Porsche Chooses Apple Over Google Because Google Wants Too Much Data

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Porsche Chooses Apple Over Google Because Google Wants Too Much Data

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday October 6, 2015 @07:51AM from the you-are-the-product-being-sold dept.

countach44 writes: As reported in number 5 of this list from Motor Trend, Porsche went with Apple over Google for the infotainment system in its new 911. Apparently, Android Auto wants vehicle data (throttle position, speed, coolant temp, etc.) whereas Apple Play only needs to know if the car is in motion. Naturally, people are curious what Google, as a company building its own car, wants that data for.

314 of 423 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Typical Apple by halivar · 2015-10-06 07:54 · Score: 1

They're creating a walled garden around my data! How dare they!
/duck
/run
Not surprising by gurps_npc · 2015-10-06 07:54 · Score: 3, Informative

On my new phone I wanted to get Google maps - until Google insisted on getting Microphone rights so that it could use voice commands.
Delete App.
You want to offer voice command only if you give microphone access? Fine. But to demand it is not acceptable.

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
1. Re:Not surprising by itamihn · 2015-10-06 08:00 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  That is fixed in Android 6. You will now be able to accept or reject individual permissions.
2. Re:Not surprising by 0123456 · 2015-10-06 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  Which is not available for nexus 7 (2012) and older devices...
  Or, indeed, many newer devices.
3. Re:Not surprising by amRadioHed · 2015-10-06 08:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  As of Monday they can. But on any Android version older than Marshmallow it is not possible.
  
  --
  We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
4. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Still, a nice improvement in the OS.
5. Re:Not surprising by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2015-10-06 08:22 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  That's what Android Marshmallow will partially fix with changes in permission handling. It supposedly won't ask you for microphone until you click the voice command button.
  And, if you say "no", hopefully it won't turn around and delete the app.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
6. Re:Not surprising by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  I hate it when older devices dont have the same features as brand new devices. how dare they!
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
7. Re:Not surprising by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:31 · Score: 3
  
  LOL. Apple does the same thing.
  What "same thing"?
8. Re:Not surprising by Last+Warrior · 2015-10-06 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  You sound like a paid shill. Just sayin'
9. Re:Not surprising by TarpaKungs · 2015-10-06 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  It is also "fixed" in Cyanogenmod 11 that I have the snapshot release of on my Samsung Note 3. It's called "Privacy Guard and it is configurable per-app (on, off, finegrained). Each requested (in the manifest) priv flag can be granted "Allow", "Deny" or "Ask". It's very seemless - the odd message pops up when it tries to *use* a privilege that is flagged "Ask" and you get to choose.
  Many apps do not actually seem to break either, when denied various things they have no business in needing.
  And the times I've been asked for "Location", "SMS", "Contacts" by things like photo apps and other things that should be working on nothing more than pure local data is frightening.
  
  --
  Why can't women be like Hedy Lamarr - beautiful, talented and inventors of frequency-hopping spread-spectrum techn
10. Re:Not surprising by TarpaKungs · 2015-10-06 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  (In the case of PrivacyGuard)
  See above - the nag can be once only and you can Grant or Deny with a Remember tick box optionally. It's no big deal in reality.
  Or you can install, go to PG settings and just set it right up front.
  
  --
  Why can't women be like Hedy Lamarr - beautiful, talented and inventors of frequency-hopping spread-spectrum techn
11. Re:Not surprising by TarpaKungs · 2015-10-06 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  And in my experience, apps don't seem to much care if you kill a flag or two. Perhaps because the ability to do so is not yet that common.
  
  --
  Why can't women be like Hedy Lamarr - beautiful, talented and inventors of frequency-hopping spread-spectrum techn
12. Re:Not surprising by the_B0fh · 2015-10-06 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Apple mandates that the app ask for certain things, like location, but the app doesn't actually have to comply with what you ask.
  Are you actually saying if you deny an app access to location, it can still get that information?
  Citation needed.
13. Re:Not surprising by khellendros1984 · 2015-10-06 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  Well, unless you count App Ops in Android 4.3 (until it was removed) and builds of CyanogenMod starting with 10.2.
  
  --
  It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
14. Re:Not surprising by kelemvor4 · 2015-10-06 09:57 · Score: 1
  
  Which is not available for nexus 7 (2012) and older devices...
  Nearly 4 years is way beyond the reasonable lifespan for a phone. Upgrade. Personally, I like a new one at least every year.
15. Re:Not surprising by TheGratefulNet · 2015-10-06 11:46 · Score: 1
  
  that does not go far enough.
  apps can change behavior if you deny privs and even worse, fail silently and not tell you why.
  best is to allow all privs and feed the apps JUNK FAKE DATA. everyone's happy. well, everyone that matters, anyway.
  anything less is not good enough. no special cases for apps; let each app gets its 'data'; but let ME decide what 'data' means.
  if apps don't like getting fed dummy data then maybe they will stop asking for the world. its a training thing; we have to train our app developers to STOP demanding the world just for a flashlight app!
  xprivacy feeds dummy data. I have not been able to install it yet, though, as it needs a bunch of things that are not always easy. but this feature is what is needed in order to put the control back in the owner's hands.
  permit/deny is the wrong approach. sorry, but its a stupid way of solving what is a broken architecture. apps writers are rogue (most of them) and we have to start treating them as hostile sources. sounds harsh but that's how it is right now.
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
16. Re: Not surprising by Karlt1 · 2015-10-06 13:34 · Score: 1
  
  Nearly 4 years is way beyond the reasonable lifespan for a phone. Upgrade. Personally, I like a new one at least every year.
  Please tell me that you are being sarcastic. The iPad 2 circa mid 2011 can run iOS 9. So that means it will be supported most likely at least until around September 2016.
17. Re:Not surprising by mjwx · 2015-10-06 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  That's what Android Marshmallow will partially fix with changes in permission handling. It supposedly won't ask you for microphone until you click the voice command button.
  And, if you say "no", hopefully it won't turn around and delete the app.
  Not worried about that, it isn't Apple we're talking about here.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
18. Re:Not surprising by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:46 · Score: 1
  
  You won't get any.
19. Re:Not surprising by drinkypoo · 2015-10-06 15:08 · Score: 1
  
  And in my experience, apps don't seem to much care if you kill a flag or two. Perhaps because the ability to do so is not yet that common.
  There are multiple reasons. Mostly two: you don't want to fail if the user is missing some hardware that the software can work without, and the app doesn't actually request the permission from the OS until it wants to use it, unless it's very poorly designed. So if you for example deny the microphone permission, the app will never even have to decide if it's upset about that unless it tries to grab some audio.
  I forget what versions it appeared and disappeared, but Google did put this functionality into an older version of android, then removed it again. You can get it back on rooted devices by installing Xposed and installing AppOppsXposed. Many custom ROMs also have this functionality baked into the ROM so you don't need to mess with Xposed, but Xposed+App Settings+Gravitybox is very wonderful and you want it anyway, if you're not running CM especially. If you can't root your device, make better purchase decisions in the future.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
20. Re:Not surprising by drinkypoo · 2015-10-06 15:10 · Score: 1
  
  Well, unless you count App Ops in Android 4.3 (until it was removed) and builds of CyanogenMod starting with 10.2.
  Or any Android device with 4.3 or later with the Xposed framework and the AppOpsXposed module installed and active, at which point AppOps shows up in Settings just like it ought to.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
21. Re:Not surprising by narcc · 2015-10-06 17:03 · Score: 1
  
  You mean the model BlackBerry has used for over a decade.
  
  --
  Required reading for internet skeptics
22. Re:Not surprising by tw2k · 2015-10-06 18:33 · Score: 1
  
  Given that Apple have never remotely removed / disabled apps from / on users devices and they take a hard line on apps that request excessive permissions in the first place, I think your specific example here is pretty poor.
23. Re:Not surprising by Gonoff · 2015-10-07 00:19 · Score: 1
  
  Too much self respect.
  
  --
  I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
24. Re:Not surprising by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-07 00:27 · Score: 1
  
  It's built in to Cyanogenmod, and possible to install on any rooted device.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
25. Re:Not surprising by khellendros1984 · 2015-10-07 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  I'd forgotten about that. Thank you for reminding me. It's one more reason to actually get around to rooting a couple of my devices that aren't going to get Marshmallow.
  
  --
  It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
26. Re:Not surprising by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  best is to allow all privs and feed the apps JUNK FAKE DATA
  You're out of date. That was the Android Fanboy's talking point back in the day when Android didn't have the ability to deny individual permissions.
  The reason that it's not a good idea is pretty obvious. Why would I want an app presenting FALSE data, or functioning according to FALSE data. For example I don't want a map to be presented centred on Easter Island, because that's the particular lie the FAKE DATA engine came up with. I want the app to know that it doesn't have my current location, so it can do something more appropriate.
27. Re:Not surprising by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  Uhh...what iOS permissions model? If you install an app on iOS, you give it access to everything, including the kitchen sink. Apple mandates that the app ask for certain things, like location, but the app doesn't actually have to comply with what you ask.
  Lying does nothing to further your point of view. The OS asks for the permissions, such as location. If the user denies it, the app gets no data back from the API. The app can't do anything with data it doesn't have.
28. Re:Not surprising by the_B0fh · 2015-10-09 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder why people feel the need to lie, and make such blatant lies that is easily caught.
It's not what Google wants.... by rotaryexpress · 2015-10-06 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
1. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Ksevio · 2015-10-06 08:01 · Score: 2
  
  Exactly - people want to see all this data and have Google log/display it. It's already plugged into the car so it might as well be aware of its surroundings.
2. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Andy+Dodd · 2015-10-06 08:07 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Yeah. This is useful for lots of automated diagnostics functions.
  Also, SOME of that data (not all of it) is highly beneficial for augmenting navigation systems (most notably, vehicle speedometer and steering position). Google even explicitly mentioned how this data would be used by Android Auto in a presentation somewhere (I don't have the link to it now...) It's hinted at a bit past one minute in to https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but I'm fairly certain I saw a presentation somewhere explicitly stating that vehicle GPS, steering position, and wheel speed would be used for location sensor fusion.
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
3. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2015-10-06 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  I'll be cynical, and guess that Google wants the data so they can sell it to insurance companies. This would be of extreme value, if, for example, a Hollywood star died in a car crash in a Porsche, doing 100mph in a 40mph zone, and someone tries to sue Porsche for a design defect.
  On the other hand . . . maybe if Volkswagen diesels were equipped with something that collect the real emissions data . . . the fudge in Volkswagen diesels might have been found earlier.
  Maybe we should call them Fudgewagen . . . ?
  
