This is beyond creepy and I felt it was a good topic to spread the word on these problems in the auto industry. What's your solution in dealing with this problem? Don't forget to share if you found value! *Thank you to our sponsor Notesnook! Visit their site to learn more about keeping your data safe with E2EE notes:* notesnook.com
Patents are NEVER 'just patents'. They cost tons of money to prepare, file and maintain, and they are never intended not to be implemented and commercialized. Thanks wholeheartedly to Techlore for the high quality contents. ❤
@@techlore They already have the ideas. Remember the Klim motorcycle airbag-vest which refuses to inflate if your subscription isn't current (or it THINKS your subscription isn't current, or if its Internet-connection doesn't work during a crash to detect if it should inflate or not)? 😒 Or the motorcycle helmet that requires a subscription to…um… I'm not sure what it would do or refuse to do without payment. 🤔
I got a 2011 six cylinder coupe that can do 280kmh all the time. Simple, 3 pedals, not even idrive or any assistance trash for lazy passive drivers. Also got a manual fiesta shitbox with roll up windows that can eat salt for winter. Wouldn't have it any other way. I don't have the new car itch at all.
Same here. I have a 2017 Seat with Bluetooth that can do handsfree calling and acts as a glorified speaker. I wouldn't wanna miss that but I really don't miss anything beyond that
The interconnected nature of modern cars has turned invasive surveillance and data collection into an unsettling norm. Automakers and dealerships employ passive consent when you purchase the vehicle, burying these terms in the fine print. The insult to injury comes with them using copyright laws like DMCA Section 1201 to void warranties if you try to bypass or modify any part of their OS, effectively stifling consumer control over their own data. Many owners aren’t even aware of the extent of data collection happening. Cars use cameras, GPS, Android Auto, Apple CarPlay, and even your own phone’s data to track and sell information to third parties-sometimes for as little as 30 cents per car profile. The time is ripe for the FTC and lawmakers to step up and pass legislation to curb this invasive practice and protect consumer privacy
If I got a car and it started playing ads on me out of nowhere, I'm immediately taking it and driving it straight into the dealer's office. This is obscene.
Holy smokes, when we say "capitalism ruins everything," this is EXACTLY what we mean. If employees owned the car companies, they'd design better cars that don't spy on themselves. Even if they did, consumer protections (i.e., "regulations" of the sort Ralph Nader advocated) should absolutely limit or outright ban this type of predatory surveillance behavior.
@@falsificationism i have heard of that problem; except in this case not killing the driver is in both the driver-shareholder, non-driver-shareholder and the producer-company's interest: never kill your own client (Ford has always considered its own shareholders and employees as potential clients as well since Henry Ford I days)
@@erkinalp You're trying too hard and overthinking it. Pepsi shareholders suffer from environmental plastics the same way everyone else does, but they will always support plastic bottle production as long as it's more profitable to do so. If different levels of analysis confuse you, I'm sorry...I really can't help you understand this.
Nah, Employees owning the car companies wouldn't actually prevent this sort of nonsense. It definitely would make a number of things better, but this isn't one of them, save perhaps that they might take longer to think of it. The problem is regulation which is bad-to-non-existant and scale of operation making non-governmental opposition impractical at best, and the existence of a market for the collected data. So your options (that will actually Achieve anything) are to either regulate them Properly or forcibly downsize the car companies. Well, that or invest massively in public transportation to the point where no one really needs, and thus few people really want, cars to begin with. After all, when you're functionally renting the vehicle anyway, why not just... only rent it when you actually need it and use public transportation (which is Much cheaper, and often actually faster, I might add... at least when it's being run properly, which is a matter of proper regulation again) the rest of the time.
@@ricky4673 just go to your local GM dealer and ask how many cameras are in a new pick up. The mechanic at my dealer told me 9. How do you think the truck knows when you're not paying attention or are sleepy?
