Data Rape

Cars used to be vehicles; i.e., they transported us where we needed to go. About a decade or so ago, they shifted into being something more like a smartphone we drive – and along the way, they did more than transport us wherever we were headed. They began to record  and emit a stream of data about our drive – such as where, when and how fast we were driving (as well as accelerating and braking) plus a bunch of other things, such as where we stopped for gas or food along the way as well as our musical preferences and possibly even our conversations.

Because most cars now have microphones embedded in the passenger compartment; some of the newest ones have cameras, too. One of the very latest things some have are fingerprint scanner pads.

All of this data about us being valuable, it is sold to various interested parties – including but not limited to the insurance mafia and third-party peddlers who are keen to know what your preferences are, so they can more effectively peddle products and services tailored to your preferences. It is both nosy and mercenary. You are monitored and peddled to but you don’t get asked – much less paid. Your data isn’t yours anymore than the eggs your chickens lay are theirs.

Of course, we like to think we’re not chickens.

Except we are, insofar as the data-collectors are concerned. It is one of the most effronterous, insolent and audacious affronts ever visited upon human beings. At least serfs in Medieval times had privacy when huddling in their hovels. We moderns are in the position of paying to have our privacy affronted in our cars. The latter is putatively your property – even if you’re still paying it off. The lienholder has the right to repossess it if you stop making payments but that is not the same thing as having the right to peer into your private affairs; to monitor when and where you drive, etc. Once you have paid in full for the vehicle, no one else ought to have any claim whatever to the vehicle or your data.

Nevermind that.

To paraphrase what the mountain man said in Deliverance: If we want your data, we’ll take your data. (And if you’ve watched the movie, you know what he said next.)

This data rape is something more and more Americans are becoming aware of – and many don’t like it.

But can this collection-without-consent be stopped?

Maybe. Sort of. There’s a bill in Congress styled the Data Rights for Information and Vehicle Electronics in Real-time (DRIVER) act that would “give vehicle owners control over how much data they share with manufacturers.”

Italics added.

Of course, “sharing” has never been what this is; the language is almost as effronterous as the fact. It is like referring to rape as a “date.” There is also this insufferable business of titling every new law with an insipid (and often tortured) acronym. It’s another manifestation of the sickly puerility of our times.

Anyhow, the DRIVER act would “require manufacturers to allow owners access to all of the data a vehicle collects, either through the standard OBD-II port or a standardized, secure wireless connection. They would then have the ability to opt in or out of sharing that data with a few exceptions, as well as delete the data. This includes personal data, including connected devices such as phones, driver behavior, precise geolocation data, and biometrics.”

Italics added.

So, we’re to be “allowed” access to our data. Isn’t that nice of them? It’s like how we’re supposed to be grateful for being allowed to live in the house we don’t really own – even if we long-ago paid off the loan – provided we continue to pay the annual and never-ending property taxes that amount to rent.

And “with a few exceptions”? Come again? How is it that any of our data is the property of some other party? Who gets to decide what the “exceptions” are? Why, the collectors (and sellers) of our data!

“Anonymized and aggregate data would still be available to manufacturers even if you opt out, since your identity isn’t required for tasks like improved traffic light control using location data. There are also exceptions for data sharing actively initiated by the driver, to first responders, and for diagnostic purposes.”

Yeah, just trust us.

And never mind whether we want let alone decide to trust them. They have a right – as they see it – to just collect our data, when it is useful to them or they can cite some “compelling state interest,” to cite the language used by the courts to take a dump over what used to be our rights. There are always exceptions to these rights, you see. Many fail to see that a right that has exceptions is no longer a right.

Even if it becomes law, the DRIVER Act would “allow manufacturers to continue to nag us on occasion. For example, a provision for ‘determining or effectuating vehicle field actions, including customer satisfaction campaigns, technical service bulletins, compliance recalls, and safety recalls’ would still allow pop-up ads on infotainment screens.”

Pop-up ads while you drive. The peddlers demand your attention!

Yet another example of mend-not-end, which is the way odiousness is enshrined. The odiousness is never repealed; it is tweaked – and that is supposed the placate the people who want the odiousness ended.

But there is good news in that there is a way to fully and completely opt out of all this electronic scheisse. It is as simple as not buying any vehicle that emits your data to other parties.

Just go back to around 2005 or so and you’ll be free to drive again – without something else coming along for the ride.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.