  --
  Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
4. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 08:16 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
  Umm, no. Google is asking for it because Google's CUSTOMERS want it.
  Hint: You are NOT a Google customer. You are Google's PRODUCT.
  Google's CUSTOMERS are INTERNET ADVERTISERS looking to strip mine your life for data.
  Google's business model is to turn your privacy upside down, shake the shit out of it, and collect everything and anything that falls out.
  Then they go through your privacy's pockets looking for loose change because it's completely dead.
5. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by bjdevil66 · 2015-10-06 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know what consumers you're talking about, but the average "consumer" of a car - the middle class Joe - could care less about the info described. Most of the diagnostic data (temps, etc.) is already available via ODBII or the current dash display. The driving data itself sounds like everything you do to control your car - pedal positions, speed, etc. Why does Google need all that to provide a better experience? Do they want to stream "I Can't Drive 55" or radar detector ads to accurately targeted customers? Google doesn't want to provide the data to the end user. They want to collect the data and monetize it, whether it's via their own research or selling the data to 3rd parties.
6. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by tlhIngan · 2015-10-06 08:21 · Score: 2
  
  Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
  Well, it's already available... I mean, coolant temp is that little gauge, fuel is the other gauge. I don't particularly care about throttle position since it's less useful (if I want to go faster, my foot presses harder on the gas pedal, and I watch the speedometer needle climb).
  Etc.
  The Apple model is "Don't collect anything unless there's a reason we need it". Google's is "Collect all the data, and when we can find neat analytics to do, we can do it on the stuff we collected".
  But you kinda-sorta already know Apple's been angling at the "you're not the product" aspect for privacy the past couple of years or so as a way to compete with Google.
7. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want.
  Are you sure about that? What little actual user research I've seen suggests that most customers don't think much of in-car "infotainment" systems generally. The same research suggests that these systems are almost never a deciding factor in sales, except in the wrong direction if they are so bad that they stick out or, in a few cases, because of security or privacy concerns.
  And really, who can blame those customers, when these systems almost invariably look awful and work even worse, even in very expensive prestige vehicles? It bends my mind that luxury car brands spend so much money getting metalwork and paint colours and seat shapes just right, but then throw in a "high tech" system that looks like the love child of a 1990s "under construction" web site and a first generation iOS app written by your neighbour's 14-year-old kid.
  One day I really want to walk into a dealership for one of these brands and when they do the spiel about how great their high-tech keyless entry and infotainment systems are, see if they're willing to bet me the car that I can't compromise their system in some significant way in under 24 hours. Given I've worked in several relevant industries and have some idea of how low the standards are in the auto industry in this area, I find it disturbingly possible that I might actually be able to do that. But even if I couldn't, it would be fun watching the sales guys squirm, a bit like the SEO people who spam me saying they can get my business onto page 1 of Google in our field, when I reply that we actually are on page 1 of Google in our field and but when I searched for SEO I didn't see their site on the first page.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
8. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by The+Grim+Reefer · 2015-10-06 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe we should call them Fudgewagen . . . ?
  I'm thinking they can use that as a new marketing slogan for their diesel line: "Fudge-vergnugen"
9. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by HexaByte · 2015-10-06 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I want NO ONE to see it. I'd be happier if my car had no 'black box' data recorder, because what I do with my car is no one's business unless I break the law with it.
  
  --
  HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
10. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by hackertourist · 2015-10-06 08:32 · Score: 2
  
  I might want information about my car to be displayed on my phone. I do NOT want it sent to Google.
11. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Yeah. This is useful for lots of automated diagnostics functions.
  Also, SOME of that data (not all of it) is highly beneficial for augmenting navigation systems (most notably, vehicle speedometer and steering position). Google even explicitly mentioned how this data would be used by Android Auto in a presentation somewhere (I don't have the link to it now...) It's hinted at a bit past one minute in to https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but I'm fairly certain I saw a presentation somewhere explicitly stating that vehicle GPS, steering position, and wheel speed would be used for location sensor fusion.
  Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
  
  If that was Apple, Slashdot's Apple-Haters would be setting the Internets on fire with the hate-posts.
12. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe we should call them Fudgewagen . . . ?
  Howabout "Fraudfenugen"?
13. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by thegarbz · 2015-10-06 08:38 · Score: 2
  
  I'll be cynical, and guess that Google wants the data so they can sell it to insurance companies
  I highly doubt it. That would involve directly linking data to a customer. It would also involve giving the data to another party. Neither of these things is something Google has been shown as willing to do.
14. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by thegarbz · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  I don't particularly care about throttle position since it's less useful
  
  Think outside the box. You may not want information about the throttle position, but maybe you want some information about the car economy? Maybe you want to know if your mileage is going to hell because something is wrong or because your driving style has changed. Things like throttle position can help give you that data. People rarely if ever are interested in the raw data from sensors but are often very keen to know some information derived from the analytics of these sensors.
  Since we're talking about cars let's add a computer analogy:
  I couldn't care how long my laptop CPU spends in each power state, but I want the OS to know and track this data so it can give me an estimated battery life remaining.
15. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  But you kinda-sorta already know Apple's been angling at the "you're not the product" aspect for privacy the past couple of years or so as a way to compete with Google.
  You're mistaken.
  
  Although Apple has come to realize that they can "Market" their Privacy Policy, it was already in place long before people started getting sensitive to being data-raped continuously.
  
  Apple sells hardware (primarily). They have no need nor interest in monetizing your data. And they freely admit that "iAd" is the (really, really miniscule) exception to that rule.
16. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Altus · 2015-10-06 08:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That's what the lovely built in computer that porche provides is for. The dashboard can show you many of these things. Porche will provide more info than almost any of its customers would care for. The rest will prefer using their custom tools to read more detailed raw data. Android is there to do gps and handle in car entertainment and communication. Nothing else
  
  --
  "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
17. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Joykiller · 2015-10-06 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  Because google is writing a car operating system? Why the hell would you go with apple when they just started developing car tech? http://www.autoblog.com/2014/1...
18. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Last+Warrior · 2015-10-06 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not asking for it. What choice do I have if I wanted to buy a Porsche?
  The car isn't made by google and they don't get to decide what the customer wants. They have apiece of software that is being licensed by Porsche.
  Porsche, being a luxury sports car maker is uniquely in a position to decide not only what they want to put into their car but also what their customers want.
  What customers are these anyway? I don't remember hearing about any such survey or study to determine what functionality that users wanted that wasn't already there in the Porsche audio/entertainment system. Remind me again who is supposed to make the decision what customers are probably going to want in a product made by a specific company.
19. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Ksevio · 2015-10-06 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  Personally I'd be interested in seeing some of that data. I'm not saying it should automatically post my fuel economy to twitter, but I find it interesting to see how my car is performing in different situations.
20. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by ic3m4n1 · 2015-10-06 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  If its for users benefit then it should be in users control to turn it on/off. Guess what, its not.
  Or Google could choose to do it locally, for sure memory is so cheap and persistent that this is possible.
  Backups you say? Well guess what there is way to do that as well with local encryption keys.
  Anything beyond this just very unlikely to be encountered by normal users or pack of lies sold to uninformed users who in turn are product to be sold at profit.
21. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by eth1 · 2015-10-06 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
  Porsches (at least the Boxsters, Caymans, and 911s) get driven on track a lot. People spend a lot of money on after-market systems that track those things. Having it built in would be nice, if it wasn't sending it all to a mother ship somewhere.
22. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-06 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  Apple just wants to do an infotainment system. Google's system is much more comprehensive, and will replace much of the car dashboard like the Tesla one does.
  Google are aiming to provide a standard system that every car can use for all dashboard functionality. It will take time to get there, but eventually they want to be the big car OS, like they are currently the big mobile/tablet OS. Not just an add on entertainment system. Considering how crap many manufacturer's dashboards and human interfaces are, it could really raise the bar, or not.
  It's a shame they don't offer both options in the new 911. The systems are not compatible and I wouldn't get an iPhone just for the car.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
23. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-06 09:40 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  This trope really needs to die. If people were treated like products they wouldn't use Google services. Google has to treat users as customers, and indeed does sell a lot of stuff to them (services, apps, hardware). If it didn't the users would go somewhere else and Google would die.
  This is obvious. The situation is simply more complex than the trope makes out. Unless you can get past the trope we can't really discuss Google in any meaningful way. There are problems, but not "you are the product".
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
24. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by KGIII · 2015-10-06 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  I'd love access to that information displayed in real time and in aggregate in a customizable display that takes up where my current instrumentation panel exists. What I do not want is a third party to have access to that information. However, I'd love a touch screen instrument display that enabled me to configure a number of "dashboards" with varied metrics and display formats for alternative driving scenarios. I just don't want Google, Apple, Microsoft, or Cannonical to have access to that.
  I'd also love to be able to access that data for further review in a manner of my own choosing. It would be awesome to be able to compile that information and crunch some numbers and mash it up with things like a map. I'd then like to be able to choose to share it, if I wanted, with other interested parties. I think it would be good fun and amuse me for hours. I'd pay quite a bit for it, actually. Now that I think about it, I may see if someone can do it. It'd be neat to have a whole integrated information panel as well as an info-tainment panel that can be easily customized and skinned. I'll look around and see what's out there. Maybe someone's already done it and I don't know about it.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
25. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by aarongadberry · 2015-10-06 09:48 · Score: 1
  
  I would like the ability to share (or NOT share) my driving history with my insurance company to get a lower premium. Many people install company specific devices in their cars to do just that.
  e.g. I don't mind a camera on my phone, as long as I control where the pictures end up.
26. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by bjdevil66 · 2015-10-06 09:50 · Score: 1
  
