From Slate:
The Glorious Return of a Humble Car Feature
Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens. Buttons are back!QuoteYou don't see a lot of good[/i] news about road safety in the United States. Unlike in most peer countries, American roadway deaths surged during the pandemic and have barely receded since. Pedestrian and cyclist fatalities recently hit their highest levels in 40 years, but U.S. transportation officials continue to ignore key contributing factors. In a February interview with Fast Company, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said that "further research" is needed before addressing the obvious risks that oversized SUVs and trucks pose to those not inside of them.
Happily, there is one area where we are making at least marginal progress: A growing number of automakers are backpedaling away from the huge, complex touchscreens that have infested dashboard design over the past 15 years. Buttons and knobs are coming back.
The touchscreen pullback is the result of consumer backlash, not the enactment of overdue regulations or an awakening of corporate responsibility. Many drivers want buttons, not screens, and they've given carmakers an earful about it. Auto executives have long brushed aside safety concerns about their complex displays–and all signs suggest they would have happily kept doing so. But their customers are revolting, which has forced them to pay attention.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2qn)
As I see it, the touchscreens came into being as a side effect of making backup cameras mandatory about a decade ago. My next vehicle better have Android Auto compatibility. Having said that, there are good solid safety reasons to have climate and audio controls with a tactile feel that have one job and one job only whether it be climate control or audio control.
Quote from: ZLoth on April 27, 2023, 04:53:42 PM
As I see it, the touchscreens came into being as a side effect of making backup cameras mandatory about a decade ago.
My 2014 Civic has a backup camera, but no touchscreen.
Quote from: vdeane on April 27, 2023, 08:21:10 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on April 27, 2023, 04:53:42 PM
As I see it, the touchscreens came into being as a side effect of making backup cameras mandatory about a decade ago.
My 2014 Civic has a backup camera, but no touchscreen.
Same in my '09 Traverse, although the display is in the rearview mirror.
Probably a requirement for display is combined with availability of touch screen displays for phones and tablets. I do have a touch screen, and even have to use it once in a while. Good thing that climate control and sound volume are not on that screen, though.
Quote from: kalvado on April 28, 2023, 12:25:05 PM
I do have a touch screen, and even have to use it once in a while. Good thing that climate control and sound volume are not on that screen, though.
Oh, totally. The only car I've used with a touchscreen was a rental. We drove up to Minnesota for Christmas in that vehicle. One morning, I went out to scrape off the car and turn on the defroster while it was —19°F outside. I thought the climate control wasn't working, because I would tap the screen and nothing would change. Then I eventually realized the plasma screen just took for.........................ever to refresh its display due to the cold.
Quote from: kphoger on April 28, 2023, 01:03:41 PM
Quote from: kalvado on April 28, 2023, 12:25:05 PM
I do have a touch screen, and even have to use it once in a while. Good thing that climate control and sound volume are not on that screen, though.
Oh, totally. The only car I've used with a touchscreen was a rental. We drove up to Minnesota for Christmas in that vehicle. One morning, I went out to scrape off the car and turn on the defroster while it was —19°F outside. I thought the climate control wasn't working, because I would tap the screen and nothing would change. Then I eventually realized the plasma screen just took for.........................ever to refresh its display due to the cold.
The touchscreen in my soon-to-be-ex-MIL's Mazda SUV barely responds, ever, but the fallback option is a giant knob you can turn that will cycle through all the options that you normally have on the touchscreen.
Can I please opt out of a rear screen viewer for my next vehicle purchase? Along with most of the rest of the bells and whistles?
Quote from: hbelkins on April 28, 2023, 02:33:25 PM
Can I please opt out of a rear screen viewer for my next vehicle purchase? Along with most of the rest of the bells and whistles?
If you buy an old used car, sure.
Could anyone give a logical explanation for their hatred of backup cameras?
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 07:32:46 PM
Could anyone give a logical explanation for their hatred of backup cameras?
Logic has nothing to do with it.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 28, 2023, 02:33:25 PM
Can I please opt out of a rear screen viewer for my next vehicle purchase? Along with most of the rest of the bells and whistles?
nope - unless you want a 2009 car..
Quote from: hbelkins on April 28, 2023, 02:33:25 PMCan I please opt out of a rear screen viewer for my next vehicle purchase?
No. About half of model year 2012 automobiles were equipped with backup cameras. On March 31, 2014, three years past its deadline, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced that it would require all automobiles sold in the United States built beginning in May 2018 to include backup cameras.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 07:32:46 PMCould anyone give a logical explanation for their hatred of backup cameras?
"Another freaking unwanted electric gizmo to malfunction and stick me with an expensive repair bill"?
Quote from: hbelkins on April 28, 2023, 02:33:25 PMAlong with most of the rest of the bells and whistles?
What "bells and whistles" are you disliking?
Button, button, who's got the button?
I say do it in a semi-Linux-y way.
Don't hardcode anything to anything, let the vehicle owner set up his display, and route things to physical buttons as desired. You could have a set of 'user-configurable' switches on the dash. So if you wanted your a/c to operate from 'switch a' ... just set it up that way.
I'm probably way oversimplifying this.
Everything old is new again.....
My Mazda's touchscreen only works when not moving, otherwise buttons and a dial control its use. To this day in 7 years I don't think I've ever touched the screen.
Besides, who wants to look at a fingerprint-laden shitted-up screen when you can just other means to control it.
Any new car that the infotainment only works via a touchscreen is a hard no for me.
I sure hope buttons and knobs make a comeback. All touchscreen controls in cars is a terrible, terrible decision. My daily driver has a good balance. I have CarPlay with touchscreen, but there are still buttons to access things like the radio or settings, and knobs for things like volume control. Climate control is also available via physical buttons separate from the infotainment system.
It's actually exceptionally good in my opinion, and I give props to the engineers at Volkswagen who designed it.
Quote from: ZLoth on April 28, 2023, 09:12:08 PM"Another freaking unwanted electric gizmo to malfunction and stick me with an expensive repair bill" ?
If it breaks and you don't use it, then you can easily avoid the expensive repair bill by not getting it fixed.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 07:32:46 PMCould anyone give a logical explanation for their hatred of backup cameras?
I wouldn't describe myself as having a "hatred" for them, but in many cases I think they are a poor trade for the reduced DLO (due to side pillar trim being wider to accommodate airbags) of newer cars. Backup cameras that display their video feeds on a console-mounted screen also take the driver's eyes away from the natural sightlines that are still available even with restricted DLO, and to the extent that these are not monitored by cameras, this can be a critical safety issue.
My current daily driver, a 1994 Saturn SL2, is far too old to have cameras of any kind but does have excellent DLO. With good parking protocols (mainly parking nose-out whenever remotely practicable), I have no problems whatsoever.
Quote from: thspfc on April 28, 2023, 07:32:46 PM
Could anyone give a logical explanation for their hatred of backup cameras?
Dumbs things down for newer drivers, although I guess the alternative of being more stringent with licensing requirements is not an option in the USA with so many people dependent on having to drive everywhere.
Quote from: abefroman329 on April 29, 2023, 12:18:59 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on April 28, 2023, 09:12:08 PM"Another freaking unwanted electric gizmo to malfunction and stick me with an expensive repair bill" ?
If it breaks and you don't use it, then you can easily avoid the expensive repair bill by not getting it fixed.
Exactly. Such a weird hill to die on.
Basically the argument I'm hearing is "well, I did just fine backing up before cameras!!" To which I would respond, 1) nobody cares, 2) you aren't required to use the camera, and 3) many people actually do find it helpful.
I find rear view cameras essential due to the much smaller rear windows of cars nowadays. I thought that was due to pillars widening to stop roof crush if the car flips over.
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2023, 01:27:58 PMI find rear view cameras essential due to the much smaller rear windows of cars nowadays.
That is part of what reduced DLO (daylight opening) is.
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2023, 01:27:58 PMI thought that was due to pillars widening to stop roof crush if the car flips over.
I think side pillar airbags are a bigger driver, since the industry was manufacturing cars that resisted roof crush and still had good DLO before those came on the scene.
Quote from: thspfc on April 29, 2023, 01:10:32 PMExactly. Such a weird hill to die on.
I don't think anyone is looking to fight to the death, but it's pretty clear that many do not regard backup cameras as a convenience improvement. While I have sympathy for that position, I do not think it is one that regulators can accept and still serve the public interest (see below).
Quote from: thspfc on April 29, 2023, 01:10:32 PMBasically the argument I'm hearing is "well, I did just fine backing up before cameras!!" To which I would respond, 1) nobody cares, 2) you aren't required to use the camera, and 3) many people actually do find it helpful.
The larger issue here is that a return to 1990's vehicle design with generous DLO is just not on the table, because customers will not accept vehicles that have fewer airbags and thus are "less safe" in a passive sense. The policy choice then falls between vehicles with poor DLO that don't have backup cameras, and vehicles with equally poor DLO that do have cameras. This is a no-brainer on the basis that half a loaf is better than none.
Quote from: 1 on April 29, 2023, 01:34:51 PM
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
Not true. Straight from MassDOT:
https://youtu.be/gAZB28ex6bI
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2023, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2023, 01:27:58 PMI find rear view cameras essential due to the much smaller rear windows of cars nowadays.
That is part of what reduced DLO (daylight opening) is.
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2023, 01:27:58 PMI thought that was due to pillars widening to stop roof crush if the car flips over.
I think side pillar airbags are a bigger driver, since the industry was manufacturing cars that resisted roof crush and still had good DLO before those came on the scene.
And then you had those horror stories in the 1980s of some parent in a hurry that backed over their toddler since they couldn't see below the rear window anyway.
Quote from: 1 on April 29, 2023, 01:34:51 PM
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
A nearly impossible feat since backup cameras have been required equipment in all new vehicles sold for the past 5 years, since May 1, 2018.
Per the below link, the car should "Not be equipped with "specialized features" (such as backing sensors, back-up cameras, automatic parallel parking, etc.) that would prevent an applicant from truly showing his/her driving skills and abilities. A vehicle will be rejected unless its "specialized features" can be turned-off or disabled and still be operated safely OR the road test examiner determines that the road test maneuvers can be performed without the assistance of the "specialized features." "
Based on a quick review on the web, I'm thinking the "OR" part was recently added, as it's probably becoming more normal for vehicles to have these features. States do have to remain current with the times. It would be the same as saying a state requires a driver take a driving test in a vehicle without power steering or a manual transmission vehicle because they refuse to acknowledge new technology and requirements.
https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/03/21/RDT101%20-%20Class%20D%20and%20M%20Road%20Test%20Information%20Sheet.pdf
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2023, 02:53:39 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 29, 2023, 01:34:51 PM
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
A nearly impossible feat since backup cameras have been required equipment in all new vehicles sold for the past 5 years, since May 1, 2018.