Most of the car's functions become unusable if you remove the SIM. That's the trick, they can make it all-or-nothing, either you bend over and let them do everything they want, or you get nothing. It's like how TOSes and EULAs are all-or-nothing; you can't say "no, I don't agree to this stuff to get full functionality, just give me the basic software).
i'm sure this idea didn't originate at the board, because execs themselves wouldn't like to kill their own drivers, they aren't that dumb (most execs are driven by others...) more like this idea originated from the bottom from someone who has never driven in their life and somehow approved by the board (or worse, some executive appointed by the board) seeing "potential increase in profits"
EU and US have a new law that actually mandate new vehicles having such hardware (not pulling over, but preventing the vehicle from exceeding a limit beyond a certain tolerance altogether)
Surely it can't be that technically involved to just rip our the cellular modem? Literally nothing in the car *needs* internet if you're using a smartphone for nav and music.
I might (hope to) be wrong, but I've read anecdotes that say some manufacturers could brick the car if somethig like that is done. If they don't already, they're working on it. And they'll say: "It's for your safety!".
They’ll void your warranty if you do that. Automakers claim the car’s mechanical systems and software are designed to run together, and they’ll use that to justify voiding it. A court case set a precedent in favor of automakers under the ‘right to repair,’ but now they also rely on DMCA Section 1201 to claim that tampering with your car’s software-even removing a SIM card-violates copyright law. So technically, they can argue you’re in the wrong just for modifying a car you own. You blow a transmission, they’ll apologize and say they can’t do anything because you pulled out the sim.
As someone having an insight into vehicle technologies etc (that currently exist to date), i can confirm 1. Your warranty is instantly revoked on all parts of the vehicle (yes you could be give dealers grief and persuade them to do something but their legal teams nowadays keep them HEAVILY safe once you drive out the door). 2. Some vehicles will stop functioning at all if they do not know AT LEAST, your GPS location. 3. Some vehicles will limit functionality on certain areas just because you drive without a “compatible” paired phone on the vehicle. 4. Functions by subscriptions have become a thing, and the amount of money you need for them is hilarious where even before it was either a standard feature or a buy it once use it always kind of option. 5. There’s TONs of details already collected on “high tech” vehicles about you. All in all, if you care about your privacy and your pocket, you don’t own the latest and flashiest car out there and instead drive a true car dated to about 2006, unless you do something even more sinister for a living that outweighs every single other thing and keeps you afloat financially etc. I chose good old reliable tech with cheap parts and ability to DIY if i want to for vehicles. Older Toyotas and Hondas are where the privacy is. Plus if you REALLY want to have an electric car, you can do a conversion (note conversions are much cheaper in US, Canada, Australia. Seriously much much more expensive in EU and varies from country to country).
@@4evermetalhead79 The warranty part of your post is bunk. They can blow hot air all they want, but if they want to deny warranty coverage they have to actually show a causal relationship between your modification and the problem. To be clear, I'm basically talking about wholesale replacing the infotainment system with something aftermarket, preferably running 100% FOSS. The car having sensors is only an issue if those sensors also have network connectivity. And it's usually trivial to spoof sensor inputs if their presence is "required" but the actual data isn't. E.g. the microphone could still sit on the bus if needed and just send white noise, the GPS sensor can be sitting on the bus sending spoofed location data. As long as we can avoid that trifecta of network connectivity, untrusted software, and invasive sensors we've mostly mitigated the issue. The privacy triangle if you will, much like the fire triangle.
@@FireStormOOO_ in this case, the excuse would be "we couldn't detect whether you tampered with the odometer, so we assumed you exceeded the mileage limit"
A better why to implement an ad system for a car is to have a brand specific radio station(i.e. Ford Radio) where users might tune into it if they wish. Its a much better idea than forcing the ads on people like the shitty greedy company they already are.