  Personally I'd be interested in seeing some of that data.
  As long as it's only the occupant/owner seeing it, that's totally cool (and like you said, maybe interesting). Google and anyone else seeing all of that data, especially in real-time? No thanks...
27. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2015-10-06 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  That's funny and all, however this information does provide benefit to a variety of stakeholders, including the vehicle occupants. For Google's side, among I'm sure others, is real world data sets pertaining to how people drive their cars. This information is rather handy in developing safer autopilot capable cars. In exchange users are given services--as is Google's business model--that provide customer benefits. Vehicle diagnostics, personalized route planning, infotainment, teen/valet driver nannies, etc..
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
28. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-06 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  If they had "no interest in monetising your data" then why does iAd exist at all? What was the always-on impossible to disable location logging about? Something doesn't add up here.
  Apple and Google both recognised that people will demand privacy for things like health data. There is a difference of philosophy about how it should be managed - Apple takes the hand holding walled garden approach and just denies a lot of stuff, while Google gives you more options to decide for yourself.
  You pays your money, you takes your choice. Google will let you buy ad free versions of most services, Apple makes you pay via hardware, or you pay via advertising and aggregation of your data.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
29. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2015-10-06 10:10 · Score: 2
  
  You're missing it. Apple's product requires third-party implementations to make up the difference. Google's product has it built in. As far as I can tell, my Q50's electronics for instance are a cobbled together mess of a few different OEMs, with an Infiniti badged facade wrapped around them. Android Auto, eliminates the bug prone piecemeal approach in favor of a common and inclusive platform. This makes it easier to maintain and secure, provides user's a broader eco-system of on board apps, and allows the car manufacturers to focus on what they know and do best.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
30. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-06 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. I've built a telemetry recorder which I can put under the seat of my motorbike. It records GPS, acceleration, magnetic direction, angle of lean, and physical angle of the bike. Currently it is self contained and doesn't have any direct sensors on the bike but that is next. I also need to move its position as under the seat is too far from the centre.
  When I get home I sync it with a gopro recording and a rendered 3d model of my bike.
  But all of this needs to be manual. The box has a battery and is self contained and it is a hack to access it realtime (wifi hotspot and webserver).
31. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by tlhIngan · 2015-10-06 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  This trope really needs to die. If people were treated like products they wouldn't use Google services. Google has to treat users as customers, and indeed does sell a lot of stuff to them (services, apps, hardware). If it didn't the users would go somewhere else and Google would die.
  This is obvious. The situation is simply more complex than the trope makes out. Unless you can get past the trope we can't really discuss Google in any meaningful way. There are problems, but not "you are the product".
  Basically, Google provides a service for FREE. Users use said service, and Google collects information about said users. Google sells information to their customers, who pay good money to advertise and analyze those users. Money goes into Google's pockets, paying engineers and providers to provide the service.
  They key here is that Google provides the services for free. But the quid-pro-quo is that Google collects information about the users so they can sell that information to advertisers and anyone else who will pay for it.
  Users currently value their privacy at less than free - they'd rather use a free email provider than pay some money. That's why Google is where they are - they sell you to other people. And for the most part, you don't care as long as Google gives you free stuff.
  You want to create a mailing list with people who agree to receive such mailings? Just set up a sweepstake in a local mall over a weekend. Give away some $50 item and by the end of the weekend, the box will be full of names, addresses and phone numbers. Even better, all that is likely legit, since you probably will call the winner, and will mail the prize to them.
  Anyhow, the other worry with such information sent to Google is well, it's a lot easier to subpoena that information from Google, who does not have to protect your Amendment rights, than it would if the information was in your control. Throttle position is useful to see if you were braking or trying to avoid the accident, or were street racing, etc.
  Face it, it's going to be a law enforcement goldmine.
32. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-06 10:27 · Score: 1
  
  Minute by minute? Fuck that! I want multiple times per second pls. 10-15Hz would be ideal.
33. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-06 10:47 · Score: 1
  
  If you have physical access to the car I would be very worried if you couldn't compromise the system. But lets see if you can compromise it without taking off a panel, disconnecting a wire, or otherwise having privileged access to it. This claim is no different to any myriad mechanical exploits that could be put onto a car if you had physical access.
  As for "infotainment" systems you can't have a bad system without a good/better one to compare it to. If you have a brilliant system it will make your competitors look worse and will absolutely be involved in the purchasing decision. The manufacturer of my current car wants $600 to update the maps in the in system GPS. It also doesn't support A2B despite it having a full handsfree system built in. When we come to replace that car I can absolutely promise you the in-car system will be high on the list of deciding factors.
34. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by c · 2015-10-06 11:00 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
  It's not as crazy as it sounds. Cars generate a ton more information than they have instruments to display. If you have a general purpose computer just sitting there, then why not use it?
  I run Torque Pro with a Bluetooth ODBII dongle in my van when towing precisely for this reason... 90% of the item I don't give a shit, but when I'm hauling 4500lbs up a mountain I kind of like a little more feedback than I get from the stock dash.
  
  --
  Log in or piss off.
35. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by nytes · 2015-10-06 11:14 · Score: 1
  
  Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
  Yes, we need this data.
  For example: If only they could put something on the dashboard that would tell us how fast the car is moving.
  That would be an incredible innovation!
  We could call it a "speed-o-thingy".
  And something to tell you how far down the throttle is pressed. I can't tell you how often I've found myself driving down the road only to discover that I've had the throttle floored for the last 5 miles.
  
  --
  -- I have monkeys in my pants.
36. Re: It's not what Google wants.... by Redbehrend · 2015-10-06 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  How many people have downloaded torque lite and pro. Not to mention the other apps available.... I think its 3-5 mil.... and thats requiring extra hardware and knowledge. But...Yea but no consumers want the information, BTW torque has saved me over $5k-10k US easy just on obd codes and diagnostics alone on my vehicles. That doesn't include the fun and tuning stuff.
37. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by lgw · 2015-10-06 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  I don't use Google products, because fuck being the product. I went elsewhere. Most people simply aren't aware of what Google does, just as most people think they're the customers for commercial TV.
  Google still makes almost all of their money selling ad impressions. You are product. (Facebook too, of course.)
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
38. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Solandri · 2015-10-06 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  Regardless of why Google is doing it, the fact remains that they are pushing this in the right direction. Away from proprietary communications protocols between the car and the infotainment system and display, towards a standardized system. Once it's standardized, if you don't want to pay $5000 for the new car's "Navigation System" option complete with $600 map updates, you can tell them to get lost. Plug in your $150 tablet that you were going to throw out because you just got a newer model, and get the same features and interface control.
  
  The same thing needs to happen to car Infotainment systems that happened to car radios. You don't have to buy the automaker's "premium" radio, you can simply buy any aftermarket radio and plug it in yourself because the interface is standardized. If you don't want Google phoning all this data back home, simply turn off the Android tablet's radios. If you need to use the GPS, make sure your tablet supports regular GPS (not just assisted GPS), and install an Android navigation app which supports downloadable maps and offline GPS use.
39. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Namarrgon · 2015-10-06 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  the quid-pro-quo is that Google collects information about the users
  True.
  
  so they can sell that information to advertisers and anyone else who will pay for it.
  Not true. Despite regular repetition, this evidence-free claim is contradicted by Google's statements & policy.
  They use that information to match ads to their users' interests, thus making the ads more valuable to the advertisers (and conceivably to their users as well). They do not sell your information to anyone, nor is it necessary or in their long-term interests to do so.
  You are not their product (which I thought was obvious, slavery being abolished some time ago). Your attention is the product they offer to their paying advertisers, if you choose to give it. In their dealings with you directly, they offer free services (or enable others to offer free services) in exchange for the possibility of your occasional attention.
  One might think none of this needed explaining, but I guess people believe what they want to believe.
  
  --
  Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
40. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Namarrgon · 2015-10-06 12:48 · Score: 1
  
  So I'm curious, how do you manage to get through your day without seeing any ads? Do you pay for Slashdot and every other web page you visit, for every TV show you watch or radio tune you might overhear, for every snippet of news? Or do you block every ad you can and demand the free services anyway?
  
  --
  Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
41. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 13:31 · Score: 1
  
  If they had "no interest in monetising your data" then why does iAd exist at all?
  It was primarily a tool to attract developers to iOS, by allowing them to have free software that still had a way to generate a little coin. And as it clearly states in the iAD terms & conditions, all the data is anonymized.
  
  What was the always-on impossible to disable location logging about? Something doesn't add up here.
  As was explained again and again, it was extremely vague location data (which in fact only kept track of the cell towers in your vicinity), which was used for the SOLE purpose of improving cell-handover times. Nothing to see there, move along. Put another layer of foil on that hat...
  
  Apple and Google both recognised that people will demand privacy for things like health data. There is a difference of philosophy about how it should be managed - Apple takes the hand holding walled garden approach and just denies a lot of stuff, while Google gives you more options to decide for yourself.
  With the amount of Apps in both App Stores (Apple's and Google's), I think it is fair to say that Apple demonstrably doesn't "deny" much.
  
  You pays your money, you takes your choice. Google will let you buy ad free versions of most services, Apple makes you pay via hardware, or you pay via advertising and aggregation of your data.
  Except that Apple really doesn't aggregate your data to even 1000th the extent that Google does. In fact, I have NEVER clicked on an iAD; and I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of iOS Users haven't either. So, no data aggregation from me! But with Google, data-raping is their ENTIRE Modus Operandi.
  
  That, my friend, is THE difference that makes ALL the difference!
42. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  But lets see if you can compromise it without taking off a panel, disconnecting a wire, or otherwise having privileged access to it.
  Does your definition of privileged access include being within radio range? Being within radio range when the legitimate owner activates a remote feature? Gaining access to the manufacturer's facilities, either to extract sensitive information or to initiate contact with vehicles through the manufacturer's own remote access tools?
  (If you're wondering if these questions aren't random and this line of questioning is a trap... Yes. Yes, it is.)
  