Per the below link, the car should "Not be equipped with "specialized features" (such as backing sensors, back-up cameras, automatic parallel parking, etc.) that would prevent an applicant from truly showing his/her driving skills and abilities. A vehicle will be rejected unless its "specialized features" can be turned-off or disabled and still be operated safely OR the road test examiner determines that the road test maneuvers can be performed without the assistance of the "specialized features." "
Based on a quick review on the web, I'm thinking the "OR" part was recently added, as it's probably becoming more normal for vehicles to have these features. States do have to remain current with the times. It would be the same as saying a state requires a driver take a driving test in a vehicle without power steering or a manual transmission vehicle because they refuse to acknowledge new technology and requirements.
https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/03/21/RDT101%20-%20Class%20D%20and%20M%20Road%20Test%20Information%20Sheet.pdf
See the video I posted above...
My general dislike for all that fancy stuff boils down mostly to cost. The truck I'm driving now doesn't have an airbag, I don't think. I don't think that all those costly add-ons (backup cameras, airbags out the wazoo, etc.) are worth the expense. Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
And did I mention cost? Who knows how much a replacement radio head unit costs when it doubles as a rearview cam, climate control center, etc.
I'm a firm believer in the fact that all these federal bureaucratic requirements just raise the price on vehicles without bringing substantial safety improvements along for the ride.
Quote from: 1 on April 29, 2023, 01:34:51 PM
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
So you have to use a 10-year-old car for your driving test? That's crazy. You couldn't just put tape over the lens?
That's a really dumb rule considering that people's issues with backing up almost always stem from simply not paying attention. It's not like turning around and looking out the window is some difficult foreign concept.
Quote from: kkt on April 30, 2023, 07:54:45 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 29, 2023, 01:34:51 PM
The Massachusetts drivers' road test prohibits backup cameras from even being in the car at all. You are required to use a car without one.
So you have to use a 10-year-old car for your driving test? That's crazy. You couldn't just put tape over the lens?
Quote from: thspfc on April 30, 2023, 08:30:37 PM
That's a really dumb rule considering that people's issues with backing up almost always stem from simply not paying attention. It's not like turning around and looking out the window is some difficult foreign concept.
See the RMV video I posted above...
The right hand on the passenger seat :-D. I remember both my parents and my driving instructor making a point of that. With the way it's talked about you'd think that the back window is blacked out until you put your hand on the seat.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2023, 04:00:24 PM
Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
We should shut down the forum because it's making everyone more dependent on their keyboards and less dependent on their own handwriting and envelope-addressing abilities.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 01, 2023, 07:12:54 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2023, 04:00:24 PM
Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
We should shut down the forum because it's making everyone more dependent on their keyboards and less dependent on their own handwriting and envelope-addressing abilities.
Plus, I seriously don't understand what the "ability" is here. Backing a car is not difficult. Accidents when backing happen due to negligence issues, not skill issues.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 01, 2023, 07:12:54 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2023, 04:00:24 PM
Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
We should shut down the forum because it's making everyone more dependent on their keyboards and less dependent on their own handwriting and envelope-addressing abilities.
I bet your job would be a lot easier if everyone had to type out posts/responses on a typewriter and mail them in.
Quote from: abefroman329 on May 02, 2023, 11:02:20 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 01, 2023, 07:12:54 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2023, 04:00:24 PM
Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
We should shut down the forum because it's making everyone more dependent on their keyboards and less dependent on their own handwriting and envelope-addressing abilities.
I bet your job would be a lot easier if everyone had to type out posts/responses on a typewriter and mail them in.
Point is that loss of skills which are no longer needed is natural.
Stone tools, for one, have been obsolete for millenia. Starting a car with a hand crank is another thing I never miss (I actually saw that used in real life!) Many drivers today don't know how to drive a shiftstick, or how to take care of a carburetor. So what?
If cameras and lidars can make backing up and parking easier, I am not the one to miss the skill.
Quote from: kalvado on May 02, 2023, 11:16:47 AM
Stone tools, for one, have been obsolete for millenia.
Well ...
https://www.epicurious.com/expert-advice/a-guide-to-choosing-a-mortar-and-pestle-article
Quote from: GaryV on May 02, 2023, 11:52:52 AM
Quote from: kalvado on May 02, 2023, 11:16:47 AM
Stone tools, for one, have been obsolete for millenia.
Well ...
https://www.epicurious.com/expert-advice/a-guide-to-choosing-a-mortar-and-pestle-article
Doesn't look like a stone age technology!
I was more thinking about select few who still know how to flintknapp - and who can make a knife out of a broken bottle
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KaQgVcsvjYk/hqdefault.jpg)
From Autocar:
Volkswagen CEO on fixing 'frustrating' interiors that 'did a lot of damage'
Boss Thomas Schäfer points to the all-new control layout of the Tiguan's cabin as a statement of VW's intentQuoteVolkswagen CEO Thomas Schäfer says the introduction of widely criticised touch-sensitive controls in his brand's cars "definitely did a lot of damage" and he has pledged to usher in simpler, more functional interiors in all future cars.
Speaking to Autocar at the recent pre-production launch for the next-generation Volkswagen Tiguan, Schäfer pointed to the revamped crossover's cabin — a near-total departure from that of the Volkswagen ID 3 and Volkswagen Golf — as a statement of intent for future Volkswagens.
The Tiguan now comes with the choice of two, much larger infotainment touchscreens and is still light on physical controls.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2ra)
Quote from: abefroman329 on April 29, 2023, 12:18:59 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on April 28, 2023, 09:12:08 PM"Another freaking unwanted electric gizmo to malfunction and stick me with an expensive repair bill”?
If it breaks and you don’t use it, then you can easily avoid the expensive repair bill by not getting it fixed.
It depends on what feature has failed. Some just stay broken and are largely unobtrusive; maybe no more than a warning light or an additional message, but one can just keep driving the same as before. Other items (traction control / stability control failure / ABS) might cause a check engine light to appear, and in some model-specific cases, one failure can lead to another unexpected issue. For example, an issue with parking sensors and "adaptive" cruise control causing each other to cancel out because one part had failed.
I think most rear-backup cameras are like the first scenario, though I have heard of one case whereby the camera image remained on the screen, rendering the rest of the infotainment unit unusable. Car technology is weird; I think most devices that aren't linked to the absolute safety and operation of the mechanical components are tested in a sort of vacuum. Much of it is tested and developed independent of each other, since their research and development usually occurs at different timelines due to the push-pull of evolving technology coupled with regulatory changes/hurdles. Throw in the concept of "everything in permanent Beta" with shrunken lifecycle commitments and you're bound to get issues.
Yeah, I get the Luddite attitude with cars; I don't always agree but there's a broken segments in the market for vehicles in that perfect, sweet spot quadrilateral of 1) limited technology 2) low prices 3) reliability 4) availability... Pick any two, unless you're good with fixing them yourself or have lots of time and money.
Quote from: formulanone on June 23, 2023, 12:38:45 PM
I think most rear-backup cameras are like the first scenario, though I have heard of one case whereby the camera image remained on the screen, rendering the rest of the infotainment unit unusable. Car technology is weird; I think most devices that aren't linked to the absolute safety and operation of the mechanical components are tested in a sort of vacuum.
While we were in Mexico recently, we parked our two vehicles at the children's home we were staying at. In order to make room for the vehicles, the director took her pickup truck and parked it at her sister's house across town. While it was there, her sister's dogs chewed through the wire for the reverse lights. Presumably because the backup camera gets its power from that wire, her backup camera display was therefore also rendered inoperable. This was all discovered the night before we left, so I'm not sure if other vehicle features utilized the same screen and were therefore also rendered inoperable.
(This was actually kind of fortunate for us personally. One of the other parking arrangement options would have been to leave
our pickup truck at her sister's house instead. The two pickups were the same model, and ours was a rental. Another option would have been to leave my family's personal vehicle there.)
The new technology can also complicate what would otherwise be routine repairs. For example, one of my uncles has a newish Ram pickup whose windshield needed to be replaced after he got caught in a sandstorm, and it is taking multiple attempts to re-initialize the camera on which the lane keeping assist, adaptive cruise control, and several other systems depend.
Quote from: abefroman329 on May 02, 2023, 11:02:20 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 01, 2023, 07:12:54 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 30, 2023, 04:00:24 PM
Besides, they make the drivers of said vehicles more dependent on technology and less dependent on their own abilities.
We should shut down the forum because it's making everyone more dependent on their keyboards and less dependent on their own handwriting and envelope-addressing abilities.
I bet your job would be a lot easier if everyone had to type out posts/responses on a typewriter and mail them in.
I think you have invented the "Letters to the Editor" section of the newspaper ca. 1950 :)
From Ars Technica:
European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls
In 2026, Euro NCAP points will be deducted if some controls aren't physical.QuoteSome progress in the automotive industry is laudable. Cars are safer than ever and more efficient, too. But there are other changes we'd happily leave by the side of the road. That glossy "piano black" trim that's been overused the last few years, for starters. And the industry's overreliance on touchscreens for functions that used to be discrete controls. Well, the automotive safety organization European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) feels the same way about that last one, and it says the controls ought to change in 2026.
"The overuse of touchscreens is an industry-wide problem, with almost every vehicle-maker moving key controls onto central touchscreens, obliging drivers to take their eyes off the road and raising the risk of distraction crashes," said Matthew Avery, Euro NCAP's director of strategic development.
"New Euro NCAP tests due in 2026 will encourage manufacturers to use separate, physical controls for basic functions in an intuitive manner, limiting eyes-off-road time and therefore promoting safer driving," he said.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2u8)
Quote from: ZLoth on March 05, 2024, 08:03:54 PM
From Ars Technica:
European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls
In 2026, Euro NCAP points will be deducted if some controls aren't physical.QuoteSome progress in the automotive industry is laudable. Cars are safer than ever and more efficient, too. But there are other changes we'd happily leave by the side of the road. That glossy "piano black" trim that's been overused the last few years, for starters. And the industry's overreliance on touchscreens for functions that used to be discrete controls. Well, the automotive safety organization European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) feels the same way about that last one, and it says the controls ought to change in 2026.