"Who cares if they harvest my data? I have nothing to hide!" Okay. You're taking your kid to school. Car doesn't vet their advertisers, and like how on here, you might suddenly get a thinly-veiled pr0n ad outta nowhere, your car does the same. You jump, get a bit flustered because there's a dirty ad in front of your kid. Maybe you hit the brakes or gas, go to cover the screen, swerve a bit. Maybe you hit something. Car sells all your data, your sudden "what the hell!?" and sudden acceleration goes straight to your insurance company. Distracted driver! Why were you watching videos? And pr0n, in front of your kid!
You mean the best idea ever? Not for the user, I mean. The user doesn't matter these days. Also, with how many people put Alexa's in their homes, I don't quite think people care all that much about being spied on. Sorry for being a downer. Current events make me stressed and ... wait, am I a coral?
I'll stay loyal to Ford... the 1997 Ford where my car came from. xD Really though, I joke about this all the time, but I spent a ton of money just recently to fix my old beater car... because it has none of this anti-consumer bullsh*t that piled up in the past couple of decades. I don't drive much these days anymore, so it's mainly there for situations I need to drive in person somewhere, and perhaps carry more people or more stuff around than I could in public transportation or something like a cab/Uber. The only real reason I'm keeping my car around, and I consider it a luxury. If one day I think this is too much, and I don't use it enough to justify, I'll just sell it. For now it's not worth getting rid of it just to need a car again in a few years or so. Plus, good part of owning an old car where I live - less taxes. I've considered buying a new car in the past, and I do have the means to, but everything I think about all the intrusive anti-consumer crap that is coming with all of them these days, and not only regarding privacy, but also proprietary crap that breaks all the time and you have to take the car into an authorized dealership or shop, which will all charge extra because of their exclusivity deal with the brand, all the stuff that can break with electronics nowadays, all of this bs you have to deal with - I just don't want it. I'd rather get rid of the car instead. I used to think EVs would likely be my next step sometime in the future, but thing is - despite EVs really having a way more simplified mechanical design to it, which would enable me to go longer without maintenance and problems... since EVs all have this entire entourage of anti-consumer bs in them too, the benefits of a simplified design end up not mattering. And in any case, EV infrastructure is so primitive in my country and will likely remain that way for a very long time, so by the time it even could make some sense, I likely won't need it anymore. :P I stopped thinking about the possibility. Of course, very particular and very somewhat privileged case... I don't need a car to work, survive or do my daily stuff. Don't really recommend others doing it. It's just for my very specific case. And I did have to leave my car on a car shop... for almost a couple of months to do all sorts of fixes which cost over the current market value of the car. ROFL, that hurt a bit. I did think several times of just sending it to a junkyard and getting something else. Then again, this is almost over a decade that it hadn't had any but the basic maintenance done to it... it had problems that went undetected for over 20 years, which only made things worse. When I finally got the car back, it's almost like it was brand new... xD The guys at the shop charged good money for repairs, but they also did a super comprehensive work... it was less car maintenance, and almost like a full car restoration project. I hadn't have it running this well for over 20 years. Right now, if I was in a position to get a new car, which I was considering because I didn't know if my car was really fixable... honestly? I think I'd get an old car and put it up for a good mechanic to check everything needed. I didn't go as far as looking up prices and whatnot, but I think it'd have to be back sometime on the years a car system with CD player was still a thing, right? I wonder what year model would be a good compromise? Up to 2010s more or less? My guess is that I wouldn't want anything that has a proper car infotainment system in it. No Android Auto, nothing of the sort. Perhaps a rule of thumb would be - a car before integrated LCD panels on the dashboard became a thing. Though I think data collection came before that. At which point OnStar and other data collection devices came to be? Did data collection and transmission using cellphone chips came before or after the whole LCD infotainment thing? Has anyone made this sort of research and calculation already? Anyways, great video Henry. This is a subject that needs to be talked about and exposed more.
No one forced people to finance new giant unnecessary gas guzzling SUVs full off tech gimmicks, planned obsolescence, assisted driving, cameras, start stop, & automatics. The average consumer is stupid, lazy, naive & corporations will take advantage of this. I learned to drive a manual, always purchased pre-owned with cash, & my cars aren't filled with any fancy tech that can't be fixed in my own garage or a local shop.