  As for "infotainment" systems you can't have a bad system without a good/better one to compare it to.
  I hope we could all agree that, for example, a system that allows a potentially dangerous compromise of the vehicle's control systems is bad even if all cars have the same defect.
  Also, the standards of presentation of these systems are awful. There is nothing good/better for comparison only if you exclude pretty much the entire field of user interface design in modern technology outside of cars.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
43. Re: It's not what Google wants.... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 13:41 · Score: 1
  
  You're talking about reading the ODBII data. That's a very different application to an information display that most drivers will be using routinely. So if nothing else, there's probably a good chance that many of those downloads were professionals who work on cars. Most of the rest were presumably enthusiasts who enjoy tweaking, and if you reckon you've personally saved $5-10K just on diagnostics with Torque then clearly you're not a typical driver.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
44. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by mjwx · 2015-10-06 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah. This is useful for lots of automated diagnostics functions.
  Also, SOME of that data (not all of it) is highly beneficial for augmenting navigation systems (most notably, vehicle speedometer and steering position). Google even explicitly mentioned how this data would be used by Android Auto in a presentation somewhere (I don't have the link to it now...) It's hinted at a bit past one minute in to https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but I'm fairly certain I saw a presentation somewhere explicitly stating that vehicle GPS, steering position, and wheel speed would be used for location sensor fusion.
  Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
  Think about the kind of cars porsche make and are famous for then think about the kind of people who'd choose a porsche like that over a Mercedes or BMW sedan (would be approx the same price).
  
  Then tell me they wouldn't want second by second logging of vital statistics.
  
  If that was Apple, Slashdot's Apple-Haters would be setting the Internets on fire with the hate-posts.
  If you could abandon your hopeless fanboyism for a moment, you'd realise how ridiculous you sound.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
45. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 14:26 · Score: 1
  
  Minute by minute? Fuck that! I want multiple times per second pls. 10-15Hz would be ideal.
  Maybe of the throttle position (although that's even a little fast for throttle, but I'll allow it) ; but the coolant temp could be sampled once a second, or even less, and not miss anything of interest.
  
  I have done embedded design for real-time measurement and control systems for nearly 40 years. ;-)
46. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  Well the location log never actually left your phone, so I guess that is not really a thing.
47. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-06 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah temp sensor doesn't need to be that fast. But I couldn't be bothered specifying different times for different sensors. Sorry was being lazy.
  I've built a custom telemetry system for my motorcycle and it is running at 10Hz for all the sensors. It is total overkill for some of them but I have used that number because it is the sampling frequency of my GPS receiver and it dead simple to work with the raw data later. That said I'm not sampling temps, its all motion stuff. It's pretty cool because I can animate a 3d model of my bike going through the same ranges of motion that my bike went through on a particular ride.
48. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Wolfrider · 2015-10-06 15:55 · Score: 1
  
  > I would like the ability to share (or NOT share) my driving history with my insurance company to get a lower premium
  > Many people install company specific devices in their cars to do just that
  --See, that attitude right there? THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM. Benjamin Franklin had a quote or two for you.
  " Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. "
  --In this case, you are WILLING to give up a FREEDOM that you should have, just to save a little money. You should be able to drive where you want, when you want, without some insurance app SPYING on you! Being willing to be spied on EVEN MORE than we already are, is actively contributing to eroding the very concept of the USA being a "Free" country!
  " I don't mind a camera in my phone... "
  " I don't mind my insurance company installing a data-collection device in my car... "
  ' I don't mind a camera in my bedroom... '
  ' I don't mind a camera in my bathroom... '
  ' I don't mind a camera in my always-on TV... '
  ' We have always been at war with Eurasia... '
  " Big Brother is Watching You. "
  https://www.goodreads.com/work...
  ...That is where it will end up going. It's called "boiling the frog."
  --As long as you haven't had an accident or ticket in $YEARS, the insurance company already knows you're a safe(r) driver. They don't *need* ever-more invasive looks into your private life to give you decent premium rates! Don't buy into the hype and marketing, and don't make it easier for them to take away your freedoms and liberty.
  --Jesus, to think our forefathers died in the wars to protect our freedom, and now the sheeple are voluntarily willing to give it up for crumbs. Nobody learns...
  --Truly, Sorry for the rant, I don't want you to feel like I'm going off on you... But my God I wish people would wake the hell up and realize that the East German regime would have KILLED for some of the stuff that people are **voluntarily willing to allow** into their lives these days, just by not being willing to protect what brave and heroic people already fought and died for. Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
  
  --
  .
  == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
49. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-06 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  Being in radio range, no. Gaining access to manufacturers facilities, yes.
  As for potentially dangerous exploit, I'm not seeing how you would manage it in 24hrs. The jeep exploit took months.
50. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by lgw · 2015-10-06 18:14 · Score: 1
  
  I do occasionally see web ads - hard to escape that without turning off JS entirely (though /. lets me disable them) - but I'd hardly count that as using a Google product. I don't listen to commercial radio; good public radio where I live, and I mostly listen to audiobooks anyhow. I don't have cable, haven't for 20 years. Netflix is fine for keeping something on my TV. I certainly don't watch any broadcast news, where my choices are the propaganda arm of the Democratic party, or Fox. No thanks. I seriously dislike commercials, as you may have gathered.
  The one place Google still gets me from time to time is YouTube. I wish there was a better alternative there, but there's educational content on YouTube that just doesn't exists anywhere else. Fortunately the interstitial ads are pretty rare for the non-pop-culture stuff (and I'm sure I could block those too, if I got more active about it).
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
51. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Herve5 · 2015-10-06 18:46 · Score: 1
  
  Frankly, and not to flame any side, my take is the trope is clear and true simply by analyzing the money flows.
  Who is paying for what.
  Who Google is paid by.
  We indeed are the product sold by Google to its customers.
  Now, obviously Google needs to catch us first, and for free, so, as their business is definitely very lucrative, they hire a number of good designers that build a very good interface that seduce us, good and efficient ways to register easily, etc.
  In this sense they indeed are somehow innovators : they drove the competition to better products.
  But this doesn't remove the fact Google customers are definitely not us.
  
  --
  Herve S.
52. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-06 19:04 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah temp sensor doesn't need to be that fast. But I couldn't be bothered specifying different times for different sensors. Sorry was being lazy.
  I've built a custom telemetry system for my motorcycle and it is running at 10Hz for all the sensors. It is total overkill for some of them but I have used that number because it is the sampling frequency of my GPS receiver and it dead simple to work with the raw data later. That said I'm not sampling temps, its all motion stuff. It's pretty cool because I can animate a 3d model of my bike going through the same ranges of motion that my bike went through on a particular ride.
  LOL! Yeah, laziness is what also caused me to not differentiate between the sampling of coolant data (which really could be "moment to moment") and the throttle data, that originally got you "all riled up"!
  
  Yiour bike-run recording/playback system sounds pretty neat, BTW!
53. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by thegarbz · 2015-10-06 20:23 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
  If that was Apple, Slashdot's Apple-Haters would be setting the Internets on fire with the hate-posts.
  No one wants that. Everyone wants what potentially you can gain from doing analytics on the resulting data. How about advanced warning that something is wrong in your engine and that your currently high MPG is not the result of a change in driving style or engine temperature? People said the same thing about phone tracking. No one wants their location tracked even if the data is anonymised, but fuck me if live Google traffic information isn't the single most useful thing a phone a phone has ever been capable of. If it helps, have ALL my location information.
  Also don't turn this into a fanboi issue. Slashdot is an equal opportunity shit-posting hate site.
54. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Waccoon · 2015-10-06 21:03 · Score: 1
  
  I can't remember the last time any software developer, let alone Google, did something on MY behalf.
55. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by SimonTheSoundMan · 2015-10-06 22:46 · Score: 1
  
  Smartphone/tablet, software such as DashCommander, and an OBDII bluetooth adapter for $10. Checked out what my Mazda would show in terms of data, here is a list: http://www.palmerperformance.c...
56. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by thegarbz · 2015-10-06 23:52 · Score: 1
  
