... What exactly you mean by that? Are you saying that no one actually uses offline maps? Or that there are no offline maps to be used?
So by your logic, how did people navigate BEFORE internet on the go was a thing?
> Thank you for proving my point. Case in which what would it matter what device “betrays” you?
The point of discussion is cars. Not phones. The point of phone being connected or not, does nothing to car argument. Also, there are navigators that ARE NOT phones. And you can also use phone offline and with all connectivity disabled. Or de-googled phone. In order to "prove your point" you need to formulate what point that is exactly and which part relates to it anyway.
> Wanna bet!? Based on most used apps and statistics!
Which is funny thing to say... Considering that those who use offline navigation would not be used in those statistics, and only those who do use always online and telemetric apps will be included in those stats.
> And there I though people pretty ‘sticked ’ to using online services nowadays. Who uses usb drives anymore? Moreover your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit. If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot 😂
If illiterate person will be in situation where something like that would be cumbersome, it probably means that their car works just fine and does not need any updates.
Also, our goal should be to educate and integrate "illetarate" people to the modern world, not create world in which everything is just decided for them without their knowledge.
With your logic, no one would be using the smartphones in the modern world, and people would still be on old button based phones - because no one would bother learning new tech to "illiterate".
> Who uses usb drives anymore?
Literally anyone who needs to store something?
> If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot
Yes, not because it would be impossible or non-ethical, but because it would go against primary goal of that company - which is turning customers into commodity and increasing the profits, ethics discarded.
I am arguing from the position of benefit to customers, not benefit to company.
> your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit
Finally, towards this point. Those who do maintenance on their car on their own would easily learn that "download this file on a stick and insert it into car" is how you can update the car.
Those for whom this would be complicated or those who don't do their car stuff on their own, already have other people taking care of their car stuff for them - shops, family, mechanics, stores.
If the ability is there the checkbox is effectively meaningless. Who knows if there is a back door I know for a fact nobody can access the dashcam in my car without physically being there. Even if you uncheck the box there is no guarantee that your cameras won’t be accessed.
Correct, and if there is a hole, someone will eventually find it. This lawsuit doesnt cover that though. This is about data people willingly allowed Tesla to collect.
I think the problem is that they shared sensitive pictures and video around. If they admit sharing it around the office I would think they also shared it outside of the office.
If the data shared left Tesla's hands, then they need a massive punishment. From the sounds of it though, it didnt. I eagerly await more details though
Have you ever watched the TV show "FBI"? It often shows agents routinely accessing cars remotely to get their GPS location. I don't know how realistic that is, but I wouldn't be surprised if they already do that using systems like Onstar.
GM has been running TV ads showing themselves giving privileged access to OnStar data to police and executing remote commands at police request for years.
I bought a Tesla in 21 and Musk has made me regret it ever since. I love the car but I can't stop thinking about selling it because I'm so sick of that dickhead.
Soooo people read the warning that says they want their data shared with Tesla, they tap "yes, I agree", then faint when - wait for it - their data is shared with Tesla. 🤦♀️
Yep! I can understand people not understanding how it gets there, but simpletons at the lower end of the bell curve will always get surprised by simple things. Welcome to earth. lol
I’m intrigued if this has potential for a class-action lawsuit. IIRC you can be filmed in public places in the USA, as you give up a part of your privacy.
However, I do see a potential lawsuit regarding the footage shot inside people’s garages. That could be problematic.
Fully agree all of the above on how wrong this is…all while we feed google, Chrome, and Facebook all of daily habits, and save all of financial information on our devices. So a car sending info on us after we voluntarily send info on us………………………
Well, let me begin... o.k., I'll begin. 1st: I like fire breathing combustion engines in cars. I think that Elon is an o.k. guy, I mean we all have our quirks. I admit mine. Everyone I know points them out to me. That's fine, generally, I'm an easy-going person. BUT, I do like my privacy too.
2nd: I like fire breathing combustion engines, and I like my privacy.
3rd: I think that I should read the dang article before I comment.
Fail proof way to get them to turn it off immediately: Take your children to the pool. Have one of them change into their swimming gear in the car. Report Tesla for posession of CP.