Billboards have been distracting drivers and taking their eyes off of the road for decades; this is just the natural evolution of ads. 🤷 It's not even the final-form, that will happen when Elong Musk manages to force everyone to get a brain-chip so he can stream ads directly into your brain. 😒 (Even road-signs are trash; htf are you supposed to read 10 lines of small text on a sign off to the opposite side of the road? 🤨) New cars don't even have proper dashboards anymore, they put everything on the digital screen, so it's just "brilliant" to replace all of the critical driving information with an ad. But don' worry, they'll probably keep the most important stuff like speed on-screen, they'll just shrink it down to an unreadablly small postage-stamp in the corner while the rest of the screen is an ad, like how TV-channels would shrink the movie credits down to the corner while running ads during over the movie, thus rendering the credits pointless, yet running them anyway (except when they just cut the credits out altogether).
This is why I hold out on EVs, despite the argument of being environmentally-friendly, my cynicism towards the corporations brings many concerns. Paying a subscription for ads-reduced driving experience, while your safety is being associated with that is just absurd. Get a vintage vehicle off a used market, restore those, and put it to good use would be better. Even better, electrify it yourself, but without all these intrusive bloats, if the local regulations allow that.
EVs don't actually require any of this garbage (not because they're EVs anyway), and the same companies put the same nonsense in the ICE vehicles too. On the up side, maybe this will help motivate a shift towards increased public transportation! after all, if you're renting the car anyway, it would make more sense to only rent it when you need it and use (invariably cheaper if run even halfway compitently, and often faster too) public transportaiton the rest of the time. ... one can dream, anyway.
@@laurencefraser ...Unless you live in Shenzhen, or one of those similar cities in mainland China, or other heavily-surveillanced cities, never been there, but from the pictures I've seen of the train stations there, they're jam-packed with security cameras in each corner of the station (Probably with facial recognition ability as well). For anonymous wannabes, it's a hellscape, but I guess the average population probably doesn't care if it meant more safety to the surrounding area (The memories of the infamous Tokyo subway sarin attack are coming back).
This is beyond creepy and I felt it was a good topic to spread the word on these problems in the auto industry. What's your solution in dealing with this problem? Don't forget to share if you found value!
*Thank you to our sponsor Notesnook! Visit their site to learn more about keeping your data safe with E2EE notes:* notesnook.com
Patents are NEVER 'just patents'. They cost tons of money to prepare, file and maintain, and they are never intended not to be implemented and commercialized.
Thanks wholeheartedly to Techlore for the high quality contents. ❤
Brakes will be availabe after 30seconds ad.
Don't give them ideas
@@techlore Actually... part of me kinda wants that to happen just so people actually realize what's happening. lol
Advertisers won't know you are dead and think you are watching ads 24/7.
Genius plan. You should work as CEO at Ford.
@@techlore They already have the ideas. Remember the Klim motorcycle airbag-vest which refuses to inflate if your subscription isn't current (or it THINKS your subscription isn't current, or if its Internet-connection doesn't work during a crash to detect if it should inflate or not)? 😒 Or the motorcycle helmet that requires a subscription to…um… I'm not sure what it would do or refuse to do without payment. 🤔
I love my not-that-old car that does only car stuff. I don't see the point of phones on wheels, even if you're living inside.
I got a 2011 six cylinder coupe that can do 280kmh all the time. Simple, 3 pedals, not even idrive or any assistance trash for lazy passive drivers. Also got a manual fiesta shitbox with roll up windows that can eat salt for winter. Wouldn't have it any other way. I don't have the new car itch at all.
Same here. I have a 2017 Seat with Bluetooth that can do handsfree calling and acts as a glorified speaker. I wouldn't wanna miss that but I really don't miss anything beyond that
Making cars from 1999 a lot more desirable
Open source cars when?