  That's what the lovely built in computer that porche provides is for.
  Yeah sorry but every attempt by a car company, and companies in many other fields to provide something that they think customers want has paled in comparison to after market offerings, especially when they are backed by a company that employs a shitload of analytics people.
57. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by dave420 · 2015-10-07 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  Nonsense. Court rulings have shown that users of their services are the users and not the product. People who buy this system are paying money for it, and are clearly not the product.
  Your trite nonsense doesn't change that.
58. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Andy+Dodd · 2015-10-07 02:01 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah. I know Google is collecting a lot of my data, however I also trust their privacy policy and the documentation they've provided on their architecture, and overall - what Google is doing with my data is overwhelmingly positive. Automagically parsing my flight reservation emails and putting up my flight's departure time and gate on my watch without me going through ANY effort to search is nice. Popping up my store loyalty card when I walk in is nice. Giving me an "accident on your current road" even when I haven't fired up Navigation is nice.
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
59. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by KGIII · 2015-10-07 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I've played with a few of those devices but I want something built in. If that makes sense. I want the entire information center to be a giant touch pad. I want the instrument panel to be a giant touch pad. I want to be able to customize my HUD. I want to be able to customize my information center and display panel. I want to load the stats and metrics that I want to see. I want to be able to configure it all and have it open to be skinned. I also want various controls on the steering wheel and I want to be able to customize those. I want a user profile that can enable others to have their own display or a raw data output for my mechanics.
  That sort of stuff... It really doesn't seem like it would be all that hard with today's technology. I know, yeah, and I want a pony too. I don't really want a pony but at least I could buy one if I did. What I am unable to do is buy such a thing as described above - and I've not found a source for it. I'd have to have it made at custom prices and that's more than I'm willing to invest. I'd consider investing in a company that did this and then sold them as after-market or to OEMs. Hell, I'd jump on investing in them if they looked like they were more than vaporware.
  Doesn't that sort of make your inner geek smile? I'm also a automobile aficionado that owns more automobiles than one should. I've put a few pics online. I've a new BMW that is my daily driver and I think it would go very well with this sort of customization. It would be (potentially) beautiful, at least in my eyes. I'd love to have raw data up on the HUD and off to the side in small text. I'd love to have a dashboard right full of information. It would be awesome to know my mileage at that exact instant, over the past five miles, over ten miles, etc... It'd be killer to have my tach shown as a graph over time. It'd be even more awesome to sync that data to my phone and take it with me or have it do so over the wireless network at home when I get there. Imagine the ways to mash that up! It'd be awesome!
  I can do some of this already. Like you mention, there are tools for it and some OEMs are better than others in this regard. I also, obviously, want control over that data. It is mine. I don't want it stored (unless I choose to) nor do I want it shared (unless I choose to) and it better be encrypted and I better be the one in control of the key and able to replace the key. It also needs to be two states and require additional methods to enter a write state. I want to read the data and then, if I want, manipulate the settings.
  I'm not sure if that's making any sense or not. I'm also sure that I'm leaving some ideas out or missing some security issues. However, that's the gist of it in my current frame of mind. I can't see how anyone would not want something like that or at least to have it as an option. I don't see it as truly viable with the current OEMs, they'll simply be too greedy and controlling. They want that data and I guess I don't blame them. I just don't want them to have the data unless I opt to give it to them. If they tell me why and do their best to secure it then I just might give it to them.
  Ah well, I'm not that articulate (but I am verbose!) so hopefully that's written well enough. If not then ask and I'll try to be more clear. I also welcome feedback. The more ideas the merrier.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
60. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by aarongadberry · 2015-10-07 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  Our thinking is far more aligned than you have concluded. But I disagree in one part. I am not giving up freedom if the data is still under my control.
  In this case, with Google involved, it probably wouldn't be under my control, so I would actively opt out by flashing firmware or buying a different car.
61. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-07 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  Was a fun little project. Based around a raspberrrypi and this https://www.adafruit.com/produ...
  Next step if to get the sensors located in better positions. At the moment I just stick the box under the seat, which is too far away from the centre of mass so it gives really really odd readings for rotation front to back.
62. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-07 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  Was a fun little project. Based around a raspberrrypi and this https://www.adafruit.com/produ...
  Next step if to get the sensors located in better positions. At the moment I just stick the box under the seat, which is too far away from the centre of mass so it gives really really odd readings for rotation front to back.
  Yeah, I really need to check out those Raspberry Pi SBCs. I just haven't done it yet...
  
  LOL, I'll bet that sensor being off-CG would make it like the bike was on some sort of "steering rod", like in an old-Skool Arcade game!
63. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-07 13:11 · Score: 1
  
  Left to right lean looks normal. But under acceleration it manages to look like the bike sinks into the ground because the motion the sensor goes through is almost solely in the vertical plane. And then under brakes the sensor says my bike gets about 240mm off the ground which is kinda funny.
  It is causing me a conundrum though as currently the whole thing is sealed and self contained at about the size of a pack of cards. There isn't the space to fit that to the bike anywhere near the centre of gravity though so I will have to break it apart to get it into the right place.... Not sure I want to do that though.
  That said the next step is to have sensors on the suspension and the brakes but I'm not sure how to do that yet.
64. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by macs4all · 2015-10-07 16:13 · Score: 1
  
  That must be pretty funny to watch!
  
  Sounds like you're going to have to limit the values coming from the Z axis when you decide that you're seeing values that are indicative of high accel/decel conditions.
  
  Think of it kind of akin to "gesture recognition" for touch displays...
  
  And the challenge will be separating the accel/decel "gestures" from normal "rotation about the horizontal axis" changes from going up/down hills, and even more intense rotation from "popping.a wheelie", or even dumping the bike.
  
  the real world seldom can be neatly modeled mathematically; so you have to just deal with what values you're given by your sensors, and try to use certain patterns to your advantage.
65. Re:It's not what Google wants.... by Harlequin80 · 2015-10-07 17:53 · Score: 1
  
  I think if I can get the motion sensor location to sit just in front of the swing arm pivot point it will solve a huge amount of the data problems. I'm not convinced I can achieve it from where the box is under the seat. The results for heavy acceleration look an awful lot like "you hit a big bump" or the rider stood up on the pegs currently.
  My bike is a CBR1000RR so it has a high acceleration factor but it also means that on the road you don't get to use it that much or for that long....legally anyway. So the high acceleration is often short and sharp.
  My goal was to model the rotation of the bike around the X & Y axis as well as cornering forces, braking and acceleration.
  This is what I am recording atm:
  Absolute Orientation (Euler Vector, 100Hz) Three axis orientation data based on a 360 sphere
  Absolute Orientation (Quaterion, 100Hz) Four point quaternion output for more accurate data manipulation
  Angular Velocity Vector (100Hz) Three axis of 'rotation speed' in rad/s
  Acceleration Vector (100Hz) Three axis of acceleration (gravity + linear motion) in m/s^2
  Magnetic Field Strength Vector (20Hz) Three axis of magnetic field sensing in micro Tesla (uT)
  Linear Acceleration Vector (100Hz) Three axis of linear acceleration data (acceleration minus gravity) in m/s^2
  Gravity Vector (100Hz) Three axis of gravitational acceleration (minus any movement) in m/s^2
  GPS tracking 10Hz
FUD by Luthair · 2015-10-06 07:57 · Score: 1

Google isn't making a car, iirc they've said they're going to license the technology. On the other hand Apple does seem to be seriously interested in make its own cars and is hiring people. The information isn't that interesting either, the most likely use would be applications to help people, but invariably car makers feel that the vehicles are appliances and that they should be able to charge customers for information about their own vehicle.
Ultimately however Porsche's strategy doesn't work, if their customers use Android having CarPlay isn't a vehicle feature and they'll eventually be forced to support Android Auto or a third party (e.g. Pioneer) will make one.
1. Re:FUD by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  The information isn't that interesting either, the most likely use would be applications to help people
  The most likely use of collecting data about vehicles and driving style is probably selling it to insurers for a huge profit.
  The next most likely use of collecting data about vehicles and driving style is probably selling it to advertisers for a huge profit.
  Somewhere down the list there are probably things to do with law enforcement.
  Somewhere near a footnote on page 17 there are probably things that will actually help make cars better for their owners, or least make future versions of cars better for their future owners. Auto manufacturers already do a huge amount of both simulation and real world testing during development of a new vehicle, using vastly more sophisticated and comprehensive systems than anything fitted to a production car you or I would drive on the road. There is only so much extra they could learn from large scale collection of real world driving data that they can't already determine from other sources.
  There might be a decent argument for some sort of black box style recording for all cars, to help with investigating after something went wrong and hopefully make the roads safer for everyone in the long term. But like any black box, the integrity of that data would be important, so some remotely accessible system that is also hooked up to all kinds of infotainment widgets is probably the last place you would want it.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
2. Re:FUD by UnknowingFool · 2015-10-06 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  Google isn't making a car, iirc they've said they're going to license the technology. On the other hand Apple does seem to be seriously interested in make its own cars and is hiring people. The information isn't that interesting either, the most likely use would be applications to help people, but invariably car makers feel that the vehicles are appliances and that they should be able to charge customers for information about their own vehicle.
  The problem with rumors is that the conclusions that come out of them are not always the best. The last time I heard that Apple was releasing an electric car, it was because Apple engineers met with Elon Musk about something. Which sounds plausible until you think about whether Elon Musk would help Apple compete with him. Then Apple announced CarPlay. Now the rumors again are that Apple is releasing an electric car. This time, they have "hundreds" of people working on a car according to other rumors. My guess: Apple is working on a car that does street mapping like Google has had for years.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
3. Re:FUD by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  The auto manufacturers are looking for this data themselves -- this is a matter of public record in some cases, and widely acknowledged privately in others -- and so it is logical that they will choose their commercial partnerships in light of that. If Google want to keep that data for themselves but someone else will implement more integrated telemetry that lets the manufacturers spy on drivers and send the data to insurers, the second person is probably going to win the deal, unless and until the privacy regulators start stepping in.
  As for ads, just tracking the locations someone visits regularly is a treasure trove of mineable information, and you can probably tell a lot about someone from their driving style as well. Of course, the implications of commercial services literally tracking our every move are pretty unpleasant for some of us.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
4. Re:FUD by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:51 · Score: 1
  
  Guessing this will be a very small issue for Porsche...
5. Re:FUD by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:48 · Score: 1
  
  If you can afford to run a Porsche, you can afford a real iPhone. There won't be many Porsche drivers with Android phones.
OBDII by zeoslap · 2015-10-06 07:58 · Score: 1

Isn't all that information readily available via OBDII anyway? What's the issue with getting a direct feed of it?
1. Re:OBDII by DigiShaman · 2015-10-06 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Google is an analytics "Big Data" company first and foremost. I'm surprised that's all they wanted from the OBD2 port. Perhaps that is all that's technically possible to get out of it!
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
2. Re:OBDII by feranick · 2015-10-06 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, it is. Plenty of aftermarket products do just that and more.
3. Re:OBDII by feranick · 2015-10-06 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Here's a list of what is available from the OBD-II port:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OBD-II_PIDs#Standard_PIDs
4. Re:OBDII by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:45 · Score: 2
  
  Isn't all that information readily available via OBDII anyway?
  Not to Google, it isn't.
Dashboards by hsa · 2015-10-06 07:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

Google Dashboard: Throttle position Speed Coolant temp Fuel Consumption etc. Apple Dashboard: The car is moving.
1. Re:Dashboards by American+AC+in+Paris · 2015-10-06 08:04 · Score: 2
  
  This issue pertains to which types of data are being centrally tracked by the service itself, not dashboard data.
  