"The overuse of touchscreens is an industry-wide problem, with almost every vehicle-maker moving key controls onto central touchscreens, obliging drivers to take their eyes off the road and raising the risk of distraction crashes," said Matthew Avery, Euro NCAP's director of strategic development.
"New Euro NCAP tests due in 2026 will encourage manufacturers to use separate, physical controls for basic functions in an intuitive manner, limiting eyes-off-road time and therefore promoting safer driving," he said.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2u8)
It's funny that while they talk about touch screens, key example is Tesla with still physical turn signals buttons instead of a stalk.
Been using some new vehicles at work recently (model year 2024) and the touch-screen for almost everything is annoying. The screen should be just for nav and music/radio/whatever. Making me hunt for HVAC controls in there is too much. Too many menus, too many settings, too much distraction from driving.
While I'm at it, I don't like temperature specific HVAC in modern cars. I don't know if I want it 66 degrees or 68 degrees; I just want it a little warmer or a little cooler. Further, with the specific temperature, whatever it's doing, hot or cold, stops when it hits that temperature. Which sometimes is fine, but I refer back to my previous statement about not knowing what specific temperature I want. 67 might be fine on a cloudy day, but if it's sunny I might be roasting. It's precision where it isn't really needed.
And now with those HVAC controls on a touch screen, that is less convenient to make adjustments. Just give me a damn dial with a blue side and a red side. Same for the option to toggle between feet, face and windshield. I can't be hunting for those while I'm driving if I need to change it. That's unsafe.
Dammit, I'm becoming an old man at 40.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 06, 2024, 12:14:20 PM
Been using some new vehicles at work recently (model year 2024) and the touch-screen for almost everything is annoying. The screen should be just for nav and music/radio/whatever. Making me hunt for HVAC controls in there is too much. Too many menus, too many settings, too much distraction from driving.
While I'm at it, I don't like temperature specific HVAC in modern cars. I don't know if I want it 66 degrees or 68 degrees; I just want it a little warmer or a little cooler. Further, with the specific temperature, whatever it's doing, hot or cold, stops when it hits that temperature. Which sometimes is fine, but I refer back to my previous statement about not knowing what specific temperature I want. 67 might be fine on a cloudy day, but if it's sunny I might be roasting. It's precision where it isn't really needed.
And now with those HVAC controls on a touch screen, that is less convenient to make adjustments. Just give me a damn dial with a blue side and a red side. Same for the option to toggle between feet, face and windshield. I can't be hunting for those while I'm driving if I need to change it. That's unsafe.
Dammit, I'm becoming an old man at 40.
I think I love you. :love:
Bring back the hi-beam control on the floor.
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2024, 12:21:53 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 06, 2024, 12:14:20 PM
Been using some new vehicles at work recently (model year 2024) and the touch-screen for almost everything is annoying. The screen should be just for nav and music/radio/whatever. Making me hunt for HVAC controls in there is too much. Too many menus, too many settings, too much distraction from driving.
While I'm at it, I don't like temperature specific HVAC in modern cars. I don't know if I want it 66 degrees or 68 degrees; I just want it a little warmer or a little cooler. Further, with the specific temperature, whatever it's doing, hot or cold, stops when it hits that temperature. Which sometimes is fine, but I refer back to my previous statement about not knowing what specific temperature I want. 67 might be fine on a cloudy day, but if it's sunny I might be roasting. It's precision where it isn't really needed.
And now with those HVAC controls on a touch screen, that is less convenient to make adjustments. Just give me a damn dial with a blue side and a red side. Same for the option to toggle between feet, face and windshield. I can't be hunting for those while I'm driving if I need to change it. That's unsafe.
Dammit, I'm becoming an old man at 40.
I think I love you. :love:
...but what am I so afraid of. (In the what are you listening to thread)
Quote from: Rothman on March 06, 2024, 12:39:38 PMBring back the hi-beam control on the floor.
That got eliminated with either the front-wheel drive models or the desire of the US auto manufacturers to emulate the European manufacturers in the 1970s. Yes, I recall when my parents car had a hi-beam on the floor board.
Quote from: ZLoth on March 06, 2024, 01:25:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 06, 2024, 12:39:38 PMBring back the hi-beam control on the floor.
That got eliminated with either the front-wheel drive models or the desire of the US auto manufacturers to emulate the European manufacturers in the 1970s. Yes, I recall when my parents car had a hi-beam on the floor board.
Heh. My first car had a manual transmission, a foot-operated high-beam switch, and a foot-operated parking brake. It drove the state inspection guy absolutely nuts.
Quote from: Rothman on March 06, 2024, 12:39:38 PM
Bring back the hi-beam control on the floor.
My dad would joke around pretending to pull on an invisible cord from the ceiling to turn on the brights, like a railroad engineer pulling on the whistle cord. It took us a while to figure out there was a foot switch.
This is something that the auto industry should've never done away with in the first place.
Buttons > Touchscreens
Quote from: Henry on March 06, 2024, 11:03:36 PM
This is something that the auto industry should've never done away with in the first place.
Buttons > Touchscreens
Buttons in cars are absolutely one of those things I'm willing to be a Boomer™ about, TBH. If it ain't got buttons and knobs, I ain't gonna want it.
Bring back dashes filled with needle gauges.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 06, 2024, 11:06:57 PM
Quote from: Henry on March 06, 2024, 11:03:36 PM
This is something that the auto industry should've never done away with in the first place.
Buttons > Touchscreens
Buttons in cars are absolutely one of those things I'm willing to be a Boomer™ about, TBH. If it ain't got buttons and knobs, I ain't gonna want it.
It depends on the function, the immediatecy of the function, and how quickly you need the control while the vehicle is in motion. Thus, climate control and the radio controls (namely the volume) should have tactile functions. Pairing up your phone to the car's Bluetooth or customizing some of the vehicle options should be handled by a touchscreen. If you have too many knobs, that also causes confusion.
The touch screen should ONLY be for things you wouldn't expect to do while the car is in motion. Reset the TPMS, change the car's settings so it won't automatically lock itself if left alone, things like that.
Meanwhile, there's my 2002 Focus. It doesn't matter which way I turn the radio's volume knob: it might go up, it might go down, who knows? The other day, I wanted to increase the volume from 13 to 15. Incrementally, I ended up getting it all the way down to zero and then gave up for the day. The next day, I managed to get it up to 15. Now I'm leaving it there, no matter what. The problem is that some radio stations are much louder than others.
Quote from: kphoger on March 07, 2024, 11:43:55 AM
Meanwhile, there's my 2002 Focus. It doesn't matter which way I turn the radio's volume knob: it might go up, it might go down, who knows? The other day, I wanted to increase the volume from 13 to 15. Incrementally, I ended up getting it all the way down to zero and then gave up for the day. The next day, I managed to get it up to 15. Now I'm leaving it there, no matter what. The problem is that some radio stations are much louder than others.
That must be a weird Ford thing when the controls start wearing out. I have a relative that had a Mercury Mariner (the forgotten counterpart to the Escape) that I think was a 2004, and it did that same thing when she was getting rid of it in 2021. Moving the knob the volume just kind of went where it wanted to go.
Quote from: kphoger on March 07, 2024, 11:43:55 AM
Meanwhile, there's my 2002 Focus. It doesn't matter which way I turn the radio's volume knob: it might go up, it might go down, who knows? The other day, I wanted to increase the volume from 13 to 15. Incrementally, I ended up getting it all the way down to zero and then gave up for the day. The next day, I managed to get it up to 15. Now I'm leaving it there, no matter what. The problem is that some radio stations are much louder than others.
Can you try pulling the knob off and spraying some contact cleaner behind it to see if that clears it up? I had to do that with the volume control in my 2009 Odyssey.
Quote from: Rothman on March 06, 2024, 11:35:54 PM
Bring back dashes filled with needle gauges.
I quite like the digital speedometer on my Civic. I can see down to the mph how fast I'm going with no guesstimating, and when I go to Canada, I can switch to metric with the push of a button. No looking at the small numbers for me!
Granted, the lack of a proper engine temperature gauge is more annoying. My Accord's was most invaluable the summer it had a coolant leak.
Quote from: kphoger on March 07, 2024, 11:43:55 AM
Meanwhile, there's my 2002 Focus. It doesn't matter which way I turn the radio's volume knob: it might go up, it might go down, who knows? The other day, I wanted to increase the volume from 13 to 15. Incrementally, I ended up getting it all the way down to zero and then gave up for the day. The next day, I managed to get it up to 15. Now I'm leaving it there, no matter what. The problem is that some radio stations are much louder than others.
Quote from: SectorZ on March 07, 2024, 12:33:10 PM
That must be a weird Ford thing when the controls start wearing out. I have a relative that had a Mercury Mariner (the forgotten counterpart to the Escape) that I think was a 2004, and it did that same thing when she was getting rid of it in 2021. Moving the knob the volume just kind of went where it wanted to go.
The trim level came with a Mach brand stereo, so I don't know that it's even a Ford issue at all.
Quote from: Sani on March 07, 2024, 12:38:31 PM
Can you try pulling the knob off and spraying some contact cleaner behind it to see if that clears it up? I had to do that with the volume control in my 2009 Odyssey.
I pulled the knob off once and put it back on again. But, in doing so, the whole face of the stereo started coming off, and it was hard to actually find the pin again to re-seat the knob onto afterward. I don't want to risk the stereo not working at all in the process.
I started having the same issue in the '04 Sienna I used to drive where the volume and tune knobs would cause the radio to do whatever it felt like rather than adjusting how I wanted. Though, admittedly, it was typically easier to change the volume via the controls on the steering wheel anyways, so I typically didn't bother with adjusting the knobs.
Quote from: kphoger on March 07, 2024, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 07, 2024, 12:33:10 PM
That must be a weird Ford thing when the controls start wearing out. I have a relative that had a Mercury Mariner (the forgotten counterpart to the Escape) that I think was a 2004, and it did that same thing when she was getting rid of it in 2021. Moving the knob the volume just kind of went where it wanted to go.
The trim level came with a Mach brand stereo, so I don't know that it's even a Ford issue at all.
She had the Mach stereo, so yeah could be a problem with that specific stereo that Ford used for the higher-end systems.