The interconnected nature of modern cars has turned invasive surveillance and data collection into an unsettling norm. Automakers and dealerships employ passive consent when you purchase the vehicle, burying these terms in the fine print. The insult to injury comes with them using copyright laws like DMCA Section 1201 to void warranties if you try to bypass or modify any part of their OS, effectively stifling consumer control over their own data.
Many owners aren’t even aware of the extent of data collection happening. Cars use cameras, GPS, Android Auto, Apple CarPlay, and even your own phone’s data to track and sell information to third parties-sometimes for as little as 30 cents per car profile. The time is ripe for the FTC and lawmakers to step up and pass legislation to curb this invasive practice and protect consumer privacy
this
If I got a car and it started playing ads on me out of nowhere, I'm immediately taking it and driving it straight into the dealer's office. This is obscene.
This is why I plan to remove the antenna, onstar box, and any other device that phones home. I dont want my car collecting any data.
you'd make your car non-roadworthy beyond 2029 (violation of LEZ and local speed limit enforcement)
sad but true
@@erkinalp oh well 🤷🏾♂️
Holy smokes, when we say "capitalism ruins everything," this is EXACTLY what we mean.
If employees owned the car companies, they'd design better cars that don't spy on themselves. Even if they did, consumer protections (i.e., "regulations" of the sort Ralph Nader advocated) should absolutely limit or outright ban this type of predatory surveillance behavior.
It's not like shareholders don't drive, they do
@@erkinalp Perhaps you've never heard of the principal-agent problem?
@@falsificationism i have heard of that problem; except in this case not killing the driver is in both the driver-shareholder, non-driver-shareholder and the producer-company's interest: never kill your own client (Ford has always considered its own shareholders and employees as potential clients as well since Henry Ford I days)
@@erkinalp You're trying too hard and overthinking it. Pepsi shareholders suffer from environmental plastics the same way everyone else does, but they will always support plastic bottle production as long as it's more profitable to do so.
If different levels of analysis confuse you, I'm sorry...I really can't help you understand this.
Nah, Employees owning the car companies wouldn't actually prevent this sort of nonsense. It definitely would make a number of things better, but this isn't one of them, save perhaps that they might take longer to think of it. The problem is regulation which is bad-to-non-existant and scale of operation making non-governmental opposition impractical at best, and the existence of a market for the collected data.
So your options (that will actually Achieve anything) are to either regulate them Properly or forcibly downsize the car companies.
Well, that or invest massively in public transportation to the point where no one really needs, and thus few people really want, cars to begin with. After all, when you're functionally renting the vehicle anyway, why not just... only rent it when you actually need it and use public transportation (which is Much cheaper, and often actually faster, I might add... at least when it's being run properly, which is a matter of proper regulation again) the rest of the time.
Cars and trucks also have many cab cameras. Selling the data to whom ever wants it.
Huh? Source?
@@ricky4673 just go to your local GM dealer and ask how many cameras are in a new pick up. The mechanic at my dealer told me 9. How do you think the truck knows when you're not paying attention or are sleepy?
Steve Lehto law, yt channel, covered this subject a few months ago. I went and asked a dealer about it and it's true.
I recently saw a video on removing the car's SIM. DWTL... guess I'll have to watch it now!
Most of the car's functions become unusable if you remove the SIM. That's the trick, they can make it all-or-nothing, either you bend over and let them do everything they want, or you get nothing. It's like how TOSes and EULAs are all-or-nothing; you can't say "no, I don't agree to this stuff to get full functionality, just give me the basic software).
@@I.____.....__...__ I need to buy an old truck. A really old truck!
I can’t even add a Bluetooth device in my vehicle while it’s in motion until I’m at a complete stop. So how is this a safe option? Morons.