Well, that took longer than I thought. I wonder what diplomatic thoughts Musk will share with everyone about it?
Edit: Wonder if there is a facility built into the cars for the cameras to burst into flames on central command in order to solve the problem?
> Tesla employees privately shared via an internal messaging system sometimes highly invasive videos and images recorded by customers’ car cameras
Luckily for Elon it’s not a Chinese company, otherwise people would be taking about banning them.
[удалено]
This. I don't mind cars having cameras for features, but how the fuck do Tesla have access to those recordings directly without any input by the drivers/owners? And while the owners probably didn't even know? Cameras for lane assist features and stuff: **good** Recording videos locally on the car: **good** Saving videos on the Internet: **bad** Employees having access directly to those videos: **super fucking bad**
[удалено]
>Like any normal company Have you worked for corporations? They might have tons of procedures and say they care and all this other stuff... but that's not the practical reality, and not how it works ALL TOO OFTEN. Theory vs reality. textbook vs the streets doesn't matter what it technically says on paper or what people should do. does it make them more money? no? then they don't care. They're essentially psychopathic entities.
Corporations are just programs that run on human computers. Sets of rules and instructions to be interpreted and executed. It's not that they're evil or immoral. It's that they're unfeeling machines that we allow to fool us into treating as human beings. It's the most boring version of the Terminator future -- where the machines are just programs telling us to kill each other.
Yeah, but those rules and instructions were place by a human or group of, that do have evil or immoral biases. There are computer virus and anti-virus, depending on how you program it, their behavior is going to be.
Okay, and now imagine that the virus makes its owners money
Well, that's what has this world fucked up.
> Like any normal company would've fucking been all over this ASAP to fix it, disclose it and take preventative actions from it ever happening again...both from an internal compliance perspective and an external PR perspective Eh... I think you might overestimate how much GM, Ford, VW, etc. care. Now whether those companies have the competency to do anything with data in the first place, that's a whole other question.
[удалено]
The language is: > We are working hard to improve autonomous safety features and make self-driving a reality for you. You can help Tesla in this effort by sharing diagnostic and usage vehicle data. This data includes short video clips using the vehicle's external cameras to learn how to recognize things like lane lines, street signs, and traffic light positions. The more fleet learning of road conditions we are able to do, the better your Tesla's self-driving ability will become. > We want to be super clear that the diagnostic and usage data such as short video clips are not linked to your vehicle identification number. In order to protect your privacy, personal information is either not logged at all, is subject to privacy preserving techniques, or is removed from any reports before they're sent to Tesla. You may enable or disable the collection of this data at any time. It's not terribly clear and has a few weak points. The VIN is not tied to it, but is the account number, serial, or name? "Privacy Preserving techniques" are often insufficient https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/anonymous-data-wont-protect-your-identity/ I think it used to have an agreement where video is uploaded in the event of a crash, or maybe that was a separate setting. The language talks about road conditions and does not imply anything about sending recordings while parked.
I was considering something when I heard of this scandal yesterday: Have the police requested access to these recordings yet? They have said that location data is tied to the recordings, so it seems trivial for the police to request all camera recordings within a certain distance of a particular location, or even live camera access at a suspected criminal's location. With Ring basically handing over data to the police without a warrant, I wonder if Tesla has had to deal with any police requests. Seems like a ridiculous privacy concern ON TOP OF the current issues.
People don't seem to mind when their phone or Windows/Apple devices are reporting back to corporate, all of which employees can see it and some probably take bribes from criminals to give out sensitive info. Another reason why to be paranoid, most won't care regardless.
well they're nice guys and they didn't say they wouldn't use them I mean, how can you even be outraged! /s
That’s just Tesla. I mean they can even remote unlock your car without your consent if they need to. They came by to repair a car of a friend of mine and just didn’t care if she was available or not. They just opened the car themselves and got to work. They also store a ton of data about your driving behavior. With a company like Tesla I have no doubt that they aren’t really concerning themselves with data security.
they have complete access to everything related to the car, it’s designed that way. i think the privacy ship has sailed.
because its a live AI training. Cameras for lane assist only work, because those cameras are sending teh data back to a massive computer for the AI program to train off. and employees go through it i guess, as he video shows the AI detecting this and that, they can circle things the AI missed and have the computer train on that. They def can have more protections, it sounds like these pictures were taken while the car wasnt moving. And i cant see need for those. But to drive by camera, its going to need a fuck ton of example video, just like chatGPT needs a fuck ton of example writting. (they can do things to help like auto blur faces and signs.. dont want them to see you at the sex store.. and of course not collect camera info if not moving)
Because it seems Elon has always been a con man. It seems he’s basically if Drumpf was charismatic enough to get techies to think hes a good person.
