Given all the discussion about privacy and of using open source wherever possible, and with so much technology packed into cars these days, I'm quite surprised that this place is almost devoid of discussion on cars.The state of modern cars and the amount of data they collect is scary, with no one seemingly caring about it. Of course, you can buy an older model, but who knows how long that will be an option? The future also looks bleak, with autonomous cars that surveil both the inside and the outside of the vehicle. I wonder if you'll even need insurance in such a world if you're not the one actually driving. Do electric cars even exist that don't connect to an auto-maker's server for data collection?
>>108473116>Do electric cars even exist that don't connect to an auto-maker's server for data collection?lol
>>108473116>I wonder if you'll even need insurance in such a world if you're not the one actually driving.If the car is yours, you should need insurance. If it's rented kind of deal it's the owner who'll ahve insurance (dilluted into the rent price, but still). You own a thing and something unpredictable damages it, insurance should cover the unexpected expense. That's what it's for. If I don't own the car, why would I care if it gets trashed for something clearly not my fault?
>>108473116Modern cars are computers on wheels. That doesn't have to be a bad thing, but it's made a bad thing because the current regulatory environment gives car manufacturers infinite control and the consumer no control.This is not even a case of the government failing to catch up with modern times as you might assume, this is on purpose. Regulations actively encourage taking as much control over their own vehicle away from the consumer.
>>108473116>muh electricI know all this doom and gloom from ME is about pushing for always connected EVs for everybody, but peak oil has been a solved problem for decades. Gas cars can run on ethanol alcohol with little to no modifications (it degrades faster) or with some modification (to degrade as fast as planned obsolescence).
>>108473153This is what I think, it's not the greatest idea or the solution to just take it in the ass with a smile, but...We have car mechanics who can do everything you need on a car without internet connection for generations now. So if the only option is a connected car, what stops me (except regulations) to remove the electronics and just use the full car as "spare parts" to build my own offline car? Engine, suspensions, etc, it's all there and in good condition, we just need to redo the electric parts (not electronics).It's shit, but in a mad max scenario it's pretty doable.
>>108473133Renewables are so much more sensible that oil, but I don't know of any car that doesn't collect some form of data. I was asking in case someone else knew of a model.>>108473137>If the car is yours, you should need insuranceI don't see why I would need to. As long as I'm doing the routine maintenance, it should be good to go. By that point, cars should have some mechanism that prevents them from driving if they detect some issue or malfunction. If a car does drive and the technology fails and lets say I run someone over, why should I be held responsible for the proprietary technology powering it? Surely the auto-maker should be the one held responsible, no? >If I don't own the carIf we get to that point I wonder if we'll even be owning our own cars anymore...
>>108473116>Idk how to remove the network card from my shitboxIt's easier than you think, lad.Also, if you turn off Wi-Fi in the car and confirm it's off, then no data is being transmitted.However, of you take your car to a dealership, they will export the data, so if you need to do that, then it won't be enough just to remove the network card, you'll have to remove the black box behind the radio. Which isn't difficult but can take some time especially if you've never done the job
>>108473173A fucking tree falls on top of the car and you'll just take the loss then. Okay.
>>108473154It doesn't really matter if the car runs on oil or electric anymore because you're getting your shit collected regardless. At least with oil you have the option of buying an older model without all the telemetry.>>108473153I was also annoyed at governmental inaction to the situation with cars, but as we can plainly see, they want that level of surveillance everywhere, not just in our cars. They have no reason to change things.>>108473166>what stops me [from building] my own offline car?Insurance. No one will insure your car, thus won't be legal for you to drive it publicly.>>108473185Insurance won't like that.>>108473210So just like everything else? Sure, you can opt to insure your car if you want, but I'm talking about mandatory insurance to drive. If a tree falls on my car, I doubt it'll be doing much driving.
>>108473173Typically only liability insurance is required if you own the car. This is to ensure if you are at fault in a collision then whoever else was involved gets compensated even if you're broke. It is a reasonable requirement to have.
>>108473232>if you are at fault in a collisionYou're not at fault if you're not the one driving, though. If I have a Google car and it gets into an accident with an Apple car, it should be on Google, not me. The more I think about it, the less plausible it is that we'll actually own them.
>>108473226>mandatory insuranceAh, okay then. Money taken from you at gunpoint I just call it taxes, irregardless of what the government wants to call it. I don't think of that as insurance since it's just there to fuck me over for no reason.
>>108473226>won't be legal for you to drive itMad max scenario, as stated previously.Also, I'm pretty sure experimental hand made cars and the like have exceptions that you can drive them even if no kike company wants to insure. What? There's a law that I have to buy a product no one is selling otherwise I'm in the wrong? How does that make any sense. Anyway, I'm not worried about legality. It's only illegal if the cop catches you.
>>108473226>Insurance Idk where you live but I'm in California and I've not heard of any insurance company checking for any such device. It's no different from removing your radio
>>108473302It should be fine to disconnect things now, but I doubt that will last long. We've got new cars equip with shit that is looking at your face to make sure you're paying attention. A quick law making them mandatory or making it that tampering with it makes it unroadworthy isn't far off the cards.
>>108473116>I'm quite surprised that this place is almost devoid of discussion on carsIt's almost as if there is a whole board for carsThere isn't much discussion on video game consoles here either
>>108473116Anons don't talk about this because they are either linux users driving some 90s car or baby duck cucks with stockholm syndrome taking large dildos into ass and eating dog shit white smearing shit on their iPoor iPoop after reading https://unlocked.microsoft.com/pride/ and driving some 2026 loan car with full Apple tier spyware and tracking.