This is exactly why I'll never buy a new car again. It's both easier & cheaper to build a restomod.
decision makers at ford are super competent
i'm sure this idea didn't originate at the board, because execs themselves wouldn't like to kill their own drivers, they aren't that dumb (most execs are driven by others...)
more like this idea originated from the bottom from someone who has never driven in their life and somehow approved by the board (or worse, some executive appointed by the board) seeing "potential increase in profits"
Question is... if you deny any privacy agreements on a car, cam you still use it effectively?
Great, newer generations now gotta worry about not only every app and smart device spying but their own car!
Great video!
Ford Alexa, why was I pulled over?
Ford Alexa : The cop said you were speeding in a school zone. Pulling over now.
EU and US have a new law that actually mandate new vehicles having such hardware (not pulling over, but preventing the vehicle from exceeding a limit beyond a certain tolerance altogether)
So in an accident you will get an ad for the nearest lawyer😂😂😂 Hell to the NO.
I’ll stick with old cars.
Work: Mack Anthem, 2 cameras inside, 2 outside, 3 ladies talking to me, ELD, tracking app...
Private: Chevy C10 1984 V8 na diesel. No tech. Have fun 😆
would be illegal in the EU
They should be awarded the patent protection so that other car manufacturers cannot use this feature. 😂
🧠
Then all you have to do is convince people not to buy that particular brand of car... and prevent them from licensing the technology to others...
Every car privacy horror story that comes out these days makes me appreciate my 2001 honda more and more.
"Also, a driver should not be looking at visual advertisements while the vehicle is moving." Oh? Well, here's an idea: DO NOT SHOW THEM! Easy!
Surely it can't be that technically involved to just rip our the cellular modem? Literally nothing in the car *needs* internet if you're using a smartphone for nav and music.
I might (hope to) be wrong, but I've read anecdotes that say some manufacturers could brick the car if somethig like that is done. If they don't already, they're working on it. And they'll say: "It's for your safety!".
They’ll void your warranty if you do that. Automakers claim the car’s mechanical systems and software are designed to run together, and they’ll use that to justify voiding it. A court case set a precedent in favor of automakers under the ‘right to repair,’ but now they also rely on DMCA Section 1201 to claim that tampering with your car’s software-even removing a SIM card-violates copyright law. So technically, they can argue you’re in the wrong just for modifying a car you own. You blow a transmission, they’ll apologize and say they can’t do anything because you pulled out the sim.
As someone having an insight into vehicle technologies etc (that currently exist to date), i can confirm 1. Your warranty is instantly revoked on all parts of the vehicle (yes you could be give dealers grief and persuade them to do something but their legal teams nowadays keep them HEAVILY safe once you drive out the door).
2. Some vehicles will stop functioning at all if they do not know AT LEAST, your GPS location.
3. Some vehicles will limit functionality on certain areas just because you drive without a “compatible” paired phone on the vehicle.
4. Functions by subscriptions have become a thing, and the amount of money you need for them is hilarious where even before it was either a standard feature or a buy it once use it always kind of option.
5. There’s TONs of details already collected on “high tech” vehicles about you.
All in all, if you care about your privacy and your pocket, you don’t own the latest and flashiest car out there and instead drive a true car dated to about 2006, unless you do something even more sinister for a living that outweighs every single other thing and keeps you afloat financially etc.
I chose good old reliable tech with cheap parts and ability to DIY if i want to for vehicles.
Older Toyotas and Hondas are where the privacy is.
Plus if you REALLY want to have an electric car, you can do a conversion (note conversions are much cheaper in US, Canada, Australia. Seriously much much more expensive in EU and varies from country to country).
@@4evermetalhead79 The warranty part of your post is bunk. They can blow hot air all they want, but if they want to deny warranty coverage they have to actually show a causal relationship between your modification and the problem.
To be clear, I'm basically talking about wholesale replacing the infotainment system with something aftermarket, preferably running 100% FOSS.
The car having sensors is only an issue if those sensors also have network connectivity. And it's usually trivial to spoof sensor inputs if their presence is "required" but the actual data isn't. E.g. the microphone could still sit on the bus if needed and just send white noise, the GPS sensor can be sitting on the bus sending spoofed location data.