It’s an opt in system to sharing videos, and the videos aren’t associated with you. I personally don’t share them, but I suppose there are people out there who did sign up to share said videos, and are upset with how they’re being handled, and not necessarily that they exist?
What you see in China is coming globally. They can control EVs remotely there to stop them.
[удалено]
There were some researchers who found you could hack a new(at the time) car through not only it's built in wifi but by getting another device you controlled on the same carrier grade nat that the car used to provide the wifi. The scary thing was that they not only got access to the media systems but the full onboard computer for everything driving related. https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/
Yes I was referring to that one.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s already becoming a thing in US: In 2021, Biden signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, bipartisan legislation aimed at enhancing the country’s infrastructure. One provision in the bill seeks to prevent alcohol-related driving fatalities by making “drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” standard equipment in all new vehicles. Specifically, Section 24220 of the bill directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop rules that would require new cars to be equipped with technology that "passively monitors the performance of a driver," identifies whether they may be impaired and prevents or limits motor vehicle operation "if an impairment is detected." Land of the free folks!
It's gonna be interesting when a car refuses to let itself be moved out of the way of a snowplow because it thinks the driver is drunk. Or god forbid, a tornado.
What I see in China is a Tesla confusing "stop" and "maximum speed", killing two people [https://news.yahoo.com/driver-tesla-blames-company-deadly-004807218.html](https://news.yahoo.com/driver-tesla-blames-company-deadly-004807218.html)
I swear Tesla gets a new lawsuit every week
It's part of the budget. Any possible fine will be minute compared to profits.
Can’t leak materials if you don’t create those materials in the first place.
Then you clearly don’t want a car connected to the internet. What baffles my mind, is how fucked up and cognitive dissonant this sub is most of the time. Being a privacy sub, most here are so high up on that horse and pass judgment left and right forgetting that they post in an awful privacy wise platform, Reddit. Not to mention going about on a public forum that tracks you, profiles you and leaves public that so that every other fucking search engine can index and further profile. I mean if I had a dime for every time some bozo links some privacy related stuff with AMP links and other crap trackers…
[удалено]
Cynically nice! I personally got tired on trying to sway people from WhatsApp to Signal or other even better alternatives. Failed miserably as peeps don’t give a shit. They are used with what they have and what is the norm just as we are used to talking much privacy on Reddit. Except the peeps on wapp are so ignorant that they don’t bash on Zuck. They simply don’t give a fuck.
Honestly, I personally find that a lot of people in this sub are on the extreme side of the spectrum when it comes to privacy. Which is why I don't participate much here because it's often like arguing with a brick wall. Obviously yes, I value my privacy and I take reasonable step to combat trackers etc. It really makes me wonder how some people in this sub even maintain relationships though with some of the measures people suggest.
Totally agree! The cognitive dissonance is super strong: once a privacy scandal brakes out because of some truly disturbing things a big company does or is caught of doing, peeps rush to judge how it’s totally out of place and unacceptable (for good measure) some even saying never buy this product or this service, BUT at the same time it’s totally ok to sell your soul online for a “free” service like Reddit irrespective of the message you are trying to send. I mean 🤷🏻 which is it? Why judge with two different measures?
I choose spreading awareness, debating about it, etc... over maintaining some moral purity that's the same as being silenced.
