Guess I’m driving my 2010 Honda Accord and burns oil and leaks steering fluid a few more years.
Should probably get the steering thing fixed.
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59223 readers
3057 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah! Fuck the environment when your car wants to track which apps you use on it!
*Edit: Lol you guys would be hilarious if the climate situation wasn’t so dire.
Is it better for the environment to drive an old car?
In conclusion, buying a used car may avoid the carbon emissions of manufacturing a new one – but you should also bear in mind the lower fuel economy, higher exhaust emissions, and ongoing maintenance requirements.
So no, it’s not always better to just drive a leaky piece of shit forever instead of upgrading. The car you’re buying has already been made, it’s carbon been produced, and now you’re generating less emissions with the newer more efficient vehicle. This is pretty simple stuff to keep in mind next time you want to act smug about smog.
I bet you it’s more environmentally friendly to keep driving a car you already have as opposed to getting a new one even if it’s “cleaner.”
Depends on how much cleaner and how much you drive.
https://www.nissanusa.com/privacy.html
Sensitive personal information, including driver’s license number, national or state identification number, citizenship status, immigration status, race, national origin, religious or philosophical beliefs, sexual orientation, sexual activity, precise geolocation, health diagnosis data, and genetic information.
Please make this reach the front page because it's beyond ridiculous
If you don't mind, please also highlight
health diagnosis data
genetic information
Because omfg, think about those for a second, and how any data that leaves your control is subject to eventual collection by law enforcement, legal or not, and anyone else willing to pay for it (or steal it):
For example, some bonehead rears your vehicle one day, but your health diagnosis data says you have a heart condition, or maybe just high blood pressure. These conditions can involve occasional lightheadedness, though you know yours is well controlled. You don't even think about it anymore because you take care of yourself and all your regular tests are good. But suddenly, you're in this minor accident, not even your fault, and it's no longer a simple rearending because some asshole has brought your health history into it so that YOU and not he will be on the hook for monetary damages.
(Triple if the bozo who hit you is some lame ass drunk rural county sheriff or elected official.)
And "genetic information" is code for DNA. How they would collect your DNA from your car I don't know, but do you REALLY want your genetic information associated with your vehicle and outside the confines of GINA* for the convenience of data sellers? I know I don't. (GINA is also the law that binds companies like 23andMe from selling your genetic data.) But the whole point of trying to legislate personal control over your own genetic information is because of all the dystopian scenarios that can easily evolve from others having it without your consent.
Yet now your car wants it too? Question this. Letting anyone have it by such means does a complete end run around any law meant to keep your personal genetic information private, and guts any rights you may have to your own privacy under the law, because you signed it away. Imagine the billions insurance companies could make, both health and auto, by refusing to pay for this or that because genetically it was a "pre-existing condition" or a "contributing factor" to you getting rearended by a drunk.
I've never been so thrilled to drive an ancient beater in my life.
*Note: GINA is weak already, but legislators are trying to weaken it further still: in 2018 a proposed change meant that "Employers would have been able to demand workers' genetic test results if the bill were to have been enacted."
I don't know where you live, but it already illegal to hide any health data from road authorities in many countries like UK. If you get a lightheadedness from a know diagnosis and get into a crash, you will not only be prosecuted for the crash itself, but also for fraud that you're unfit to drive. Double criminal sentence, enjoy!
To be fair the UK is farther along the dystopian nightmare surveillance state path than the US.
Not really.
K
At the very least.. cant the US implement one of the basic rules from GDPR?
In simple terms, what data can companies keep?
Data need to have: OK
Data nice to have: Not OK
The US will absolutely not implement anything remotely like GDPR, because that would hurt the profits of a LOT of companies who happen to have a LOT of lobbyists on K street.
I'd much rather they implement the right to deletion. I know they will get their hands on a ton of data, regardless of how we write the clause. But at least let me delete that data when I want it gone.
GDPR includes right to delete data too.
Thank you for that link and Thank you to Mozilla for doing those tests. I always suspected something like this but it is good to have it tested and in writing.
My only gripe with the article is this:
All of the car brands on this list except for Tesla, Renault, and Dacia signed on to a list of Consumer Protection Principles from the US automotive industry group ALLIANCE FOR AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, INC.
Renault and Dacia aren't available in the US, so there is really no need for them to sign those principles. Which makes Tesla the only one where this is relevant.
I got an email from OnStar the other day saying it contacted my bank and updated my card info because I had gotten an old card and hadn't updated the info, I don't pay for OnStar but the dealership MAKES you set it up even if you don't use it.
How the fuck are they allowed to contact my bank and get information like that? Weirded my TF out to say the least.
They did that to me. I specifically gave them a card I knew was going to expire before the trial period was over and they got the new information anyway.
If I remember correctly, it's a "feature" the credit card companies have so your subscriptions don't lapse.
How is that fucking legal?