Onstar in your car

[Chris Fleming]

A while ago I posted about a friend of mine who wanted to end his Onstar service in his car. Obviously they didn't like losing business but things got very interesting. He asked if Onstar still had the ability to monitor the car even after he had ended service, to which he was not given a straight answer at all. They didn't say yes, but they wouldn't say no. There was even a veiled threat made to him when they were unable to convince him to maintain service.

Just now, I saw a commercial about Onstar presented from the angle of how it can be used (against you) under the guise of preventing crashes from car chases and recovering stolen cars. Couldn't find the commercial online but the below shows all that and more. Now, there's no way something like this has the potential to be abused, right?

[chud]

I understand your point Chris, and I believe that people who don't want Onstar should be able to disable it, completely.
However having said that, my parents have Onstar in their vehicle and it makes me feel better since they both have health issues, and my dad, who had a stroke, sometimes has difficulty communicating.
Perhaps if there was an Onstar control module that you could just pop out to completely disable it, that might be the way to go. It's strange that it's so melded into the vehicle, you can never truly disable it.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Or you could just not buy a car or truck that has it.
You can be tracked by any digital radio device you have. Like your cell phone or your pda or your laptop. All of those are constantly transmitting where you are and who you are.

Also, in the move towards living in star trek, we have to remember that every single aspect of our lives will be recorded and reviewed in a rather Orwellian manner. Star Trek made the parts from 1984 palatable. We never thought twice that they could bring up any data from any time aboard the ship and it would monitor the details of ones life. But in 1984, it was hidden from while in Star Trek it was an aside.

It takes time, but people will conform to gradually having their privacy stripped away bit by bit. We are having that happen now. It won't be complete until long after everyone posting here is dead though, so I wouldn't worry about it.

[Steve James]

I think equating tracking with the loss of privacy is useless. Privacy is a modern ideal. People for most of pre-recorded and recorded history have not had privacy, they've just been unable to communicate with or see anyone outside the range of their voices or eyes. People have generally eaten, shat, screwed, etc., in front of each other. That is, most people except hermits and monks. Well, and those who liked to masturbate Iow, "private" is what a person doesn't want other people to see or hear. It can little to do with what people "can" see or hear. Sure, you can put on your briefs to keep your nuts covered; everyone covers their private parts. But, ya go to a nude beach and the 'privates' are out there in pubic ... er, public for anyone who wanted to look. That's because, obviously, those people either wanted to show or felt they had nothing to hide.

Now, personally, I don't like the idea that car companies install OnStar for free; but, if you don't want to pay, you can't disable the device. And, even if it were disabled, they could re-enable it. (Btw, I've had LoJack for 10 years). Anyway, it's just a signal and a computer --and unless you're planning to remove your car's computer, then resistance to tracking will be futile, anyway. Americans, particularly, have turned privacy into an ideological subject while adopting all the technological media that destroys that ideological illusion. People want to be able to see and hear things thousands of miles away or in the past, but don't want to be seen or heard. Yeah, it's true; ya wouldn't want a gov't agent in the room listening while you're planning the govt's overthrow with your friend ... or if you were planning to rob a bank. That doesn't change when you get on the phone, or on your CB or on the internet.

So, for me, it comes down to whether I want to be like the guy on the nude beach or the criminal. Yeah, I know that "privacy" is a "good think" to some people who would never be criminals. I'm just saying that I think the gov't "should" be afraid of me because I've got nothing to hide. I am interested in what people want to hide. Ok, porn; but, shoot, gov't officials are probably among the biggest consumers. Voyeurs don't really bother me ... at my age. If the gov't wants to view my willy, as long as they're not interrupting me while I'm using it and I don't have to take time off from work, what the hey.