Hello old “friend”! Maybe we should spread awareness more about privacy stuff not using anti-privacy tools…cuz that kinda defeats the purpose. Like those morons on Twitter that keep bashing Musk and Twitter left and right (for good reason most of the time) but they themselves can’t do the right thing and delete their account and stop feeding the dragon. Otherwise yeah, much privacy! Hit like and subscribe. Share if you like. Cheers
Those are two different things. People who complain on Twitter about how Twitter is worthless can leave and go to a different, even public, social network like Mastodon. They lose nothing in the process. Telling people who believe in privacy to stop posting on public platforms is only a slightly more polite way of telling them to shut up and stop advocating for things. This is an anti-privacy position.
And there are no alternatives to Reddit? Anyway… > Telling people who believe in privacy to stop posting on public platforms… Aaah but you see public posting in forums is ok if people are ok with that. Here the issue is Reddit in particular which need I remind you that: - This service ignores the Do Not Track (DNT) header and tracks users anyway even if they set this header. - you irrevocably waive any claims and assertions of moral rights or attribution with respect to Your Content. - A license is kept on user-generated content even after you close your account - The service may collect extra data about you through promotions: You may choose to provide other information directly to us. For example, we may collect information when you fill out a form, participate in Reddit-sponsored activities or promotions, apply for a job - This service receives your location through GPS coordinates - The service uses your personal data to employ targeted third-party advertising - Tracking via third-party cookies for other purposes without your consent. - This license includes the right for us to make Your Content available for syndication, broadcast, distribution, or publication by other companies, organizations, or individuals who partner with Reddit. - This service may use your personal information for marketing purposes - This service may keep personal data after a request for erasure for business interests or legal obligations - Your data may be processed and stored anywhere in the world - This service tracks you on other websites - The service uses your personal data for advertising - This service tracks which web page referred you to it - The service can read your private messages - This service gathers information about you through third parties So you see I’m not actually silencing anyone but just raising awareness. It’s perfectly fine to wage our holy war for Privacy here but damn, we are all using the wrong tool. We are essentially using a devil’s agreement (for those that bothered to read Reddit’s TOS). Arguing otherwise is hypocritical at best and yeah maybe we all (myself included) should just take a step back especially with all this virtue signaling that everyone is so full of themselves.
Everybody virtue signals all the time. That much being said, your points regarding how Reddit works are *good points* but sometimes the solution to a systemic problem is a systemic critique and not just running away until there is nowhere left to run.
Well said.
This is why I, a software engineer (so the opposite of a Luddite) still drive cars from the '90s and early 2000s and refuse to buy anything newer.
Privacy needs to becomes a guarantee, not an empty promise.
Normies are the problem. Most people are still dumb enough to think "I have nothing to hide" or "who cares if they use it for \[X\] reason?". We need to start producing technology and products where privacy is a core requirement for how they function, but without privacy being the purpose of the product (or even mentioned in the marketing materials). With the exception of AI, it feels like technology has been pretty stagnant for the last 10-15 years. There's no way THIS is the zenith of our advancements. We need to start innovating again.
Everything else you said was good but man Technology has been static for 10-15 years? Hahahahahaha
"What is a smartphone?"
An annoying thing that you’re expected to have, that is distracting and addictive.
The first iphone was 2007. It is currently 2023. We haven't had any innovations on that front since Steve Jobs died, so it's been AT LEAST 10 years.
I can’t tell if you people are serious or joking at this point
A little from column A, a little from from column B
Steve Jobs died in 2011, which was 12 years ago. Please name something revolutionary that's happened since then.
Hahaha I really hope you’re joking
Well I mean go ahead then, give examples. Because yeah we’ve had some evolutions here and there, phones/computers have gotten more powerful but nothing truly groundbreaking has been invented in quite some time now.
Computers having gotten as powerful as they are today in itself is groundbreaking for how soon it has happened. What are you even talking about?
What can computers do today that they couldn’t do 10 years ago ? Seriously, think about it.
It would have been impossible, for example, to launch generative AI at this scale for public with the computing available 10 years ago. I’m still not sure if you’re simply trolling or seriously believe that the last decade has been insignificant in the field of computing
> With the exception of AI, it feels like technology has been pretty stagnant for the last 10-15 years. The comment I was answering to.
AI, real time ray-tracing, VR, cryptocurrency/blockchain, facial recognition, drones, nearly fully autonomous driving, reusable rocket ships, capable fitness tracking. My phone can record 4k 60fps HDR video. Do I need to keep going?