As long as we can avoid that trifecta of network connectivity, untrusted software, and invasive sensors we've mostly mitigated the issue. The privacy triangle if you will, much like the fire triangle.
@@FireStormOOO_ in this case, the excuse would be "we couldn't detect whether you tampered with the odometer, so we assumed you exceeded the mileage limit"
Are you going to release a video where you explain this was all a joke? Please, tell me this is a joke. Please.
😣
wish this was a joke
but it's not
When will this lead to distracted driving caused crash into a bus? They’ll likely receive a fine that isn’t big enough for ford to stop sending ads
Time to disconnect
Ford is toast. Nobody should ever buy one again.
First time I get an ad in my car, I’m selling it
A better why to implement an ad system for a car is to have a brand specific radio station(i.e. Ford Radio) where users might tune into it if they wish. Its a much better idea than forcing the ads on people like the shitty greedy company they already are.
I buy a car it’s mine, the manufacturer should have nothing else to do with it except for warranty and maintenance issues.
No sale!
"Who cares if they harvest my data? I have nothing to hide!"
Okay. You're taking your kid to school. Car doesn't vet their advertisers, and like how on here, you might suddenly get a thinly-veiled pr0n ad outta nowhere, your car does the same. You jump, get a bit flustered because there's a dirty ad in front of your kid. Maybe you hit the brakes or gas, go to cover the screen, swerve a bit. Maybe you hit something.
Car sells all your data, your sudden "what the hell!?" and sudden acceleration goes straight to your insurance company. Distracted driver! Why were you watching videos? And pr0n, in front of your kid!
Brought to you by Carls Jr.
You mean the best idea ever? Not for the user, I mean. The user doesn't matter these days.
Also, with how many people put Alexa's in their homes, I don't quite think people care all that much about being spied on.
Sorry for being a downer. Current events make me stressed and ... wait, am I a coral?
I'll stay loyal to Ford... the 1997 Ford where my car came from. xD
Really though, I joke about this all the time, but I spent a ton of money just recently to fix my old beater car... because it has none of this anti-consumer bullsh*t that piled up in the past couple of decades.
I don't drive much these days anymore, so it's mainly there for situations I need to drive in person somewhere, and perhaps carry more people or more stuff around than I could in public transportation or something like a cab/Uber.
The only real reason I'm keeping my car around, and I consider it a luxury. If one day I think this is too much, and I don't use it enough to justify, I'll just sell it. For now it's not worth getting rid of it just to need a car again in a few years or so.
Plus, good part of owning an old car where I live - less taxes.
I've considered buying a new car in the past, and I do have the means to, but everything I think about all the intrusive anti-consumer crap that is coming with all of them these days, and not only regarding privacy, but also proprietary crap that breaks all the time and you have to take the car into an authorized dealership or shop, which will all charge extra because of their exclusivity deal with the brand, all the stuff that can break with electronics nowadays, all of this bs you have to deal with - I just don't want it. I'd rather get rid of the car instead.
I used to think EVs would likely be my next step sometime in the future, but thing is - despite EVs really having a way more simplified mechanical design to it, which would enable me to go longer without maintenance and problems... since EVs all have this entire entourage of anti-consumer bs in them too, the benefits of a simplified design end up not mattering. And in any case, EV infrastructure is so primitive in my country and will likely remain that way for a very long time, so by the time it even could make some sense, I likely won't need it anymore. :P I stopped thinking about the possibility.
Of course, very particular and very somewhat privileged case... I don't need a car to work, survive or do my daily stuff. Don't really recommend others doing it. It's just for my very specific case.
And I did have to leave my car on a car shop... for almost a couple of months to do all sorts of fixes which cost over the current market value of the car. ROFL, that hurt a bit. I did think several times of just sending it to a junkyard and getting something else.
