> This data is cached on the head unit so that finding a contact to call or reading a text message doesn't require 10 minutes worth of Bluetooth nonsense.
This is such an early 2000s idea. I'd much rather my car act as a dumb display that shows a copy of my phone screen then an intelligent agent that tries to replicate functionality already extant in my phone.
>it may not be possible to easily do that without also removing GPS/radio functionality. Some models are now integrating WiFi/Bluetooth into the same system.
I don’t really need any of those with my phone in the car.
> What's concerning to me are reports of the car still uploading all the collected data if you attach a cell phone to the radio's bluetooth
This must be if you have the car manufacturer's app installed. I can't think of any other way for it to phone home from DCM via buetooth if the cellular module is disabled.
> Sometimes it’s the connection to the car speakers, via CarPlay or Android Auto.
One issue I've had is that I'll be on a call on my cell phone, and my wife will start the car to go somewhere. The car will then inexplicably attach to my phone via bluetooth — despite my being 30 feet away. Super confusing for all parties involved, and only resolves when my wife drives out of range.
How is it cars can't tell that the phone they're connecting to is not actually inside the car?
> Moreover, it's every geek's dream. You can remotely control the car with a smartphone app, monitor the car's efficiency and performance via beautiful graphs, and even have presets for charging cycles.
Yuck. If that's a geek dream, I'll take the nightmare. Smartphone app? Beautiful graphs? I want raw data over RS-232, csv, text/plain, not opaque layers of App Stores and flashy (unreusable) charts.
> the multiple potential in-car and remote access points such as OBDII, USB and SD ports, keyless entry, Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, embedded modem, sensors, infotainment or smartphone apps and the multiple connections via telematics and other cloud systems that access car systems.
I want a car without all these. I don't mind OBDII but all the rest has no real reason to be there let alone be integrated with the car itself.
As someone who was on the R&D Infotainment team on the US side of one of the big Japanese manufacturers, I had many heated debates with management over these "features," which became a big enough deal for me that it was one of the main reasons I left the company. The executive suite on the American side R&D were always pushing these dubious features for the underlying data underneath. This was masked as "value" for the customer, but it's mostly a smokescreen so that the manufacturer can sell the data on the open market. There is a large Silicon Valley/MBA influence when it comes to data and how to monetize it.
One may or may not be surprised of the philosophies here - the idea is to monetize the vehicle and data every step of the way. The data doesn't belong to the customer even though they bought the car. Given the pervasiveness I saw at this specific company and it's software suppliers, I would assume every supplier and manufacturer for newer model vehicles are doing this now.
I'm a little old-ish school. At this point just give me a bluetooth connection that always works with my phone and I'm good. These newer vehicles are basically just another mobile phone on wheels, riddled with bugs and data collection services. No thanks.
> Do they erase previous BT and WIFI connections stored on the radio?
I've pulled many contact details from cached data on rental vehicles. Always worth checking what the stuff you pair your phone with asks for and keeps.
The fact that the car can read your texts and contacts does not necessarily imply that they're stored by the car and readable after the phone disconnects. There's no reason a consumer would assume that.
> whose products directly encourage you to have your phone paired (more than any other car of its type)
They do? The cars all come with wireless data, streaming, maps, and internet. In the Model 3, using your phone as a Key is done via BLE and doesn't involve pairing which is a sperate function.
I would say they're indifferent to your phone but let you use it if you choose.
Of no use to them, but perhaps a valuable thing they can sell to others (insurance companies, marketers, spies, etc).
I'd really rather my car not gather that much data to start with. My phone provides all the mobile compute and navigation (and privacy invasion) I need. I don't think historical telemetry data of any kind is going to deliver extra value to me, the car owner. Every extra feature in a car is just another thing that breaks.
> After all, the voice recognition in my Prius doesn't send recordings of my "call mom and dad mobile" back to Toyota and it certainly doesn't send random snippets of conversations my wife and I have to low paid contractors around the world.
The data mentioned in your link can also be collected from a phone connected to the vehicle. What is the problem then?
Does the author think that just because it's running on an ECU it will have unrestricted access to all vehicle data?? Does he not understand that a modern vehicle contains of multiple isolated networks??
>What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet?
Pretty much any low power radio application (CB/HAM radio, key fobs, walkie talkies, POTS lines and dozens more), or higher power (although those require FCC licenses) don't require the internet.
Besides, I'm referring to the software that makes the vehicle operate. That software/system should never be exposed to remote sources. Otherwise, you're pretty much begging to be locked in your car and taken on a joyride which ends with you rolling off a cliff.
The author is very naive if he thinks the feature was made open in the older cars with 3G connectivity because of the sunset of 3G as a courtesy for those customers.
Given the context it is far more logical to assume they did not enhance the older cars, but instead, they decided not to cut access while they could because then they wouldn't be able to enable it remotely should the customer renew their subscription.
You act like "the information needed to interface with his car via a 3rd party system" exists. It almost certainly doesn't, because they'd have to specifically develop their system to support that use case. And there's no reason that they would.
This is such an early 2000s idea. I'd much rather my car act as a dumb display that shows a copy of my phone screen then an intelligent agent that tries to replicate functionality already extant in my phone.
reply