Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by astronads 884 days ago
The downside, other than the obvious maintenance/reliability concerns of an aging vehicle is safety. Modern cars are much safer in crashes than 20+ year old cars. [0]

What sucks though is that basically every modern vehicle egregiously violates our privacy [1]

[0]https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...

[1]https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...

3 comments

If it’s a choice between safety and privacy, I will always choose privacy. Because without it, you are not safe.
A motor block going through your head might concern you more than an image of yourself going through someone else's head. ;)
in the 20th century governments killed about a quarter billion of their subjects (see https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE5.HTM) plus another couple hundred million foreigners (see https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/2006080...) which brings the total to about five million per year

car accidents kill less than that, though by a factor of less than four, about 1.3 million per year (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...)

so probably you should re-evaluate your risk assessment: even if you're only concerned with pieces of metal traversing people's bodies, rather than people being maimed, enslaved, raped, and kept in poverty, ignorance, and disease, you should weight the denial of fundamental human rights as a much larger threat than unintentional automotive injury

Maybe do not drive a car with internal cameras if you are living in an autocratic hellhole? Yes, things can change in liberal democracies as well, but a car is easily sold.
autocratic hellholes arise where autocracy is more stable than democracy, for example when the police have enough dirt on activists to keep them from organizing opposition and can persuade themselves that such a crackdown is justified

you can sell the car, but you may find yourself walking to work, and you can't un-record the videos the car already recorded of you; and, if your neighbors still have surveillance cameras the police have access to, you may not have achieved any actual privacy

privacy, in the civil liberties sense, is a collective good, not an individual good

It is an unrealistic expectation that a sufficient number of people boycott modern cars (with internal cameras) to change the vendors' offerings. Besides that, there will not even be a sufficient number of old cars for everyone (everywhere).

Your general point is quite correct, though, and I am avoiding surveillance more than most people.

Thanks for sharing the Mozilla report. I wish more people would pay attention to that.

One thing I know for sure isn't spying on me is my e-bike, and that's what I use for the majority of my around-town trips.

>The downside, other than the obvious maintenance/reliability concerns of an aging vehicle is safety.

New cars appear safer because the scores include stuff that is not directly related with crash safety, so if a car does not have a back camera, or some "active safety" stuff they will get a very low score. but that does not mean that the car is made of paper and you will be less safe in a crash.