Most cars are otherwise so reliable today that the majority of reliability complaints and JD Power demerits come from the infotainment system. The more things buried in there to save money the less functional the car becomes when something goes wrong with it. And the harder to use which is more on the JD Power side.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 07, 2024, 08:45:13 PM
Most cars are otherwise so reliable today that the majority of reliability complaints and JD Power demerits come from the infotainment system. The more things buried in there to save money the less functional the car becomes when something goes wrong with it. And the harder to use which is more on the JD Power side.
Technology isn't always for the better...
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 07, 2024, 03:54:05 PM
I started having the same issue in the '04 Sienna I used to drive where the volume and tune knobs would cause the radio to do whatever it felt like rather than adjusting how I wanted. Though, admittedly, it was typically easier to change the volume via the controls on the steering wheel anyways, so I typically didn't bother with adjusting the knobs.
I had a 1997 Pontiac Trans Sport minivan that did similar. It had steering wheel volume controls. At some point the volume started going haywire. It would get really loud for some reason, even as I turned the volume down on the dial on the radio, the volume would keep getting louder and louder to the point where I was waiting for the speakers to blow out. I finally got so annoyed with it, and thought maybe the buttons on the steering wheel had something to do with it. So I started pounding on them as hard as I could with my fist until the buttons finally broke. Problem solved!
Quote from: epzik8 on March 08, 2024, 06:34:50 PMQuote from: GCrites80s on March 07, 2024, 08:45:13 PMMost cars are otherwise so reliable today that the majority of reliability complaints and JD Power demerits come from the infotainment system. The more things buried in there to save money the less functional the car becomes when something goes wrong with it. And the harder to use which is more on the JD Power side.
Technology isn't always for the better...
I would rather have the Bluetooth integration of today rather than the CD and tape players of yesteryear... or even the AM-only radios of my parent's generation. How about those fuel injection systems over those carburetors?
Eh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 01:41:41 AMEh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
That's a couple pounds of added weight that has to be engineered to withstand the temperature extremes of the Arizona Summer and the Wisconsin Winters. Not to mention a repair bill. My CD player malfunctioned in my previous vehicle, and I ended up putting in a FM modulator to play audio. It was cheaper than getting the rarely-used CD player fixed.
Quote from: ZLoth on March 11, 2024, 08:49:45 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 01:41:41 AMEh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
That's a couple pounds of added weight that has to be engineered to withstand the temperature extremes of the Arizona Summer and the Wisconsin Winters. Not to mention a repair bill. My CD player malfunctioned in my previous vehicle, and I ended up putting in a FM modulator to play audio. It was cheaper than getting the rarely-used CD player fixed.
*shrug*
Lived in northern WI. Never had issues with my car's CD player.
I do not miss having to figure out which CDs were in the changer and whatnot.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 01:41:41 AM
Eh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
Seriously, people figured out a way for offline media such as songs on your phone to have "advertising". This is what happens when every single thing is combined into one device. I'm sorry, life was just more interesting when we interacted with multiple objects every day rather than a single Joypod.
I don't think I've heard advertising in offline songs, but then, I just use VLC, not any of the commercial apps. As for cars, give me a good old aux cable. I like that those just send the audio, especially given that car manufacturers can't be trusted with security and privacy. I don't need or want the entire contents of my phone downloaded into the car.
I usually just connect to either my Plex or Emby server from my phone. No advertising.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 11, 2024, 12:19:16 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 01:41:41 AM
Eh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
Seriously, people figured out a way for offline media such as songs on your phone to have "advertising". This is what happens when every single thing is combined into one device. I'm sorry, life was just more interesting when we interacted with multiple objects every day rather than a single Joypod.
I have 2,000+ CDs, all on an iPhone along with thousands of others songs I have "downloaded" as well. No ads listening to music either way in my case.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 11, 2024, 12:19:16 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 01:41:41 AM
Eh, I'd rather have the CDs. Way harder for telemarketers to interrupt them.
Seriously, people figured out a way for offline media such as songs on your phone to have "advertising". This is what happens when every single thing is combined into one device. I'm sorry, life was just more interesting when we interacted with multiple objects every day rather than a single Joypod.
I prefer CDs for many reasons, but I've never heard of this happening.
I mean, even if you have CDs ripped to your phone, that does nothing to prevent the too-common occurrence of your listening interrupted because it's ducked down under the ringtone caused by some asshole calling you to try and hit you up for money you don't have. And then you have to try and fumble around with whatever control to reject the call, and then sometimes the volume gets messed up...
With a CD, the music keeps going while the phone just vibrates uselessly in my pocket. Anyone who actually needs to get ahold of me knows I don't answer the phone in the car.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 07:37:44 PMI mean, even if you have CDs ripped to your phone, that does nothing to prevent the too-common occurrence of your listening interrupted because it's ducked down under the ringtone caused by some asshole calling you to try and hit you up for money you don't have.
You know, there is a "Do Not Disturb" feature available on phones nowadays. If you go into Android Settings → Connected Devices → Communications Preferences → Driving Mode, you can automatically turn on Do Not Disturb when you are connected to certain Bluetooth Devices. And, you can also go into Do Not Disturb settings so that "Starred Contacts" are able to get in touch with you even if you are driving. Of course, I enjoy the call sceening application that my Pixel phone has.
Starting in 2021, cars started phasing out CD players, so it's becoming an expensive option if offered at all. And, unfortunately, physical media is a dying form.
If I go into Android Settings → Connected Devices → Communications Preferences → Driving Mode, that's way more time having to touch the gross hell rectangle than I can take the psychic damage from. If I have to go four levels deep into a menu just to tell a device not to be annoying, that device has failed at its job.
And it doesn't even sound like that would help, considering I connect with an aux cable. I drive a 2009 Pontiac.
To clarify, I'm talking about telemarketers calling while you are listening music on your phone.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 09:08:33 PM
If I go into Android Settings → Connected Devices → Communications Preferences → Driving Mode, that's way more time having to touch the gross hell rectangle than I can take the psychic damage from. If I have to go four levels deep into a menu just to tell a device not to be annoying, that device has failed at its job.
And it doesn't even sound like that would help, considering I connect with an aux cable. I drive a 2009 Pontiac.
Do Not Disturb can also be turned on very quickly by swiping down from the top of the screen and setting it as one of your main "functions" (not sure the right word... but for example mine include Wifi, Bluetooth, flashlight, etc.). I use it every night so my phone doesn't go off while I'm asleep.
I used to be a big CD guy, and I still have a decent-sized collection, but I never use them anymore. Spotify is just too good of a deal to compete IMO. Something like $15 a month for my family to simultaneously stream almost any song we can think of. I've paid for CD's that cost more than that, and that's for a single album! It's also amazing at finding new music from smaller acts I would likely never hear about.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 09:08:33 PM
And it doesn't even sound like that would help, considering I connect with an aux cable. I drive a 2009 Pontiac.
And here I was bummed out because the 2002 Ford I just bought doesn't have a tape deck. CD and radio only. Not even an aux jack.
I definitely prefer CDs as well. Trying to mess with a phone while driving seems like too much of a hassle, not to mention being illegal in plenty of areas.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 12, 2024, 07:15:01 PM
Trying to mess with a phone while driving seems like too much of a hassle, not to mention being illegal in plenty of areas.
It does strike me as strange that so many people seem to think everyone should do everything on their phone while driving, at the same time that more and more jurisdictions are prohibiting the use of phones while driving.
Quote from: kphoger on March 12, 2024, 07:17:38 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 12, 2024, 07:15:01 PM
Trying to mess with a phone while driving seems like too much of a hassle, not to mention being illegal in plenty of areas.
It does strike me as strange that so many people seem to think everyone should do everything on their phone while driving, at the same time that more and more jurisdictions are prohibiting the use of phones while driving.
Oh, it's definitely distracting. Because if the shuffle function puts on a song I'm not in the mood for, I have to pull the phone out of the little cubby it stays in, draw the pattern on the screen to unlock it, and press the "next" button.
If you hook the phone up to the car through Bluetooth, you can do this with the onboard touchscreen, but that's not an acceptable solution because 1) my car doesn't have one of those, and even if it did 2) I'm not comfortable with the amount of data that sends back from the phone to the car manufacturer (who, as far as I can tell, has no legitimate reason to have that data).
Quote from: kphoger on March 12, 2024, 07:17:38 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 12, 2024, 07:15:01 PM
Trying to mess with a phone while driving seems like too much of a hassle, not to mention being illegal in plenty of areas.
It does strike me as strange that so many people seem to think everyone should do everything on their phone while driving, at the same time that more and more jurisdictions are prohibiting the use of phones while driving.
That's what's driving a lot of the integration. Using the
phone is illegal. Using the controls on the car to
control the phone, however,
is legal. Plus a lot of people just use apps like Pandora, so they're not constantly picking songs/albums. If they do have their music library on their phone, it's often on shuffle.
Back when I had my iPod, I'd set up the "on the go" playlist before drives when I was going to use it. VLC has the ability to set playlists as well, but I haven't actually gotten around to setting any up since I rarely hook up my phone to my car (and if I am, it's to stream a podcast). I've been in the habit the past 9 years to just listen to the sound of the road when out of range of my radio presets, and while I reserve the right to play music on my phone in those circumstances, I've never pulled the trigger on that.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 12, 2024, 08:25:32 PM
I'm not comfortable with the amount of data that sends back from the phone to the car manufacturer (who, as far as I can tell, has no legitimate reason to have that data).
And this right here is why I'll never connect my phone to my car via anything more sophisticated than an aux cable.
Phone mount...love mine.
I find Android Auto interfaces geared to lead people to pay for premium versions of apps. Blech.
Quote from: vdeane on March 12, 2024, 08:54:24 PM
I've been in the habit the past 9 years to just listen to the sound of the road when out of range of my radio presets, and while I reserve the right to play music on my phone in those circumstances, I've never pulled the trigger on that.
I keep my car's CD player loaded with CDs for that same reason.
Quote from: vdeane on March 12, 2024, 08:54:24 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 12, 2024, 08:25:32 PM
I'm not comfortable with the amount of data that sends back from the phone to the car manufacturer (who, as far as I can tell, has no legitimate reason to have that data).
And this right here is why I'll never connect my phone to my car via anything more sophisticated than an aux cable.
Same. I'm glad my current car has both an aux port (along with my phone) and a 6-CD player. It can do bluetooth, but I don't bother with it for obvious reasons.
