This reminds me of a story that I recently heard. I don’t know if the story is true, or if it’s an urban legend.
So someone bought a salvaged Tesla that had been legally written off as a total loss after being involved in an accident. The new owner restored the Tesla. But it still wouldn’t run. When the car was written off, Tesla had turned it off remotely. Tesla said they would not turn it back on because the license to use all of the built-in software and firmware, expired with the car going in to salvage status. So the new owner pulled out all of the advanced technology and installed a gasoline engine. This is one way to take back control of your car.
That’s right. The repo man can easily extract the data once he has the car itself.
So I suppose that if the vehicle is encumbered then you can’t even start the vehicle unless the vehicle is online to the internet, which of course means permanent tracking whenever the vehicle is started.
It is unclear how this would work in areas where there is no mobile signal (that being the obvious means of communication) but maybe they plan a tie up with a satellite provider.
(Satellite isn’t mentioned among the overly broad list of communication technologies that the patent includes.)
as well as just relocating it off private property or other inaccessible areas
Don’t reckon the vehicle or the patent is capable of opening gates or garage doors. Looking at the patent it would seem that they have a shot at hacking the garage door if it has a remote control.
I assume that no such car actually exists at this stage?
… well until you actually want to drive the car. Which I think is the point: harass the user so much that the car is basically unusable (except in an emergency).
Did you read the patent? One of the items is “emit an incessant and unpleasant sound” when a person is in the car.
Yes, in addition to your suggestion, it seems like there is a risk that, in an emergency, the exemptions don’t work. So someone dies because the driver can’t get to hospital or the car wants to go to a different medical facility. The patent talks about detecting a heart attack. Yeah right.
I don’t think anybody would pay for a car that couldn’t be driven with non-functioning sensors/cameras, at least not yet. But, then again, people surprise me all the time…
As for the incessant noise, speakers can be rendered mute pretty easily.
But to my initial point, I don’t believe a car company would be willing to take control from the driver because then they’re taking liability from the driver.
I get your thinking but that presumes that you have a choice i.e. if all manufacturers go in this direction then you won’t have a choice. Hold onto your old tech car until it literally won’t go any more.
There is so much tech in cars these days that it is anyone’s guess what will happen if you intentionally disable sensors.
(For example, on my car the lane-keeping assist relies on the front-facing camera to detect lane markers - and it will be nudging the steering wheel if it thinks I am going out of my lane, which would be annoying but not serious. Likewise the automatic high-beam cancellation relies on some kind of front-facing image sensor - but obviously that only applies if driving at night - and that can be overridden by taking manual responsibility for high-beam cancellation. Then there are front and back obstacle sensors. …)
Maybe if you get critical mass of “failed” sensors, the car really would disable itself e.g. under the assumption that there has been a major fault.
It may be unlawful however to mute the horn. (Conversely, in an emergency, you just go for it - and take the risk that the cops issue a fine for unlawful use of the horn.) NB: This comment strongly depends on what applicable legislation exists in your jurisdiction.
Yes. Everything Tesla and more. Lawyer’s paradise, particularly in the US where legal claims are astronomical and payouts still eye-watering. The car company would have to decide whether it is a net financial gain.
Yeah, maybe someday in the distant future cars will become automated shuttles, but besides us not being close to that tech yet, I don’t think there would be any private owners of cars at that point.
Right, but I’m fairly certain if you tape over the sensors or otherwise block them then you can still drive the car. If not, then I’d sue the manufacturer (if you can in Oz).
Maybe, but the risk of getting caught for that alone is miniscule, and if the cops are searching your car thoroughly enough to find out you disabled the horn, you’ve got much bigger problems.
And, with the damage to the reputation such accidents would cause, almost assuredly not worth it. Tesla can at least blame the driver for not paying attention, but commanding the car to drive on its own and resulting in damage/injury/death would be a whole nother shitstorm.
Some of the recordings caught Tesla customers in embarrassing situations. One ex-employee described a video of a man approaching a vehicle completely naked.
Tesla: “…designed from the ground up to protect your privacy…”
Employees: “Hey, check out this naked dude! Heehee…”
Here is a more useful and direct link for those looking to take more actionable steps.
There are other categories too, but I do not trust any of Mozilla’s assessments whatsoever. Their approval of the Apple HomePod Mini is a clear reminder of why I keep my relationship with them locked down.
Here is the quote that rang the alarm bells in my head:
About as safe as trusting Mozilla and Apple combined.