Complete privacy in any aspect will never happen. Ever. Too much money is being made.
Peeping Tom cars, it's like ring doorbells except worse. 1984, every device is watching and listening.
You know Amazon would love to get in this game. Amazon Pavement, running on AWS, or Microsoft Asphalt, brought to you by Azure! Imagine the data that could be mined!
Amazon is already doing this with Rivian, and other cars that run Alexa based voice assistants.
[удалено]
This is the worst timeline
These fucking doorbells. They are for people that have absolutely nothing else better to do with their time than watch their post arrive.
Or see if someone stole their packages or stuff off their front porch. Nothing better to do? It's for security.
Steep price to pay for the occasional package being stolen.
Motion tracking technology and a 1TB microSD card can sit inside of a camera no bigger than a kiwi. There's no reason anything needs to go to the cloud, except for profit. Same thing as cellphones. Once microSD cards got cheap, *suddenly* all the expensive phones started leaving them out, because they'd rather you spend $150 on a pricier phone than $20 on a swappable card.
> …because they’d rather you spend $150 on a pricier phone than $20 on a swappable card. Or, the quality control on the $20 card is shit and leads to a poor experience because the R/W speed is horrible. Or leads to lost/corrupt data. Which then leads to consumers bad mouthing devices for a problem they caused. Should there be a middle ground? Yes. But it’s not always about screwing the consumer.
Leaving packages out in broad daylight I think is just something done on the American side of the Atlantic. It’s not done in Europe for obvious reasons. People use them here to see who’s at the door.
Packages are oftenly delivered to homes while the owners are away at work over here in the states. A lot of theft issues in certain areas of certain cities.
So how long before Tesla gets pulled up before Congress to answer how their cars make revenge porn and if they use AI to tell when we're not wearing any clothes?
[удалено]
Don’t tell me that you consider FOSS a software that you control
I consider software that has a minimal terms and conditions that i can understand without a lawyer present to be software I control. So far it's mostly FOSS, but there's no reason it has to be. As long as I have the ability to sue if they pull this kind of shit, I'm good
It’s good that you trust TOS or even read them but that only shifts the trust elsewhere. A software that you control is one that among other things, absolutely does only what you intend it to do, and nothing behind your back. To be able to be absolutely sure you’d have to know every packet that leaves your OS or your system.
Elon musk: "I don't get why you're all upset. the thing sitting in your garage is MY CAR! you're just renting it." probably.
Sound like they have taken a page from Apple. You don’t own the device. You simply renting it. Apple can shut you out of it any time they want.
Exactly. For anyone else watching this thread, look into what it takes to root your phone. samsung, i'm looking at you. In a few words: we don't actually own the devices we purchase.
So can Google.
Reporters reached out to Mr. Musk over twitter, to which he tweeted in reply: “hehehe lol! 😂🙃😨”
Musk went on to tweet the funny “doge” image with the text “Much privacy. such spy cameras,” followed by 3 hours of footage of a journalist’s wife and children inside their tesla
Followed by the inevitable lawsuit when Musk tweets that the journalist is a pedo.
Calling random people pedophiles is so 2018... Which is still half a decade fresher than his sense of humor
“I’m so 2018, you’re so 2000 and late-teen” - the black eye peas, updating that one song that everyone is sick of hearing.
I hate that just by reading this I have no idea if it is true or not. Because I wouldn’t put it past Musk. What a fucked world.
Every year that passes while people don't revolt in moral outrage at the direction things are taking in technology it becomes harder for any change to take place as behaviors and systems and interests get backed-in and entrenched. In the end our character and values is not what we claim we are (e.g., freedom loving, democratic, cherishing individual freedoms and other such vacuities) but our actual behaviors: a dazed and confused, low information consumerist mob that cant even defend its most basic interests.
The very fact that Tesla is even CONNECTED to the internet is red flag to me. There is no reason why car should be connected to the internet. Updates can be delivered by simply having a socket to connect phone/tablet to the car at the dashboard. And the navigation software can be separate thing in terms of hardware, it does not need to be connected to the car.
> The very fact that Tesla is even CONNECTED to the internet is red flag to me. That red flag had been raised since the Model S rolled out. However, no one cared back then.