Eh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Quote from: vdeane on March 12, 2024, 08:54:24 PMI've been in the habit the past 9 years to just listen to the sound of the road when out of range of my radio presets, and while I reserve the right to play music on my phone in those circumstances, I've never pulled the trigger on that.
Some of us would rather not deal with terrestrial radio and what feels like "40 minutes of commercials, DJ blabbing, and radio contests and 20 minutes of actual music" and would rather be our own masters of the music, podcasts, and audiobooks that are played back in our vehicles. Also, many of the radio stations are streaming now. I'm frequently tuning in to WRR for Classical Music and the NWS radio KEC-56 through Radio Garden (https://markholtz.info/radiogarden).
Quote from: ZLoth on March 13, 2024, 11:09:47 AM
Some of us would rather not deal with terrestrial radio and what feels like "40 minutes of commercials, DJ blabbing, and radio contests and 20 minutes of actual music" and would rather be our own masters of the music, podcasts, and audiobooks that are played back in our vehicles.
I normally listen to public radio for this reason. (I also like jazz, and it seems like that's not commercially viable, so it's only found on public radio.)
Las Vegas has a UNLV-run public radio station that plays jazz, and it's not NPR-affiliated, so there's not even any news at the top of the hour. There is a little bit of DJ banter, but it's just kind of comical since it's a university station.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 14, 2024, 05:47:39 PMLas Vegas has a UNLV-run public radio station that plays jazz, and it's not NPR-affiliated, so there's not even any news at the top of the hour. There is a little bit of DJ banter, but it's just kind of comical since it's a university station.
Are you talking about KUNV in Las Vegas (https://www.unlv.edu/kunv)? Looks like they have a streaming feed that is accessible from Radio Garden (https://markholtz.info/radiogarden) along with my local classical music station WRR in Dallas (https://markholtz.info/wrr101).
Looks like Radio Garden has implemented a subscription model, but at a reasonable price for $2.49 per month or $26 per year if you want an equalizer or sleep timer.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 14, 2024, 05:47:39 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on March 13, 2024, 11:09:47 AM
Some of us would rather not deal with terrestrial radio and what feels like "40 minutes of commercials, DJ blabbing, and radio contests and 20 minutes of actual music" and would rather be our own masters of the music, podcasts, and audiobooks that are played back in our vehicles.
I normally listen to public radio for this reason.
There are two local NPR stations here, and I listen to them pretty much exclusively during my daily commute, plus at some other times. But what sucks is when both of them are into their pledge drives at the same time.
Radio is for silly old people.
IMO, radio is preferable to the costly subscription services which are hard to get out of.
Quote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 06, 2024, 06:50:46 AMIMO, radio is preferable to the costly subscription services which are hard to get out of.
Have you tried to get out of SiriusXM? It's a single phone call. It's no trouble at all.
The problem is that modern cars have so many functions that if you had physical buttons for everything it'd look like this
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2024, 09:23:01 AMThe problem is that modern cars have so many functions that if you had physical buttons for everything it'd look like this
video snipped
Totally down with that. More buttons and gauges the better. Once I have the muscle memory and layout memorized I'm good.
Someone doesn't remember the wonderful era of a zillion needle gauges on one's dashboard.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 06, 2024, 07:35:35 AMQuote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 06, 2024, 06:50:46 AMIMO, radio is preferable to the costly subscription services which are hard to get out of.
Have you tried to get out of SiriusXM? It's a single phone call. It's no trouble at all.
If you have an online account, it's two mouse clicks.
Quote from: Rothman on April 06, 2024, 10:13:26 AMSomeone doesn't remember the wonderful era of a zillion needle gauges on one's dashboard.
For very small values of a zillion. Speedo, tach, oil pressure, temp, alternator, gas. That's about it.
A modern car measures a lot more but it's not really important. MPG? I have a gas gauge and an odometer, I know if something's wrong. Air pressure, but it's a stupid measurement based on tire rotations, not actual pressure, so you still need your own tire pressure gauge. All routed through one flakey microprocessor.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 06, 2024, 06:50:46 AMIMO, radio is preferable to the costly subscription services which are hard to get out of.
Really?
I had a trial subscription to SiriusXM, which took all of 5 minutes to cancel. I went to their website and canceled it in just a few clicks. You can call them and cancel it in an equal amount of minutes.
Spotify can be canceled in just two minutes if you go to your device's subscription settings or through the app itself, depending on whether you are using Android or Apple.
But why would I listen to the Radio, which plays about 8 to 10 songs per hour? Add in commercial breaks and promotions and a less-than-ideal audio quality, and it's no wonder that the format is dying a quick death. Apple Music and Spotify add so much more value for not a lot of money, with easy methods to discover new music, find the music you already listen to, curate playlists, follow playlists of others, and get high-quality audio. I suppose it's not free, but Spotify at least has a free, ad-supported tier that plays many more songs per hour than radio.
Add in that Spotify has extensive podcast capabilities that make longer drives tolerable. Long-form audio has long been abandoned by commercial radio.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2024, 07:09:38 AMQuote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
It's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
Quote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMIt's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
Gps is more of a phone function, so it's mighty Google area
I doubt cars can collect GPS data without very clearly spelling that out
Quote from: kalvado on April 06, 2024, 12:05:52 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMIt's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
Gps is more of a phone function, so it's mighty Google area
I doubt cars can collect GPS data without very clearly spelling that out
It could be spelled out but easily missed.
Owners manuals are hundreds of pages long, and are rarely reviewed by drivers, which could have the disclosure of collection of data via GPS. Or, if you click "I agree" on the vehicle's smartscreen, stating that you are now aware the vehicle has a GPS device that can track you, most users are probably not going to read that screen and aren't going to be aware what they agreed to before the pull out of the driveway.
But you probably don't need the car for that info anyway. Your phone is going to track that for you since it'll probably know the exact room you're in, not just the parking lot of the building you're at.
Phones don't track location unless something is requesting it. Unless you're using a GPS, this won't happen. Check your rate of battery drain when you're using location services compared to when you're not.
Quote from: hotdogPi on April 06, 2024, 01:45:27 PMPhones don't track location unless something is requesting it. Unless you're using a GPS, this won't happen. Check your rate of battery drain when you're using location services compared to when you're not.
Not true, cell carriers know quite a bit about device locations (from both GPS and cellular triangulation) and have mixed retention policies for said data: https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/29/tech/wireless-carriers-locations-fcc/index.html
Quote from: hotdogPi on April 06, 2024, 01:45:27 PMPhones don't track location unless something is requesting it. Unless you're using a GPS, this won't happen. Check your rate of battery drain when you're using location services compared to when you're not.
Phones may do a lot of funny stuff.
If you have android, check out http://maps.google.com/timeline
And see what Google knows about you
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 06, 2024, 01:35:01 PMQuote from: kalvado on April 06, 2024, 12:05:52 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMIt's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
Gps is more of a phone function, so it's mighty Google area
I doubt cars can collect GPS data without very clearly spelling that out
It could be spelled out but easily missed.
Owners manuals are hundreds of pages long, and are rarely reviewed by drivers, which could have the disclosure of collection of data via GPS. Or, if you click "I agree" on the vehicle's smartscreen, stating that you are now aware the vehicle has a GPS device that can track you, most users are probably not going to read that screen and aren't going to be aware what they agreed to before the pull out of the driveway.
But you probably don't need the car for that info anyway. Your phone is going to track that for you since it'll probably know the exact room you're in, not just the parking lot of the building you're at.
Someone would still find out. It's pretty well known that each car sold in US since 20xx has a cellular data link, for example. I don't think gps is mentioned in that context.
Quote from: kalvado on April 06, 2024, 05:45:58 PMQuote from: hotdogPi on April 06, 2024, 01:45:27 PMPhones don't track location unless something is requesting it. Unless you're using a GPS, this won't happen. Check your rate of battery drain when you're using location services compared to when you're not.
Phones may do a lot of funny stuff.
If you have android, check out http://maps.google.com/timeline
And see what Google knows about you
I specifically disabled the tracking in my Google settings. It's amazing how few people bother doing such things. Then again, maybe that's why Google is willing to offer the setting in the first place...
Quote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 09:18:35 PMQuote from: kalvado on April 06, 2024, 05:45:58 PMQuote from: hotdogPi on April 06, 2024, 01:45:27 PMPhones don't track location unless something is requesting it. Unless you're using a GPS, this won't happen. Check your rate of battery drain when you're using location services compared to when you're not.
Phones may do a lot of funny stuff.
If you have android, check out http://maps.google.com/timeline
And see what Google knows about you
I specifically disabled the tracking in my Google settings. It's amazing how few people bother doing such things. Then again, maybe that's why Google is willing to offer the setting in the first place...
Honestly, I've found it useful on occasion. I have a pretty boring life so if they want to track me, whatevs.
Quote from: kkt on April 06, 2024, 10:35:47 AMQuote from: Rothman on April 06, 2024, 10:13:26 AMSomeone doesn't remember the wonderful era of a zillion needle gauges on one's dashboard.
For very small values of a zillion. Speedo, tach, oil pressure, temp, alternator, gas. That's about it.
A modern car measures a lot more but it's not really important. MPG? I have a gas gauge and an odometer, I know if something's wrong. Air pressure, but it's a stupid measurement based on tire rotations, not actual pressure, so you still need your own tire pressure gauge. All routed through one flakey microprocessor.
It's easier to have my car calculate my MPG and I haven't had a pressure gague in my car for years. The tire pressure measurement is great when you are driving and there is a problem. I've had it recognize a problem long before I did.
My car's pressure reporting system is pretty good. Within just 1 psi of whatever gauge measures it, whether my own $2 gauge or the one on the air machine or...
Quote from: Rothman on March 11, 2024, 10:38:02 AMLived in northern WI. Never had issues with my car's CD player.
Lucky you. That's the type of engineering that had to go into a CD player or tape player for the environment that isn't faced with a home CD player.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 09:08:33 PMIf I go into Android Settings → Connected Devices → Communications Preferences → Driving Mode, that's way more time having to touch the gross hell rectangle than I can take the psychic damage from. If I have to go four levels deep into a menu just to tell a device not to be annoying, that device has failed at its job.