Then again, this is almost over a decade that it hadn't had any but the basic maintenance done to it... it had problems that went undetected for over 20 years, which only made things worse. When I finally got the car back, it's almost like it was brand new... xD The guys at the shop charged good money for repairs, but they also did a super comprehensive work... it was less car maintenance, and almost like a full car restoration project. I hadn't have it running this well for over 20 years.
Right now, if I was in a position to get a new car, which I was considering because I didn't know if my car was really fixable... honestly? I think I'd get an old car and put it up for a good mechanic to check everything needed. I didn't go as far as looking up prices and whatnot, but I think it'd have to be back sometime on the years a car system with CD player was still a thing, right?
I wonder what year model would be a good compromise? Up to 2010s more or less?
My guess is that I wouldn't want anything that has a proper car infotainment system in it. No Android Auto, nothing of the sort. Perhaps a rule of thumb would be - a car before integrated LCD panels on the dashboard became a thing. Though I think data collection came before that. At which point OnStar and other data collection devices came to be? Did data collection and transmission using cellphone chips came before or after the whole LCD infotainment thing?
Has anyone made this sort of research and calculation already?
Anyways, great video Henry. This is a subject that needs to be talked about and exposed more.
Non-electrical car owners are sleeping easy tonight
They are not. ICE vehicles have the same concerns and nothing about this is exclusive to EVs.
@@techloreTrue.
That sounds like Ford. Left them years ago. Poor leadership...
No one forced people to finance new giant unnecessary gas guzzling SUVs full off tech gimmicks, planned obsolescence, assisted driving, cameras, start stop, & automatics. The average consumer is stupid, lazy, naive & corporations will take advantage of this.
I learned to drive a manual, always purchased pre-owned with cash, & my cars aren't filled with any fancy tech that can't be fixed in my own garage or a local shop.
Billboards have been distracting drivers and taking their eyes off of the road for decades; this is just the natural evolution of ads. 🤷 It's not even the final-form, that will happen when Elong Musk manages to force everyone to get a brain-chip so he can stream ads directly into your brain. 😒 (Even road-signs are trash; htf are you supposed to read 10 lines of small text on a sign off to the opposite side of the road? 🤨)
New cars don't even have proper dashboards anymore, they put everything on the digital screen, so it's just "brilliant" to replace all of the critical driving information with an ad. But don' worry, they'll probably keep the most important stuff like speed on-screen, they'll just shrink it down to an unreadablly small postage-stamp in the corner while the rest of the screen is an ad, like how TV-channels would shrink the movie credits down to the corner while running ads during over the movie, thus rendering the credits pointless, yet running them anyway (except when they just cut the credits out altogether).
This is why I hold out on EVs, despite the argument of being environmentally-friendly, my cynicism towards the corporations brings many concerns.
Paying a subscription for ads-reduced driving experience, while your safety is being associated with that is just absurd.
Get a vintage vehicle off a used market, restore those, and put it to good use would be better. Even better, electrify it yourself, but without all these intrusive bloats, if the local regulations allow that.
ICE vehicles have the same concerns and nothing about this is exclusive to EVs. It's an issue with all modern vehicles.
EVs don't actually require any of this garbage (not because they're EVs anyway), and the same companies put the same nonsense in the ICE vehicles too.
On the up side, maybe this will help motivate a shift towards increased public transportation! after all, if you're renting the car anyway, it would make more sense to only rent it when you need it and use (invariably cheaper if run even halfway compitently, and often faster too) public transportaiton the rest of the time.
... one can dream, anyway.
@@laurencefraser ...Unless you live in Shenzhen, or one of those similar cities in mainland China, or other heavily-surveillanced cities, never been there, but from the pictures I've seen of the train stations there, they're jam-packed with security cameras in each corner of the station (Probably with facial recognition ability as well). For anonymous wannabes, it's a hellscape, but I guess the average population probably doesn't care if it meant more safety to the surrounding area (The memories of the infamous Tokyo subway sarin attack are coming back).