Re: What is a car?
Agree with the sentiment, but a few corrections here. I've worked with a few OEMs specifically on connected car tech over the past 5yrs:
> sim is enbedded into the car as part of an EU mandate that cars must have one from 2017 so that they can be in the future stoped.frrom drriving above the speed limiits
The cellular connection is mandated for 2x reasons - eCall (emergency/accident) and bCall (breakdown). The former is automated on collision and goes straight to the local emergency services (not the OEM) and the latter goes to an OEM call centre or backs off to local public service. Nothing to do with speed limits. Even the V2X (vehicle-to-vehicle, vehicle-to-infrastructure) tech, which uses WiFi bands has nothing to do with enforcing speed limits today (but the future?).
> constant telemetry going back to the manufacturer that gets on my nerves
This is opt-out in all cases that I'm aware of. Might not be obvious how to opt-out, but I think it has to be as OEMs are so worried about GDPR.
> This is all a massive money spinner//saver for the manufacturer as the data they get off the cars is huge, saves them having to pay for research amd development teams.
You would be shocked at how little, if at all, OEMs are using the telematics data. Other than Tesla who are light years ahead, most OEMs have little idea of how to exploit it, yet let alone have restructured their business around using it. EVs will change this posture - the margins are so razer thin on the car, they will need to make it up in value-add services like parking, charging, insurance, etc.
Again, agree that all this stuff needs to be transparent for drivers, but in many cases there can be legit trade-offs for data vs functionality. Examples: proactive JIT maintenance, stolen vehicle tracking, scheduled EV charging at cheap energy rates, etc. What needs to change is a more up-front, granular consent for each service. I have no doubt this will come.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