Did you even give it a try? This "four levels deep" is a one-time configuration so that when your phone sees that it is connecting to a particular bluetooth device, it will go into "Do Not Disturb" mode automatically.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 11, 2024, 09:08:33 PMAnd it doesn't even sound like that would help, considering I connect with an aux cable. I drive a 2009 Pontiac.
Here is a Bluetooth Speaker that appears to fit in a cup holder (https://amzn.to/49qdrjt). But yeah, what I described only works with Bluetooth, not a aux cable. And, while I'm sure that there are aftermarket kits for adding Bluetooth to your existing radio, what's the cost-benefit?
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 06, 2024, 06:50:46 AMIMO, radio is preferable to the costly subscription services which are hard to get out of.
I differ. I set up a personal media server so that I can stream (and download) music and audiobooks so that I can listen without the talking heads or the endless commercials. It was a bit of a pain to set up and rip all of my media, but the convenience is well worth it.
And remember, if you aren't paying for the product, you
are the product as a advertising target.
Quote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 09:18:35 PMI specifically disabled the tracking in my Google settings. It's amazing how few people bother doing such things. Then again, maybe that's why Google is willing to offer the setting in the first place...
Does that mean you don't watch any of the television streaming service (either paid or free) at all either? There's plenty to derive from your viewing habits, time of viewing, and location based upon IP address.
Also, using a credit card or debit card? Location, time of day, where you shopped at.
I saw a billboard yesterday about not using your phone while driving. I thought it was silly that it said something about "hands-free driving" being required. Really? I think I need to use my hands while driving.
Quote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2024, 07:09:38 AMQuote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
It's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
Quote from: ZLoth on April 07, 2024, 08:50:52 AMDoes that mean you don't watch any of the television streaming service (either paid or free) at all either? There's plenty to derive from your viewing habits, time of viewing, and location based upon IP address.
Also, using a credit card or debit card? Location, time of day, where you shopped at.
So, because some things have tracking (sometimes impossible to provide the service without, like credit cards), we shouldn't keep the issue from getting worse? There's also the matter of degree. I can turn my phone off (mine even lets me remove the battery). I can pay with a cash, or split charges between different cards. Not driving my car is a bigger ask.
As I mentioned, I take steps to limit my exposure to this stuff. I'm honestly surprised that so few people do and that even suggesting that privacy is a thing to value seems to be such an unpopular opinion.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PM<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a member of a social group whose very existence has become politicized. Or of the government becomes paranoid again. I'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2024, 07:09:38 AMQuote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
It's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
As
@vdeane said, it's a matter of degree. Feel free to collect data for statistical purposes without unnecessary personalization. For actual crime investigation (do you know that adultery is a crime in NY?). Recent trend to use criminal prosecution as political tool isn't encouraging, though.
A lot of employers may be eager to use data they are not entitled to. Requests to review social network accounts, including personal messages, during hiring do exist. Taking day off for an interview with competitor? Going to political event after work? These can easily lead to consequences...
Sounds like a place I wouldn't want to work for anyway.
Quote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
While there's a little truth to this, what may seem suspicious to us isn't really all that suspicious or entertaining to law enforcement. People make wrong turns and go indirect ways all the time. People taking roads less traveled are still on roads that are traveled.
Liken it to a bunch of teens and 20-somethings meeting up for a bonfire or party or drinking spot (which is a surprising example from me, being I've never been to one of these). Google data could point to a "delay" in what should be an unusual area.
Quote from: kalvado on April 07, 2024, 06:39:59 PMAs @vdeane said, it's a matter of degree. Feel free to collect data for statistical purposes without unnecessary personalization. For actual crime investigation (do you know that adultery is a crime in NY?). Recent trend to use criminal prosecution as political tool isn't encouraging, though.
A lot of employers may be eager to use data they are not entitled to. Requests to review social network accounts, including personal messages, during hiring do exist. Taking day off for an interview with competitor? Going to political event after work? These can easily lead to consequences...
If your profiles and posts are public, companies aren't doing anything wrong. Anyone is entitled to view public information. I don't know of any company that has a right to contact a company to gain access to private profiles or posts, and social media companies wouldn't give access to such. As it is, even law enforcement needs to provide a warrant to access someone's private info if it's in regard to criminal research.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 07, 2024, 08:27:04 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
While there's a little truth to this, what may seem suspicious to us isn't really all that suspicious or entertaining to law enforcement. People make wrong turns and go indirect ways all the time. People taking roads less traveled are still on roads that are traveled.
Liken it to a bunch of teens and 20-somethings meeting up for a bonfire or party or drinking spot (which is a surprising example from me, being I've never been to one of these). Google data could point to a "delay" in what should be an unusual area.
Quote from: kalvado on April 07, 2024, 06:39:59 PMAs @vdeane said, it's a matter of degree. Feel free to collect data for statistical purposes without unnecessary personalization. For actual crime investigation (do you know that adultery is a crime in NY?). Recent trend to use criminal prosecution as political tool isn't encouraging, though.
A lot of employers may be eager to use data they are not entitled to. Requests to review social network accounts, including personal messages, during hiring do exist. Taking day off for an interview with competitor? Going to political event after work? These can easily lead to consequences...
If your profiles and posts are public, companies aren't doing anything wrong. Anyone is entitled to view public information. I don't know of any company that has a right to contact a company to gain access to private profiles or posts, and social media companies wouldn't give access to such. As it is, even law enforcement needs to provide a warrant to access someone's private info if it's in regard to criminal research.
Was the trend a while back:
https://www.beankinney.com/a-warning-for-employers-requiring-social-media-login-information/
Looks like no longer the trend, but shows that people in charge don't feel privacy concerns as a factor.
Quote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMQuote from: ZLoth on April 07, 2024, 08:50:52 AMDoes that mean you don't watch any of the television streaming service (either paid or free) at all either? There's plenty to derive from your viewing habits, time of viewing, and location based upon IP address.
Also, using a credit card or debit card? Location, time of day, where you shopped at.
So, because some things have tracking (sometimes impossible to provide the service without, like credit cards), we shouldn't keep the issue from getting worse? There's also the matter of degree. I can turn my phone off (mine even lets me remove the battery). I can pay with a cash, or split charges between different cards. Not driving my car is a bigger ask.
As I mentioned, I take steps to limit my exposure to this stuff. I'm honestly surprised that so few people do and that even suggesting that privacy is a thing to value seems to be such an unpopular opinion.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PM<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a member of a social group whose very existence has become politicized. Or of the government becomes paranoid again.
It also depends a lot on where you live. I imagine Nevada wouldn't give two fucks about anything I was up to if they got that kind of data on me, but if, say, Texas got it I would be worried. With Texas, there's also the "sue people doing things you don't like for $10,000" laws, and I would imagine a cell provider or car service doing business in Texas could be compelled to respond to a subpoena from a private attorney for that data.
Quote from: kalvado on April 07, 2024, 06:39:59 PMA lot of employers may be eager to use data they are not entitled to. Requests to review social network accounts, including personal messages, during hiring do exist. Taking day off for an interview with competitor? Going to political event after work? These can easily lead to consequences...
Or perhaps your car data puts you in the parking garage of the office of a labor union you're talking to...or a government office you're whistleblowing at...
It should also be noted that whether or not someone is legally
entitled to that data, they may well be able to just purchase it.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 07, 2024, 08:27:04 PMI don't know of any company that has a right to contact a company to gain access to private profiles or posts, and social media companies wouldn't give access to such.
Quote from: NBC NewsMark Zuckerberg leveraged Facebook user data to fight rivals and help friends, leaked documents show
April 16, 2019, 1:30 AM PDT / Updated April 18, 2019, 4:51 PM PDT
By Olivia Solon and Cyrus Farivar
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg oversaw plans to consolidate the social network's power and control competitors by treating its users' data as a bargaining chip, while publicly proclaiming to be protecting that data, according to about 4,000 pages of leaked company documents largely spanning 2011 to 2015 and obtained by NBC News.
The documents, which include emails, webchats, presentations, spreadsheets and meeting summaries, show how Zuckerberg, along with his board and management team, found ways to tap Facebook's trove of user data — including information about friends, relationships and photos — as leverage over companies it partnered with.
In some cases, Facebook would reward favored companies by giving them access to the data of its users. In other cases, it would deny user-data access to rival companies or apps.
For example, Facebook gave Amazon extended access to user data because it was spending money on Facebook advertising and partnering with the social network on the launch of its Fire smartphone. In another case, Facebook discussed cutting off access to user data for a messaging app that had grown too popular and was viewed as a competitor, according to the documents.
[...]
Facebook ultimately decided not to sell the data directly but rather to dole it out to app developers who were considered personal "friends" of Zuckerberg or who spent money on Facebook and shared their own valuable data, the documents show.
So say you work at a grocery store with an app. Upper management decides they want access to their employees' profiles, so they offer Facebook ad money and data from their app in exchange for their employees' data from Facebook. Facebook would absolutely entertain that deal.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 08, 2024, 12:44:25 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMQuote from: ZLoth on April 07, 2024, 08:50:52 AMDoes that mean you don't watch any of the television streaming service (either paid or free) at all either? There's plenty to derive from your viewing habits, time of viewing, and location based upon IP address.
Also, using a credit card or debit card? Location, time of day, where you shopped at.
So, because some things have tracking (sometimes impossible to provide the service without, like credit cards), we shouldn't keep the issue from getting worse? There's also the matter of degree. I can turn my phone off (mine even lets me remove the battery). I can pay with a cash, or split charges between different cards. Not driving my car is a bigger ask.
As I mentioned, I take steps to limit my exposure to this stuff. I'm honestly surprised that so few people do and that even suggesting that privacy is a thing to value seems to be such an unpopular opinion.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PM<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a member of a social group whose very existence has become politicized. Or of the government becomes paranoid again.
It also depends a lot on where you live. I imagine Nevada wouldn't give two fucks about anything I was up to if they got that kind of data on me, but if, say, Texas got it I would be worried. With Texas, there's also the "sue people doing things you don't like for $10,000" laws, and I would imagine a cell provider or car service doing business in Texas could be compelled to respond to a subpoena from a private attorney for that data.
Quote from: kalvado on April 07, 2024, 06:39:59 PMA lot of employers may be eager to use data they are not entitled to. Requests to review social network accounts, including personal messages, during hiring do exist. Taking day off for an interview with competitor? Going to political event after work? These can easily lead to consequences...
Or perhaps your car data puts you in the parking garage of the office of a labor union you're talking to...or a government office you're whistleblowing at...