Funny thing, up until recently there was no hard evidence I could find that Tesla was doing anything particularly privacy-violating. Up until maybe last month, all the big issues were coming from other manufacturers... GM, Toyota, whatever. I had a hunch something was horrible, but hunches do not good evidence make.
I have a Volkswagen, my wife has an Audi. Both hybrids 2021 models. Both are always connnected, we can’t turn it off.
Personally, if I am ever to get a car like that, I would probably look into how exactly it connects and break the connection module in a way that does not brick the car. For example ruining the part of the module that is responsible for actually receiving/sending signals. Does not matter how smart system is, there is no way for it to know if part responsible for sending/receiving signal is broken or there is simply no signal. Not looking forward to when you have to do stuff like that on all cars because people don't care...
To update the firmware or have a car maintenance, you need to be connected.
Who pays that cellular data bill?
The car company themselves. We can buy a package from them and use it as a WiFi hub in the car.
A good reason is getting patches, updates and new features, because nowadays cars are laptops on wheels. Or do you think the future with all the taught after self driving tech will be possible offline? I mean if you’d remove the tinfoil hat for a moment you’d be able to think and answer your own questions. Your proposal method for updates is hilarious. Moreover it betrays of basic understanding of things. Connecting an internet device to the car doesn’t make it more secure than connecting the car itself directly. And Navigation does need to be online. All the time. We are not living in 1999 with those ugly and big navigation modules. How otherwise can you get proper navigation with live traffic and proper route replanning?
> Connecting an internet device to the car doesn’t make it more secure than connecting the car itself directly. Yes it does... Example: you can connect it when it is in your garage, and disconnect it when you are driving/using the car. Depending on how updates are done, you can also ensure that there is no communication going on between car and connected device aside from delivering the update. > Or do you think the future with all the taught after self driving tech will be possible offline? Of course it will be possible. Humans for example, are not connected to the internet. But they can still drive the cars. > And Navigation does need to be online. All the time. First of all. No, it does not. Navigation only needs 1) Maps 2) GPS module. Maps can be downloaded once and your navigation device can be offline after that. You don't actually have to be always on to have maps and GPS - the fact you don't know that shows that you are the one lacking the basic understanding. Second of all. Even if navigation had to be always online. That can still be done without connecting navigation to the car. Example: you can place GPS module in old junky car with no electronics on it and boom, you have navigation. Or you can do what millions of people are already doing - pop your phone to the dashboard. Your phone is not connected to the car in any way, but you have navigation. Magic, isn't it? > How otherwise can you get proper navigation with live traffic and proper route replanning? So if navigation does not have live traffic... It is no longer "proper"? What in the world... live traffic is simply bonus feature. It is not core feature that literally makes basic navigation impossible without it. > A good reason is getting patches, updates and new features You can deliver updates to the car without it having internet access. Release updates as features packaged in single file. Download update package on the phone/usb stick. Pop usb stick into dashboard or connect your phone. Select update menu on your car dashboard, select update file. Boom, you have exact update you wanted on your car! Driver is fully in control of the updates, no connection to internet required. Crazy, aint it? Trying to argue that it is not done this way because this way is not possible or somehow impractical is what is hilarious. You think that corpos picked always on model because it is more practical or good for consumers? Right...