  --
  Obliteracy: Words with explosions
2. Re:Dashboards by SeaFox · 2015-10-06 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  It's an infotainment system. I believe there are already things on the dashboard that will tell you all these metrics and will not require using a touchscreen to view. The glorified stereo/nav system doesn't really need the info.
3. Re:Dashboards by Archangel+Michael · 2015-10-06 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Eventually, Apple will be gathering all that data too. Because people will demand it. Google on the otherhand is just asking for the data now, so they can provide a more complete diagnostic and failure predictive warnings.
  "We have noticed that A, B and Z are happening in your (Y) (BRAND) (MAKE) Vehicle. We recommend (Car Shop Advertiser) take a look and repair the (Part) that is about to fail."
  If you can't measure A, B and Z (and everything else) then you can't do predictive failure warnings.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
4. Re:Dashboards by Coren22 · 2015-10-06 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  The glorified stereo/nav system doesn't really need the info.
  Reread your sentence and rethink that. What could a nav system possibly use throttle position, speed, steering position for?
  The rest of those are probably to allow display of these values back to the user.
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
5. Re:Dashboards by Dan+East · 2015-10-06 08:23 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  More like:
  Apple Dashboard:
  Now playing: U2 Songs of Innocence
  
  --
  Better known as 318230.
6. Re:Dashboards by Drathos · 2015-10-06 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  Have you seen the extra INFO that is in the INFOtainment system (I really hate that name, FWIW) for some higher end cars, like the GTR?
  
  --
  End of line..
7. Re:Dashboards by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  better traffic reports for the nav system is one you missed
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
8. Re:Dashboards by rossdee · 2015-10-06 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  "a volume adjustment for road noise, "
  Thats cool. Is there a mute button as well?
  One thing hybrid cars need is a volume control for engine noise.
9. Re:Dashboards by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that definitely all sounds like a good idea and an excellent way to promote road safety. Can I subscribe to your newsletter?
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
10. Re:Dashboards by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  I award you 3 internetz for that one. especially the low fuel indicator
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
11. Re:Dashboards by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2015-10-06 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  My existing car dashboard:
  Essential information I actually need when driving
  No other junk
  No other distractions
  What do I win?
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
12. Re:Dashboards by Coren22 · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  So, you are saying that a NAVIGATION system needs volume controls? It couldn't have anything to do with improving the navigation by having real data from the car to augment the GPS, or replace it in scenarios where you lose signal (GW Bridge, tunnels, also much of NY due to the buildings). There are good reasons to want this data in a built in car system. Even the gear shift position is useful...for turning on a backup camera.
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
13. Re:Dashboards by Anubis+IV · 2015-10-06 08:45 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Both the article and summary explicitly state that this is about what data is sent back to the companies, not what data is available to the apps for use in-car. From the article (emphasis mine):
  
  [...] Android Auto tracks variables including vehicle speed, throttle position, fluid temperatures, and engine revs, information that is collated and then sent back to Google. Apple's CarPlay, on the other hand, only checks with the car's powertrain control module to ensure that the vehicle is moving.
  That said, the article has been updated with a link to a report on Google's denial of the allegations. Google denies that they collect that information, but they do say that users can opt-in to sharing data. That alone may be what Porsche had an issue with (assuming the original report is to be believed), since they may be concerned that their users will opt-in to sending back information that Porsche would rather keep in-house, instead of allowing a separate company making cars--Google--to get their hands on it.
14. Re:Dashboards by Last+Warrior · 2015-10-06 09:17 · Score: 2
  
  The only reason Porsche is rejecting this is because they would prefer to be able to charge a premium for this type of functionality.
  Great, who is making the car again? Are you telling Porsche that they cant make money on additional functionality like this? Even if they said yes to google, they could still turn the functionality off and on based on some premium pricing. That wouldn't change. It seems a lot more likely that they didn't like Google's terms in relation to the way the data is used, handled, processed, and transmitted. Porsche could even write the app themselves if they wanted to. My guess is that they don't want some company telling them what information they need to give up about their customers. Customers that pay a premium price already for the name and functionality of the vehicles they produce.
15. Re:Dashboards by Last+Warrior · 2015-10-06 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  Eventually, Apple will be gathering all that data too.Because people will demand it.
  What customers? I didnt realize that google was an expert in the auto industry. What demand. I haven't heard of anyone asking for this.
  
  Google on the otherhand is just asking for the data now, so they can provide a more complete diagnostic and failure predictive warnings.
  Stupid. There are already plenty of failure predictive warnings on vehicles right now. Especially luxury automotive brands. they are in no position to say that Porsche must allow them to gather that information about their customers (without their knowledge). And no Google doesn't get to decide if they'll be the one to recommend the shop mechanic to fix it. Its not their decision.
  In my experience, more and more people are started to get a little wary of all data collection that is going on without their express consent. When people actually find out what and where data is being collected about them, even die hard data sharers are starting to ask why. Especially things that don't provide a net benefit for them. Most of the data collection does not provide a net benefit for them.
16. Re:Dashboards by SeaFox · 2015-10-06 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  The glorified stereo/nav system doesn't really need the info.
  Reread your sentence and rethink that. What could a nav system possibly use throttle position, speed, steering position for?
  The rest of those are probably to allow display of these values back to the user.
  My Garmin navigates fine without needing to be connected into the CANBUS. That's what GPS and built-in sensors are for.
17. Re:Dashboards by Archangel+Michael · 2015-10-06 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  Lighten up Francis.
  Prove what statements? Prove future predictions? I can't, but then again, I don't have to. Neither do I have to GTFO. Nice to have your enlightened thoughts on this topic though. Thank you.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
18. Re:Dashboards by Archangel+Michael · 2015-10-06 09:50 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't heard of anyone asking for this.
  Yet.
  
  And no Google doesn't get to decide if they'll be the one to recommend the shop mechanic to fix it. Its not their decision.
  Google can recommend. Google can suggest. Google can do lots of things to influence things. Being short sighted is why many geeks fail to see how Google "the search engine" is way bigger than search now (Now called Alphabet).
  
  Most of the data collection does not provide a net benefit for them.
  That you know of. I suspect that a lot of data collection on you has benefited you in some way, but in ways you can't even see. MetaData can be a very powerful tool.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
19. Re:Dashboards by khellendros1984 · 2015-10-06 10:40 · Score: 1
  
  I see three statements:
  1. "Eventually, Apple will be gathering all that data too." It would be reasonable for them to do so, but I agree that it seems like it's not in their plans, so far (or, at least it couldn't be proven, if claimed)
  2. "Because people will demand it." I don't believe that most people will. If I really want access to that data, I have a bluetooth OBD-2 dongle and an app to read/log/whatever it. I don't really need or want some screen echoing that data right now, although I wouldn't actually be opposed.
  3. "Google on the otherhand is just asking for the data now, so they can provide a more complete diagnostic and failure predictive warnings." They're obviously asking for the data now, but the rest of the statement is speculation (and may be incomplete, since Google likely wants the data for other purposes as well).
  
  What I don't understand is your reaction. It's not like they're accusing Apple of wrongdoing; they're saying that Apple may want to provide access to a larger feature set in the future. I don't have a problem with that.
  
  --
  It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
20. Re:Dashboards by Vapula · 2015-10-06 11:04 · Score: 1
  
  Nav system needs to know vehicle speed to interpolate when GPS signal is lost
  Entertainment needs two of RPM, speed, gear shift to evaluate the road noise (both from wheels on road and from the engine)
  Nav can make a nice addition if coupled with gas-tank level (to show reachable gas stations)... Except that accurate gas-tank level can only be measured when the vehicule is stopped... So fuel consumption (which can always be measured accurately) will allow proper extrapolation.
  Gear shift can be used for rear-cam/rear-radar used as park-helpers
21. Re:Dashboards by fj3k · 2015-10-06 11:23 · Score: 1
  
  The M5 East tunnel in Sydney is a great example of why that information would be useful for a navigation system.
  The tunnel was completed in 2001 with enough capacity, as stated, to last 20 years. It started to exceed its capacity within 5–10 years of completion.
  The position my Garmin is usually fairly accurate. This is probably because the slowing of traffic begins before the tunnel while the device still has signal. When the traffic is at its worst, however, the Garmin decides that since I was moving at 25km/h when I entered the tunnel, I should have been out of the tunnel by now and thus there must be something else blocking the GPS signal—when in reality I'm still stopped somewhere in the tunnel waiting for the traffic to move again.
  If the stated information was available to the navigation calculations, it would know that I had slowed, stopped, moved a bit, stopped, inched forward a bit more, stopped, stopped, still stopped, grown incredibly impatient and started to curse the government which built a tunnel with very a short life expectancy and without any thought for expansion, etc.
  
  --
  Two men claimed to have walked into a bar. Only one had the bruises to prove it.
22. Re:Dashboards by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2015-10-06 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  So if you're driving the same route again, you can see the ghost driver doing your previous trip.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
23. Re:Dashboards by SeaFox · 2015-10-06 16:40 · Score: 1
  
  If the stated information was available to the navigation calculations, it would know that I had slowed, stopped, moved a bit, stopped, inched forward a bit more, stopped, stopped, still stopped, grown incredibly impatient and started to curse the government which built a tunnel with very a short life expectancy and without any thought for expansion, etc.
  What would that really accomplish, though? If you're stuck in a tunnel you don't need a GPS at that point -- there's only only two directions to go and one of them would require an illegal U-turn.
24. Re:Dashboards by Ed_1024 · 2015-10-06 19:25 · Score: 1
  
  "We have noticed that A, B and Z are happening in your (Y) (BRAND) (MAKE) Vehicle. We recommend (Car Shop Advertiser) take a look and repair the (Part) that is about to fail.â
  *BING BONG!* Your coolant temperature seems a bit high, why not pull into Daves Auto and buy some lovely, fresh, cold fluid? Its only a few miles away. While youre there, try a Marios Pizza from across the road - just follow the new directions! Pay for it with a DollarCo loan, only 1400%APR, turn the steering wheel or press the brake pedal to accept!
25. Re:Dashboards by houghi · 2015-10-07 00:33 · Score: 1
  
  Google and opt-in? That will end as soon as it is out of Beta.
  We are Google . Resistence is futile. All your data are belong to us.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
26. Re:Dashboards by Coren22 · 2015-10-07 01:06 · Score: 1
  
  On one trip from Maryland to Massachusetts, going on the lower level of the George Washington Bridge, my Garmin said I was moving south on the river at 700mph. I kept that record on my GPS until I gave it away.
  GPS through tunnels, double decker bridges and in cities is unreliable. In cities, the buildings can block enough of the sky to prevent you getting a lock, and if you have ever driven through New York, you will know you don't want to get lost there.
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
27. Re:Dashboards by Coren22 · 2015-10-07 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  What about when your GPS tells you to turn while inside a tunnel or on a bridge?
  http://www.nydailynews.com/new...
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
28. Re:Dashboards by khchung · 2015-10-07 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  Google denies that they collect that information, but they do say that users can opt-in to sharing data.
  "Opt-in"? Just like how users can "opt-in" to Google+?
  No, thanks.
  