It should also be noted that whether or not someone is legally entitled to that data, they may well be able to just purchase it.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 07, 2024, 08:27:04 PMI don't know of any company that has a right to contact a company to gain access to private profiles or posts, and social media companies wouldn't give access to such.
Quote from: NBC NewsMark Zuckerberg leveraged Facebook user data to fight rivals and help friends, leaked documents show
April 16, 2019, 1:30 AM PDT / Updated April 18, 2019, 4:51 PM PDT
By Olivia Solon and Cyrus Farivar
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg oversaw plans to consolidate the social network's power and control competitors by treating its users' data as a bargaining chip, while publicly proclaiming to be protecting that data, according to about 4,000 pages of leaked company documents largely spanning 2011 to 2015 and obtained by NBC News.
The documents, which include emails, webchats, presentations, spreadsheets and meeting summaries, show how Zuckerberg, along with his board and management team, found ways to tap Facebook's trove of user data — including information about friends, relationships and photos — as leverage over companies it partnered with.
In some cases, Facebook would reward favored companies by giving them access to the data of its users. In other cases, it would deny user-data access to rival companies or apps.
For example, Facebook gave Amazon extended access to user data because it was spending money on Facebook advertising and partnering with the social network on the launch of its Fire smartphone. In another case, Facebook discussed cutting off access to user data for a messaging app that had grown too popular and was viewed as a competitor, according to the documents.
[...]
Facebook ultimately decided not to sell the data directly but rather to dole it out to app developers who were considered personal "friends" of Zuckerberg or who spent money on Facebook and shared their own valuable data, the documents show.
So say you work at a grocery store with an app. Upper management decides they want access to their employees' profiles, so they offer Facebook ad money and data from their app in exchange for their employees' data from Facebook. Facebook would absolutely entertain that deal.
People often freak out on a possibility of Chinese espionage from some equipment. thing is, that data is unlikely to cause any personal problems - unlike data with the friendly local business which is right here.
Quote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
The license plate readers are not designed to look for people taking "suspicious" routes. ALPR systems capture a image of the vehicle and license plate, and transform the plate image into alphanumeric characters using OCR that then compares the plate number to one or more "hot list" databases. Essentially, if you aren't already on a list through a local police bureau, state police, or through the FBI, you aren't going to be profiled.
Quote from: seicer on April 08, 2024, 09:39:23 AMThe license plate readers are not designed to look for people taking "suspicious" routes. ALPR systems capture a image of the vehicle and license plate, and transform the plate image into alphanumeric characters using OCR that then compares the plate number to one or more "hot list" databases. Essentially, if you aren't already on a list through a local police bureau, state police, or through the FBI, you aren't going to be profiled.
Do you know that first hand, or you read about it somewhere?
I doubt about first hand knowledge, as "reader" describes only a front end of the system which can be combined with any backend processing.
And I won't underestimate capabilities of existing back ends. Even before covid people were saying it's almost impossible to get into NYC without getting identified. Not without going through things like traveling in the trunk and getting out in closed private garage. With AI models being in full bloom, who knows what the system would call suspicious tomorrow...
It's pretty well-detailed (https://www.theiacp.org/projects/automated-license-plate-recognition#:~:text=ALPR%20systems%20typically%20capture%20the,unit%20that%20captured%20the%20image.). Federal DPPA also restricts access and prohibits releasing certain personal information from MVRs, alleviating some concerns some had raised. But conspiracy theorists will raise concerns with any type of tracking system regardless of how advanced or not they are.
The ALPR system uses off-the-shelf OCR technology to read the alphanumeric digits and compare them to a live database of plates flagged in one or more databases. There isn't anything suspicious or "AI" about that. ("AI" has sadly become a catchphrase for all things people don't understand and want to mislabel.)
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2024, 07:09:38 AMQuote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
It's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
A decade or two ago, someone used cell phone company 'ping' (used by the cell phone system, every few minutes they send out signals to all of the phones to know where they are so they can receive incoming messages) records to show that he was at a Dodgers game and not in a Los Angeles city neighborhood when a murder that he was on trial for happened.
Mike
People are so concerned about being "tracked" by Google Maps that they turn off its location history feature, which is helpful if you review places or want to see places you've visited previously. But then they won't put their phone in airplane mode and aren't aware that, with proper warrants, they can be tracked through the onboard GPS module in their vehicle and/or phone. At the least, triangulation through cellular towers can provide a pretty good timeline of where someone has been.
But we know people don't turn on airplane mode all day long because they use their phones as intended. And people don't remove GPS modules from their cars (unless it's a Subaru with Starlink and you live in Massachusetts). And almost everyone here comments on forums and websites where their IP address is logged. Unless people wear tinfoil hats all day, the notion that they have privacy and anonymity on the Internet or on their phones is funny.
Quote from: seicer on April 08, 2024, 12:07:52 PMPeople are so concerned about being "tracked" by Google Maps that they turn off its location history feature, which is helpful if you review places or want to see places you've visited previously. But then they won't put their phone in airplane mode and aren't aware that, with proper warrants, they can be tracked through the onboard GPS module in their vehicle and/or phone. At the least, triangulation through cellular towers can provide a pretty good timeline of where someone has been.
But we know people don't turn on airplane mode all day long because they use their phones as intended. And people don't remove GPS modules from their cars (unless it's a Subaru with Starlink and you live in Massachusetts). And almost everyone here comments on forums and websites where their IP address is logged. Unless people wear tinfoil hats all day, the notion that they have privacy and anonymity on the Internet or on their phones is funny.
That's why solutions for these questions should be in a legal and ethical domains, not brute force disabling things with companies happily deploying workarounds.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they? I remember when Border Patrol was pulling over random cars on US 9 that were "suspicious" because they didn't use I-87 (granted, this was the part bypassing their checkpoint, but still). I remember when vehicles at their checkpoints could expect to be potentially detained, given a fake hit from a drug dog, and have their cars torn apart. All from an agency that is legally only allowed to ask if you're a US citizen and then let you go. I even remember the NYS state police setting up a checkpoint on NY 74 and quizzing everyone on their travels. And my roadgeeking trips tended to look a lot weirder than just taking the scenic route, especially when I was still clinching NY routes and would go up, down, on a loop, down a road and deadhead back, etc. multiple times in one trip.
Quote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:08:11 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they?
Because it's completely inefficient.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 02:15:32 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:08:11 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they?
Because it's completely inefficient.
Not with AI it isn't. It's not like you need a person physically watching everyone's travels to determine this. And they basically already do this at the border. Have a non-typical itinerary? You're going to secondary.
Quote from: mgk920 on April 08, 2024, 10:53:54 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 07, 2024, 01:32:37 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 06, 2024, 11:40:23 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2024, 07:09:38 AMQuote from: Rothman on March 13, 2024, 06:49:22 AMEh, I still find data privacy concerns overblown, considering the level of harm that could really come from it to me, personally.
I find Bluetooth and the ability to make hands-free calls and the like invaluable while driving.
Yeah if a car company wants to collect my data, I have no idea what they are going to do with it, but more power to them. They will figure out I drive a lot, have a lot of pictures of my dogs on my phone, and have a weird obsession with buttery love songs from the 1970s.
Anyway I use Sirius XM and cycle through about fifteen or so different stations on any ride.
It's amazing how much you can figure out from such data. Imagine figuring out someone has cancer based on which doctor's offices they drive to and when (or other, more political, medical things).
<shrug>
My privacy expectations aren't all that high. I pretty much assume anytime I use my phone or drive my car something is tracking me. Again, I don't really know what harm that actually does to me.
A decade or two ago, someone used cell phone company 'ping' (used by the cell phone system, every few minutes they send out signals to all of the phones to know where they are so they can receive incoming messages) records to show that he was at a Dodgers game and not in a Los Angeles city neighborhood when a murder that he was on trial for happened.
Mike
Great, now his phone has an airtight alibi.
Quote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:19:26 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 02:15:32 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:08:11 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they?
Because it's completely inefficient.
Not with AI it isn't. It's not like you need a person physically watching everyone's travels to determine this. And they basically already do this at the border. Have a non-typical itinerary? You're going to secondary.
At the border, they've asked where I'm going, where I'm staying, for how long, and do I have tobacco or alcohol. I've never been asked for my route-by-route directions, or have they asked for my specific schedule.
Maybe if you're going up for the day and you tell them you're clinching a route, well, yeah, that's unusual. But this is also way different than driving and having a camera see you pass by.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 02:15:32 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:08:11 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they?
Because it's completely inefficient.
Because the sheriff's office of Lunchbuckler County, population -56, is really concerned about efficiency, am I right?
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 08, 2024, 07:09:28 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 02:15:32 PMQuote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 02:08:11 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:45:43 AMQuote from: vdeane on April 07, 2024, 04:21:51 PMI'm honestly surprised they never took the data from licence plate readers to pull over cars with "suspicious" routes (which would, I presume, include any roadgeek trip that is pure route clinching) for questioning.
Why would they do that? Its not as though law enforcement has a ton of time on its hands to pull over people for doing nothing but taking the scenic route somewhere.
Why wouldn't they?
Because it's completely inefficient.
Because the sheriff's office of Lunchbuckler County, population -56, is really concerned about efficiency, am I right?
When that actually happens, let me know.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 08, 2024, 06:57:28 PMAt the border, they've asked where I'm going, where I'm staying, for how long, and do I have tobacco or alcohol. I've never been asked for my route-by-route directions, or have they asked for my specific schedule.
Maybe if you're going up for the day and you tell them you're clinching a route, well, yeah, that's unusual. But this is also way different than driving and having a camera see you pass by.