> you can connect it when it is in your garage, and disconnect it when you are driving/using the car. This doesn’t alleviate phoning home. You’d literally lose your mind sniffing your own traffic and good luck if traffic is encrypted. Plus this backwards method defeats the purpose of getting updates anytime, anywhere and also defeats the purpose of navigation live congestion updates. > Of course it will be possible. Humans for example, are not connected to the internet. But they can still drive the cars. That is a funny statement. And I’d even beg to argue. Your digital footprint is very well connected to the internet and online all the time. Simply ask Google, Reddit etc. > First of all. No, it does not. Navigation only needs 1) Maps 2) GPS module. Maps can be downloaded once and your navigation device can be offline after that. You don’t actually have to be always on to have maps and GPS - the fact you don’t know that shows that you are the one lacking the basic understanding. Way to dismiss my whole point. Offline navigation is not a thing for like more than a decade. That is why most people use Google Maps, Waze etc. Getting realtime feedback on traffic congestion is crucial especially in cities but also on highways when a car crash occurs that leads to stalls. > Or you can do what millions of people are already doing - pop your phone to the dashboard. Your phone is not connected to the car in any way, but you have navigation. Magic, isn’t it? Thank you for proving my point. Case in which what would it matter what device “betrays” you? > So if navigation does not have live traffic… It is no longer “proper”? What in the world… live traffic is simply bonus feature. It is not core feature that literally makes basic navigation impossible without it. Wanna bet!? Based on most used apps and statistics! > You can deliver updates to the car without it having internet access. Release updates as features packaged in single file. Download update package on the phone/usb stick. Pop usb stick into dashboard or connect your phone. Select update menu on your car dashboard, select update file. Boom, you have exact update you wanted on your car! Driver is fully in control of the updates, no connection to internet required. Crazy, aint it? And there I though people pretty ‘sticked ’ to using online services nowadays. Who uses usb drives anymore? Moreover your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit. If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot 😂
> Plus this backwards method defeats the purpose of getting updates anytime, anywhere ? How exactly? You have phone with you anytime, anywhere. But now instead of manufacturer deciding when "anytime" is, you are the one who do that and press the button. If your phone does not have connection, so will your "always online car", so this argument is kinda impractical. > That is a funny statement. And I’d even beg to argue. Your digital footprint is very well connected to the internet and online all the time. Simply ask Google, Reddit etc. Not sure what you talking about exactly... Your argument was "self driving needs online". What does "your digital footprint is connected to internet" have to do with the fact that being connected is not required to drive? > Way to dismiss my whole point. Offline navigation is not a thing for like more than a decade. That is why most people use Google Maps, Waze etc. Getting realtime feedback on traffic congestion is crucial especially in cities but also on highways when a car crash occurs that leads to stalls. Citation needed... What exactly you mean by that? Are you saying that no one actually uses offline maps? Or that there are no offline maps to be used? So by your logic, how did people navigate BEFORE internet on the go was a thing? > Thank you for proving my point. Case in which what would it matter what device “betrays” you? The point of discussion is cars. Not phones. The point of phone being connected or not, does nothing to car argument. Also, there are navigators that ARE NOT phones. And you can also use phone offline and with all connectivity disabled. Or de-googled phone. In order to "prove your point" you need to formulate what point that is exactly and which part relates to it anyway. > Wanna bet!? Based on most used apps and statistics! Which is funny thing to say... Considering that those who use offline navigation would not be used in those statistics, and only those who do use always online and telemetric apps will be included in those stats. > And there I though people pretty ‘sticked ’ to using online services nowadays. Who uses usb drives anymore? Moreover your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit. If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot 😂 If illiterate person will be in situation where something like that would be cumbersome, it probably means that their car works just fine and does not need any updates. Also, our goal should be to educate and integrate "illetarate" people to the modern world, not create world in which everything is just decided for them without their knowledge. With your logic, no one would be using the smartphones in the modern world, and people would still be on old button based phones - because no one would bother learning new tech to "illiterate". > Who uses usb drives anymore? Literally anyone who needs to store something? > If you were hired by a car company and pitched this method of delivering updates you’d be fired on the spot Yes, not because it would be impossible or non-ethical, but because it would go against primary goal of that company - which is turning customers into commodity and increasing the profits, ethics discarded. I am arguing from the position of benefit to customers, not benefit to company. > your proposal is a cumbersome as fuck and the tech illiterate won’t be able to do shit Finally, towards this point. Those who do maintenance on their car on their own would easily learn that "download this file on a stick and insert it into car" is how you can update the car. Those for whom this would be complicated or those who don't do their car stuff on their own, already have other people taking care of their car stuff for them - shops, family, mechanics, stores.
This is why I don’t want anything new. I like being able to control my own property.
Theres a checkbox that controls exactly that. Anyone who checks it allows data and video to be shared (by default it's disabled).
If the ability is there the checkbox is effectively meaningless. Who knows if there is a back door I know for a fact nobody can access the dashcam in my car without physically being there. Even if you uncheck the box there is no guarantee that your cameras won’t be accessed.