  --
  Oliver.
29. Re:Dashboards by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  I used to use a Garmin. But their capabilities have long since been outdone by phones. A phone will have compass and accelerometer. Between that and the knowledge you are very likely to be on a road, it should be able to give a pretty good estimate of your position through dead reckoning.
  In fact the phone probably has better access to travel information too, and so will be better able to give you an ETA for your whole journey.
30. Re:Dashboards by SeaFox · 2015-10-07 19:16 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.nydailynews.com/new...
  
  While the road leading up to the bridge is marked with large signs that read “road closed,” orange barrels and other barricades, Hussain was likely paying more attention to his GPS than the road, deputies said.
  I would say it's Darwin Award time.
  If only he's had a fancy Infotainment system with car diagnostics access -- it could have told him he was driving vertically on the bridge from the same outdated navigation data.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by mlkj · 2015-10-06 07:59 · Score: 1

Do you work for the people, or something?
Not necessarily malice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 08:01 · Score: 1

For some values, it would make sense for Google to not just collect, but also use it. Google Maps is commonly used for navigation. One of its useful features is its predictive ETA based on live traffic data. Collecting speed and location gives data to feed that model and give better accuracy on current traffic conditions in a given area. I'd say that's a good use of it, as long as it's anonymized.
1. Re:Not necessarily malice by Drathos · 2015-10-06 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Android Auto doesn't want this data to send back to the Google farm. Their demos have shown a place for car info to be displayed while staying in Android Auto instead of jumping back to the car's UI. They obviously need to get this data from the car somehow if they're going to do it.
  Google already has a source of speed and location data (Maps and Waze). There's no need to get that info from the car via Android Auto.
  
  --
  End of line..
2. Re:Not necessarily malice by MobyDisk · 2015-10-06 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  And the problem with that is...what? Are you saying you want troopers to be inefficient? If the troopers knew that an area tended to have more murders, would you not want them to increase patrol efforts in that area?
3. Re:Not necessarily malice by jittles · 2015-10-06 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  And the problem with that is...what? Are you saying you want troopers to be inefficient? If the troopers knew that an area tended to have more murders, would you not want them to increase patrol efforts in that area?
  Well certainly you would want them to increase public safety. Studies have shown that artificially decreasing a speed limit does not increase public safety - people are going to go the speed they feel comfortable going for the conditions. However, you'll find that many cities are increasing their traffic enforcement at the cost of decreasing other programs such as gang enforcement teams or programs that may have the officers respond to events that do not benefit the bottom line of the law enforcement's office.
4. Re:Not necessarily malice by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  well if the data reads that everyone is driving 70 in a 65 , perhaps we can get better speed limits out of that info.
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
5. Re:Not necessarily malice by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  apparently not. havent you seen the outcry against the broken window patroling that has kept NY safe for years?
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
6. Re:Not necessarily malice by ahodgson · 2015-10-06 08:50 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that's how government works.
7. Re:Not necessarily malice by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  For some values, it would make sense for Google to not just collect, but also use it. Google Maps is commonly used for navigation. One of its useful features is its predictive ETA based on live traffic data. Collecting speed and location gives data to feed that model and give better accuracy on current traffic conditions in a given area. I'd say that's a good use of it, as long as it's anonymized.
  Which of course neatly explains things like Coolant Temp.
  
  Coolant Temp?!? WTF, Over???
8. Re:Not necessarily malice by ganjadude · 2015-10-06 15:18 · Score: 1
  
  *should work
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Isn't it obvious? by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-10-06 08:08 · Score: 1

I do I.T. contract work for the government. So?
Re:Enjoy a Haiku by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2015-10-06 08:08 · Score: 1

Did you mix up your tumblr and slashdot windows again?

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Any sufficiently powerful corporation by jenningsthecat · 2015-10-06 08:12 · Score: 1, Insightful

...thinks it's indistinguishable from God.

--
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
1. Re:Any sufficiently powerful corporation by willworkforbeer · 2015-10-06 08:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  ...thinks it's indistinguishable from Government.
  FTFY.
  
  --
  Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
Google Response by feranick · 2015-10-06 08:15 · Score: 1, Informative

Here: http://recode.net/2015/10/06/g...
1. Re:Google Response by ashpool7 · 2015-10-06 08:37 · Score: 2
  
  Or, the actual article. That seems like a stub.
  http://www.theverge.com/2015/1...
2. Re:Google Response by macs4all · 2015-10-06 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  Here: http://recode.net/2015/10/06/g...
  
  Yeah, nice DoubleSpeak, that.
  
  "We don't collect the data..." vs. "We only collect the data when..."
  
  Yeahrightsure. And you only get the option to "Opt In/Out" when you initially set-up the system.
  
  Yeah, buddy. I feel SO much safer now...
Seriously: anybody can via OBD-II by feranick · 2015-10-06 08:17 · Score: 1

Anybody can get that kind of info by just plugging into the standard OBD-II port. Several aftermarket solutions provide that.
1. Re:Seriously: anybody can via OBD-II by ic3m4n1 · 2015-10-06 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  Several aftermarket solutions dont harvest and sell it for profit. If they do we can have same conversation about them as well.
  This isnt about Google or others. Its about practices where personal information is farmed and sold off.
cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago lan by Joe_Dragon · 2015-10-06 08:21 · Score: 1

cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago land.
It's seems like posted 55 (few areas at 60-65) have a real speed limit of 70-75
Google claims NOT to collect throttle + temp data by jenningsthecat · 2015-10-06 08:22 · Score: 4, Informative

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1...

--
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Re:My biggest fear by GungaDan · 2015-10-06 08:25 · Score: 2

I, for one, welcome our new Goople overlords.

--
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
Re:My biggest fear by guruevi · 2015-10-06 08:28 · Score: 1

How? Both companies are so rich and valuable the other doesn't have enough funds to buy out the other, let alone the stock premiums and regulatory costs involved.
Perhaps in a decade or two when one of them has driven itself into the ground but most likely by then they will both have devalued so much they'll be in the same boat and another player may buy one or both of them.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Why do they need ANY info? by cayenne8 · 2015-10-06 08:32 · Score: 1, Insightful

Ok, why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
All of my car stereos so far, have never had to have any connection to car info to play my songs as I barrel down the road. On custom installs, I've never hooked to any of the car data, etc.
Why would an entertainment system need to know any of that information at all?

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
1. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by hrimhari · 2015-10-06 08:34 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  To block you from doing distracting tasks while driving such as editing a playlist or browsing your contact list.
  
  --
  http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
2. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Alascom · 2015-10-06 08:39 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  A couple of years ago, your probably asked why a phone needed sensors - like gyros, compass, temperature, motion, fingerprints, cameras, etc.
  If you want to do really innovative and cool stuff, you need a way for the computer to be aware of the world around it. If you are a "car" system and you want to make really useful and cool apps for cars, then things like speed, g-forces, braking, turn signals, GPS, temperature and other sensors all become really essential.
3. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  To block passengers in your car from doing useful tasks while you are driving such as editing a playlist, browsing your contact list, or searching for food/gas/bathrooms on your route.
  FTFY. This nanny corp crap really needs to go away.
4. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Lumpy · 2015-10-06 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  Mine do, in fact the double din I installed in the wifes civic has a ODB-II Canbus input so it can do fully adjustable dim levels with the dash lighting and speed sensitive volume adjust. But I also can look at all the ODB information in any android app I install.
  It runs plain old Android 4.2.2 and is a china wing-wang-wong no name brand. does more things than the top of the line Pioneer or JVC can.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
5. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Last+Warrior · 2015-10-06 08:52 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The point is that Porsche should be telling google what they want their entertainment system to do and how much information they want to send to it. Google should not be asking for this information and they should definitely not be the one dictating what information is required for an embedded audio entertanment system. the next thing you know Google will be sending all the data back to their datacenters, monitoring not only where you are but how fat you are diving, what rpms you are changing gears so they can let your insurance know if you have a lead foot, and your auto mechanic if you like to bounce off the rev limiter a little too often.
  losing out on my privacy and autonomy in the name of someone elses stupid feature is the wrong way to go. Google making demands on a car company when the car company is the one who should be making decisions about the features and functionality of the car is the wrong way to go.
  Google should STFU and be happy that someone wants to pay to license their technology and then they should work to provide the features that the licensee wants.
6. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by LWATCDR · 2015-10-06 08:57 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  1. Google says it is not true.
  2. Adding things like current speed and wheel angle can really help with dead reckoning when GPS is having a problem getting a lock like going through a tunnel.
  3. Knowing how much fuel you have left and your current mpg can help it find the cheapest gas along your route.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
7. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 09:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  FTFY. This nanny corp crap really needs to go away.
  Car companies do this because they fear that if they don't, government will hit them with all sorts of new regulations. Judging by past government behavior, that's a reasonable fear.
8. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by geeper · 2015-10-06 09:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  My truck has a variable volume based on speed so that the volume lowers as the truck slows. It's a handy feature. That is the only reason I can think of.
  