I actually
have had them ask detailed itinerary questions (both during day trips while I was in college, incidentally) before (one of which even involved going to secondary screening heading in to Canada), although the third trip that year and the two since were more chill (aside from returning to the US from the Québec City meet in 2014; then they spent a few minutes grilling me on why I was working for the state instead of something more directly related to my degree). But it's worth noting two things:
1. My "roadgeek day trips" don't fit the typical profile of travel (and, as such, I have never done one that involves crossing the border), as there is no destination involved in the traditional sense; I just leave my apartment, drive on a bunch of roads, and get back with no stops other than lunch/gas (and occasionally intermediate bathroom breaks as needed, though I try to avoid them). Like I said, this isn't as simple as "taking the scenic route". Since it seems an example is needed, here's an example of one (split into two parts, as Google didn't provide enough shaping points to do this all in one), minus the drive from my apartment to the beginning of the loop and back again - Part 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/42.2063999,-71.7918714/41.4984787,-71.2801327/@41.7481482,-71.4818135,9.88z/data=!4m59!4m58!1m55!3m4!1m2!1d-71.1831829!2d42.2122325!3s0x89e48005799283c3:0x16dcbe581bc40b84!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2123523!2d42.1503372!3s0x89e47e0a239a9bfb:0x8f26085c1b9f1d52!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2988171!2d42.0545451!3s0x89e46485fb5ada35:0x53cb6a9a66cbe70d!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3300036!2d41.9730877!3s0x89e46706ba7eda13:0xc313eb270353f26b!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3743556!2d41.8883924!3s0x89e45cb645861085:0xccf1b2b9878e889c!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2563784!2d41.6040171!3s0x89e5ab3c38b94ae3:0xca1aa12adaccfaeb!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2436292!2d41.6278656!3s0x89e454d9d9d2be3b:0x8edcf127f2795fdb!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2747015!2d41.5277419!3s0x89e5a947e9e6b94d:0x601a223353b1cc55!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3142089!2d41.5075786!3s0x89e5af18e2eaab1f:0x2682ccacf271c85e!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3153241!2d41.4869963!3s0x89e5af68e7448113:0x2751e420b6d8f4b0!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2959301!2d41.5232906!3s0x89e5aece40fad2a3:0x6c04b9983c051307!1m0!3e0?entry=ttu), Part 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/41.4984787,-71.2801327/42.2065894,-71.7919522/@42.2051584,-71.7992753,14.15z/data=!4m29!4m28!1m25!3m4!1m2!1d-71.2831885!2d41.5177597!3s0x89e5a92deb5c31ed:0x4ffd2dbc7d81f5e6!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3117284!2d41.5192734!3s0x89e5aee759e7f57f:0x5fbeb51db0e6c264!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3147558!2d41.5065866!3s0x89e5af19aebf46a1:0x70536438a83f3c3!3m4!1m2!1d-71.3164987!2d41.5032017!3s0x89e5af16d9d81927:0x261abed09b8eed80!3m4!1m2!1d-71.4188713!2d41.8425926!3s0x89e444fd285ccb9b:0x2d14100d5acaaef1!1m0!3e0?entry=ttu).
2. You're acting like it's one camera. It's not. Many areas are covered with them. Imagine if the Newport area was covered with them and the system was able to use the date/time stamps to piece together that whole itinerary and that it didn't have stops (aside from my lunch at Neon Marketplace in Portsmouth) and deemed it suspicious (if I wasn't a roadgeek, I would).
My two experiences of driving from the United States to Canada were as follows:
late September, 2013 - via Ferry from Port Angeles, WA to Victoria, BC. Was questioned as to if I was currently employed (yes), if I knew anyone in the area (no), where I was staying (Royal Scot Hotel), when I returning to the United States, when I was returning to work.
mid-September, 2016 - I was staying at a hotel in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and was taking a day trip up to Canada with the intention of visiting Kootenay Lake. There was a security incident near New York City a few days previous, so all of the border security was on heightened alert. My plan was to enter Canada via Eastport/Kingsgate, go to Creston, then the lake, then loop back around and re-enter the United States via Rykerts/Porthill. My car was searched by dogs, my computer and smart phone was reviewed, and they questioned why I didn't take the direct route to Creston. Of course, they asked where I was staying, if I was employed, etc.
In both cases, I was using my passport card to enter Canada, was traveling off-season, and was a single person.
Quote from: vdeane on April 08, 2024, 09:13:52 PM2. You're acting like it's one camera. It's not. Many areas are covered with them.
Saying was that anyone on Manhattan is always observed by at least 2 cameras when outside of a private residence. I really hope restrooms are treated all the later as well.
I suspect coverage only increases with storage capacity growth.
I disagree with the U.S. Border Patrol's claim that they have jurisdiction 100 miles into the interior from any land or maritime border, as that raises all sorts of legal claims (https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone) still playing out in courts. Immigration officers only need "probable cause" to search your vehicle and only need "reasonable suspicion" to arrest you. Both violate the Constitution. This affects 200 million people, and the Border Patrol's jurisdiction almost entirely or entirely blankets some states. It doesn't entirely matter to the Border Patrol as they often extend their jurisdiction past the 100-mile limit, which two Circuit Courts have backed up. It's also dubious regarding legal authority - it was pushed through without any public input or debate.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:02:44 PMQuote from: Scott5114 on April 08, 2024, 07:09:28 PMBecause the sheriff's office of Lunchbuckler County, population -56, is really concerned about efficiency, am I right?
When that actually happens, let me know.
Quote from: US 89 on February 01, 2023, 12:54:48 AMWhen I was 19, I was pulled over in Blackfoot, Idaho for 42 in a 35 (I was going south on 91 and speeding up as the town was ending and I was about to pass the 45 sign). Given my age, out-of-state license plates, and location on US 91 instead of I-15, the cop assumed I was carrying weed. Another cop showed up and asked if they could search my car. I consented as it was clear I was going to get a speeding ticket otherwise. After 15 minutes of going through every nook and cranny in my car, they decided I had nothing, clearly felt bad about the whole thing, and let me off with a warning.
As of now, that's the only time I've ever been pulled over. I had a Talbot County cop ride my ass through the middle of nowhere in Georgia, clearly trying to egg me into breaking the 55 mph rural speed limit on US 80, but eventually he gave up and pulled into a gas station.
Plenty of other examples on the forum if you care to search. Jake Bear in particular had it happen to him a lot since he tended to take a lot of back roads during his wild roadgeeking days, but I don't remember whether he posted those stories here or to his blog. I also seem to remember an instance of someone getting pulled over in West Texas for being on US-180 with out of state plates, but I'm having a hard time finding it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 09, 2024, 10:21:18 PMJake Bear in particular had it happen to him a lot since he tended to take a lot of back roads during his wild roadgeeking days, but I don't remember whether he posted those stories here or to his blog.
IIRC he also had a few rants about Border Patrol hanging out at California agricultural inspection stations.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 09, 2024, 10:21:18 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 08, 2024, 08:02:44 PMQuote from: Scott5114 on April 08, 2024, 07:09:28 PMBecause the sheriff's office of Lunchbuckler County, population -56, is really concerned about efficiency, am I right?
When that actually happens, let me know.
Quote from: US 89 on February 01, 2023, 12:54:48 AMWhen I was 19, I was pulled over in Blackfoot, Idaho for 42 in a 35 (I was going south on 91 and speeding up as the town was ending and I was about to pass the 45 sign). Given my age, out-of-state license plates, and location on US 91 instead of I-15, the cop assumed I was carrying weed. Another cop showed up and asked if they could search my car. I consented as it was clear I was going to get a speeding ticket otherwise. After 15 minutes of going through every nook and cranny in my car, they decided I had nothing, clearly felt bad about the whole thing, and let me off with a warning.
As of now, that's the only time I've ever been pulled over. I had a Talbot County cop ride my ass through the middle of nowhere in Georgia, clearly trying to egg me into breaking the 55 mph rural speed limit on US 80, but eventually he gave up and pulled into a gas station.
Plenty of other examples on the forum if you care to search. Jake Bear in particular had it happen to him a lot since he tended to take a lot of back roads during his wild roadgeeking days, but I don't remember whether he posted those stories here or to his blog. I also seem to remember an instance of someone getting pulled over in West Texas for being on US-180 with out of state plates, but I'm having a hard time finding it.
So...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 10, 2024, 08:44:43 AMSo...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
OnStar advertised that if your vehicle was stolen, they would send your GPS to law enforcement then stop the vehicle when police came.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 10, 2024, 08:44:43 AMSo...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
Primarily because that capability is fairly limited so far.
Couple of stories about gps device planted on a car, phone spoofing, ezpass off label use are there.
Also cheating spouses/significant others. :nod:
Mike
Quote from: kalvado on April 10, 2024, 08:48:26 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 10, 2024, 08:44:43 AMSo...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
Primarily because that capability is fairly limited so far.
Couple of stories about gps device planted on a car, phone spoofing, ezpass off label use are there.
Quote from: mgk920 on April 10, 2024, 10:47:19 AMAlso cheating spouses/significant others. :nod:
Mike
Another big one was for evidence in those entering the Capitol on Jan 6, 2020. For those going to DC, especially from the Northeast, investigators used EZ Pass records attributable to the car or person, showing they were driving to or from DC on or about Jan 6.
But, like the other examples above, these are all intentional reviews of GPS and other electronic equipment to determine the whereabouts of a specific person, with known reasons to monitor them. They weren't random lookups as traffic was passing by to try to guess what someone may be doing in real time.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 10, 2024, 11:25:08 AMBut, like the other examples above, these are all intentional reviews of GPS and other electronic equipment to determine the whereabouts of a specific person, with known reasons to monitor them. They weren't random lookups as traffic was passing by to try to guess what someone may be doing in real time.
It is really about (lack of) capabilities. Those will be brought up under "we are looking for terrorists" reasons and then definition will be expanded....
Quote from: kalvado on April 10, 2024, 11:31:21 AMQuote from: jeffandnicole on April 10, 2024, 11:25:08 AMBut, like the other examples above, these are all intentional reviews of GPS and other electronic equipment to determine the whereabouts of a specific person, with known reasons to monitor them. They weren't random lookups as traffic was passing by to try to guess what someone may be doing in real time.
It is really about (lack of) capabilities. Those will be brought up under "we are looking for terrorists" reasons and then definition will be expanded....
Agreed. It hasn't happened yet (as far as anyone is aware of, at least) because the technology didn't exist until the terrorism panic died down. Now imagine if we had the same AI, GPS, and camera capabilities we have now (or that we imagine we might five years from now) immediately after 9/11, when Congress was passing the Patriot Act and creating the NSA...
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 10, 2024, 08:44:43 AMSo...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
Original post was about license plates, not GPS.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 10, 2024, 01:01:17 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 10, 2024, 08:44:43 AMSo...none with local law enforcement tracking your car's movements via GPS.
Original post was about license plates, not GPS.
I would say that the current discussion is about what kind of information can be collected, specifically under "it's in plain view!" assumption. License plates are very low hanging fruit, face recognition is also up there by now. toll tags readout may be a bit less simple. GPS data would require a bit more legalize wording to get.