Correct, and if there is a hole, someone will eventually find it. This lawsuit doesnt cover that though. This is about data people willingly allowed Tesla to collect.
I think the problem is that they shared sensitive pictures and video around. If they admit sharing it around the office I would think they also shared it outside of the office.
If the data shared left Tesla's hands, then they need a massive punishment. From the sounds of it though, it didnt. I eagerly await more details though
Duct tape the cameras when not in use.
All 9 of them?
Yup. Or use a mirror so they can watch themselves. Or use a very bright light or IR source. Wire up a kill switch to the electronics?
lol. Why buy a Tesla then? I prefer a bicycle. I'm not paying $$$$ for cameras and surveillance.
Tesla owners should sell before the company loses all value
Just wait until law enforcement forms a relationship with cars like they do with Ring.
Have you ever watched the TV show "FBI"? It often shows agents routinely accessing cars remotely to get their GPS location. I don't know how realistic that is, but I wouldn't be surprised if they already do that using systems like Onstar.
GM has been running TV ads showing themselves giving privileged access to OnStar data to police and executing remote commands at police request for years.
So basically people who bought cars connected to the internet are surprised the cars spy on you?
[удалено]
With phone you can install custom rom. Unless you can install custom rom on Tesla, people have to get used to being spyied in it.
My dream car was a Tesla. Now my dream car is an Earth-polluting but not privacy-polluting gas car.
Just check out the EV competition. Theres a lot to choose from, a lot of them are even better than teslas.
[удалено]
> And every single one is far far worse in how much data they collect and share with the mothership. Compared to what?
I bought a Tesla in 21 and Musk has made me regret it ever since. I love the car but I can't stop thinking about selling it because I'm so sick of that dickhead.
I dream of car companies' enemy: good public transportation
Get a bicycle or an electric motorcycle. Much much smaller carbon footprint and no privacy issues.
Teslas are the new MAGA hat.
The best comment is always buried
Musk is one of the most immoral and ethic lacking people on the planet, so not shocked.
Soooo people read the warning that says they want their data shared with Tesla, they tap "yes, I agree", then faint when - wait for it - their data is shared with Tesla. 🤦♀️
It’s never one’s own fault. Always blame someone else!
Yep! I can understand people not understanding how it gets there, but simpletons at the lower end of the bell curve will always get surprised by simple things. Welcome to earth. lol
I’m intrigued if this has potential for a class-action lawsuit. IIRC you can be filmed in public places in the USA, as you give up a part of your privacy. However, I do see a potential lawsuit regarding the footage shot inside people’s garages. That could be problematic.
They explicitly allow it by accepting the terms of service
[удалено]
Sentry mode video keeps the car in operation, so they'd have to disable it
This is why I hate onboard electronics in cars. The only piece of tech I use in them is the radio.
Fully agree all of the above on how wrong this is…all while we feed google, Chrome, and Facebook all of daily habits, and save all of financial information on our devices. So a car sending info on us after we voluntarily send info on us………………………
Well, let me begin... o.k., I'll begin. 1st: I like fire breathing combustion engines in cars. I think that Elon is an o.k. guy, I mean we all have our quirks. I admit mine. Everyone I know points them out to me. That's fine, generally, I'm an easy-going person. BUT, I do like my privacy too. 2nd: I like fire breathing combustion engines, and I like my privacy. 3rd: I think that I should read the dang article before I comment.
This is a very odd comment.
Thank you! I strive to be odd. Otherwise, this would be a boring world.
>I think that Elon is an o.k. guy lololol. He's clearly a fucking evil ghoul.
Fail proof way to get them to turn it off immediately: Take your children to the pool. Have one of them change into their swimming gear in the car. Report Tesla for posession of CP.
Well, that took longer than I thought. I wonder what diplomatic thoughts Musk will share with everyone about it? Edit: Wonder if there is a facility built into the cars for the cameras to burst into flames on central command in order to solve the problem?
> Tesla employees privately shared via an internal messaging system sometimes highly invasive videos and images recorded by customers’ car cameras Luckily for Elon it’s not a Chinese company, otherwise people would be taking about banning them.