  --
  Error reading device 'Signature'. (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?
9. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by tripleevenfall · 2015-10-06 09:19 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It's not just Apple doing this. Many car navigation systems prohibit certain functions (such as typing an address or a text message with the fingers) while the car is in motion.
  This is not a change from the industry standard for Apple. It is for Google.
10. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Google should STFU and be happy that someone wants to pay to license their technology and then they should work to provide the features that the licensee wants.
  Google get 90% of their revenue from advertising (eg. data mining) and only 10% from all their other products and licensing combined. It is really interesting how geeks related to Google, it is by far the biggest data miner advertising company out there, but because they build cool free services, many geeks seems to have a blind spot on what this company really is about.
11. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by ArmoredDragon · 2015-10-06 09:20 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I don't know if you've kept up with the latest and greatest when it comes to maintaining a car, but car manufacturers are VERY CONTROLLING when it comes to being able to read sensor data. The reason they do this is because they can keep third party mechanics out unless they pay $$$$$ to become a licensed technician or otherwise obtain the diagnostic information needed to effectively work on today's cars. Car repair is big bucks for the manufacturer if they keep that information proprietary.
  If Porsche handed that stuff over to Google, it would make it a HELL of a lot easier for end users to be able to troubleshoot their car and fix it on their own, and THAT could seriously hurt Porsch's aftermarket revenue, hence I could see why they wouldn't want it. I'm guessing that Google might want this information mainly to allow app developers to be able to better use their imagination, but still, I doubt Porsche would give it up anyways.
12. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by UnknowingFool · 2015-10-06 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
  Satellite navigation functionality is part of CarPlay (and I assume Google's version as well). Off the top of my head, if I were a designer, then the pinging the car's GPS location should occur more frequently if the car is moving and less frequently if the car is stationary.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
13. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by SeaFox · 2015-10-06 09:29 · Score: 2
  
  Ok, why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
  This isn't about music.
  It's fairly standard for Infotainment systems to need a sensor input as to whether the car is in motion (or in gear), as many can play back video and they don't want you watching movies when you're driving. Some also tie into gear selection so they know when to activate an installed backup camera and display its video feed.
14. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Xenx · 2015-10-06 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  The permissions in Google Auto vs regular android phones are only different in the types of data it is able to collect. It still ultimately comes down to the user as to whether they want to use apps and features that report the sensor activity.
15. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Noah+Haders · 2015-10-06 09:31 · Score: 2
  
  Imagine if Google tracked your car telematics and automatically showed you ads for auto mechanics when your car breaks down, or driving school if your drive recklessly? They want unlimited power to shows you with relevant ads.
16. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by ShanghaiBill · 2015-10-06 09:46 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  To block passengers in your car from doing useful tasks
  Most modern cars have weight sensors in the front seats, so the computer will know if there is someone in the passenger seat. If the car is in motion, and there is no passenger, then it is reasonable to change the UI behavior.
  
  This nanny corp crap really needs to go away.
  You may feel different when some distracted driver runs over your kid. This isn't just about protecting people from themselves. Distracted drivers are a danger to other people as well.
17. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by danceswithtrees · 2015-10-06 09:51 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Mixed feelings: Porsche (do want) with nanny controls( don't want). Sort of like watching your Ferrari going over a cliff driven by your mother-in-law.
18. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by kelemvor4 · 2015-10-06 09:53 · Score: 2
  
  You may feel different when some distracted driver runs over your kid. This isn't just about protecting people from themselves. Distracted drivers are a danger to other people as well.
  Which is why manually operated cars should be outlawed.
19. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by adolf · 2015-10-06 09:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  All of the things listed in TFS are already available on the OBD-II port.
  
  --
  Kid-proof tablet..
20. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by thesupraman · 2015-10-06 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know if you've kept up with the latest and greatest when it comes to maintaining a car, but the mandatory and open OBD-II interface that is required on all vehicles since 1996 (in the USA). This standardised plug must be located in the interior withing 2 feet of the driver.
  It provides all this data, in real time, and more.
  A bluetooth interface to get this to your smartphone costs approximately $5.
  Sounds pretty damn hard to me.. you may have to look in your owners manual, and open a little plastic door to get to it!
21. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 10:42 · Score: 1
  
  No. What we have a problem with re: advertising and data mining is when it is done in excess and to the detriment of the user, such as serving malware alongside ads or a blog with multiple ad providers and tracking services. Even worse when we pay for something and get ads and tracking. Many, if not most, of us are perfectly willing to trade some of our personal data and eyeball time for useful services; and most who fall into that category seem to agree that Google has struck a reasonable balance. Slashdot, on the other hand... AdBlock engaged.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
22. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Vapula · 2015-10-06 10:49 · Score: 1
  
  Information not only about "in motion" but about speed is a huge improvement for Navigation
  People are used to "tomtom" and other removable Navigation systems... but serious one used to require the vehicle speed for years. When you enter some tunnel, it allows the system to continue to track the movements of the car while the GPS signal is lost.
  Using a compass and the car speed let the navigation system follow your track without GPS signal... directly on the map. Well, it's not utterly precise but it is usually precise enough to keep track for a few kilometers.
  Being able to know the RPM of the engine and the speed of the car also allow to evaluate the environmental sound level and adjust the audio system's volume accordingly, lowering it when you stop at a traffic light or when you slow down and putting it back in "normal" volume when you're driving.
  So, there are plenty of useful uses for that data...
  I guess that, as VM group (VM, Audi, Porsche and other) already uses Android on other cars, they wanted an excuse to use Apple's system on porsche as usually, people who drive such cars like to show their wealth, including through an iPhone. It's not about data or system quality, it's only about flattering the ego of their customers.
23. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by vux984 · 2015-10-06 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  1. Google says it is not true.
  Multiple different sources report that google wants that data; going back over a year.
  
  2. Adding things like current speed and wheel angle can really help with dead reckoning when GPS is having a problem getting a lock like going through a tunnel.
  "The publication says that Android Auto tracks variables including vehicle speed, throttle position, fluid temperatures, and engine revs, information that is collated and then sent back to Google"
  So does it need to be collated and sent to google for dead reckoning? Why can't the phone do that itself? Or maybe the car doesn't need to give all that data to the phone so that it can do dead reckoning because the car already has GPS, antennae, its own dead reckoning and plenty computing power that's not constrained by a tiny battery... so rather than report its throttle position and steering wheel position etc, it can just tell the phone where it is, as a solved problem.
  
  3. Knowing how much fuel you have left and your current mpg can help it find the cheapest gas along your route.
  Yes, because saving a nickle a gallon sounds like a typical Porsche owner priority.
  Meanwhile Porsches have been able to estimate their remaining range for over a decade. If the phone wants to know if it can reach cheaper gas the app can ask the car if it thinks it can go another 200km or not.
  All that said... if Porsche doesn't want to hand the data over, big deal. The android app can just say "Feature not available. Porsche telemetry not available." I don't see why that's not a valid solution.
24. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  You know, I maintain my vehicles and have never had one break down on the road, so I don't exactly know where the nearest mechanic is everywhere I drive. On the off chance that I should break down on the side of the road, sans tools and sans parts, on a trip so I'm not near my garage, it would be VERY useful for my car to automatically tell me where the nearest mechanic is; even better if it gave me a list with ratings and reviews, so I could call around while waiting for a tow and find one that could get me in ASAP, so I can get back on the road quicker. Beyond that, if they want to advertise things to me that I'm not actually interested in, well, my eyeballs are capable of being averted. Is there too much advertising, in general? Yes. But, Google is trying to make advertising more effective, therefore allowing advertisers to reduce the number of ads they (feel they) must show us to get the desired effect; we should be supporting them in this goal, as it will ultimately result in less advertising. The ideal would be no advertising, but you know as well as I do that we'll never get all those demons stuffed back into Pandora's box.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
25. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  This. Honestly, I'd like to see a device-agnostic bluetooth connection for the phone and feed the infotainment system as much data as possible. The more data is has access to, the more fun (and often useful) stuff it can let me do. And isn't driving a 911 supposed to be about having fun?
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
26. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Barnoid · 2015-10-06 11:18 · Score: 2
  
  1. Google says it is not true.
  2. Adding things like current speed and wheel angle can really help with dead reckoning when GPS is having a problem getting a lock like going through a tunnel.
  3. Knowing how much fuel you have left and your current mpg can help it find the cheapest gas along your route.
  True, but to implement 2 or 3 only the navigation app needs that data. You don't need to send it all the way to Google (and TFA says so).
27. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by TheGratefulNet · 2015-10-06 11:40 · Score: 1
  
  china wing-wang-wong no name brand
  you should upgrade to, at least, a wun hung lo unit; the wing-wang-wong just doesn't measure up.
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
28. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by Redbehrend · 2015-10-06 11:42 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a Google auto app pre-dev and they ask for information required by law to be available, on top of this they only wanted read access. This ontop of mining allows you to create really cool apps and diagnostics systems for auto makers. Apple just wants to be an ipad where google wants to become part of the car with custom app experience. Remember it's not running critical components just extra user experience stuff.
29. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by Redbehrend · 2015-10-06 11:50 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly I have a obd2 reader and you are missing out on all the cool shut you can do with the information. You can actually crowd tune cars, diagnose, track maint milage, variable volume, backup cams, recording, racing, music tempo smart lists to speed, etc..
30. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Pubstar · 2015-10-06 11:57 · Score: 1
  
  I was just thinking this. I mean, if I could get a custom gauge cluster with all that data through the Android Auto platform, that would be amazing. I have a car that I take to the track sometimes, and having something like this would be much sleeker than having to remove my car headunit and put gauges in the double DIN slot in my car.
31. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 12:00 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not missing out on anything, I don't own a 2016 911 :)
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
32. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Pubstar · 2015-10-06 12:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because saving a nickle a gallon sounds like a typical Porsche owner priority.
  You would be surprised. I saw someone with a brand new Jaguar F-Type filling up at a local ARCO (basically the cheapest gas you can buy in Southern California). I cringed a bit as I was filling up my 93 Integra with Shell Premium. Some people buy really expensive cars and fill them with complete shit for gas.
33. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Lumpy · 2015-10-06 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  ebay. go searching Like I did. pay about $400-$450 for a good one that runs only android, dont touch the crap that runs Windows CE/Android.
  no SKU as china has a law against sku's and they murder the families of companies that use SKU's or any real markings. and about 30 companies all sell variations of the same thing.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
34. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Noah+Haders · 2015-10-06 12:16 · Score: 2
  
  You don't find it creepy? If they track you in your car then drop ads in your browser at work or insert it into your gmail?
35. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  My 2015 Toyota will only let me place calls from my "recent" and "favorites" lists, with the "contacts" greyed out and unselectable unless the car is stopped.
36. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2015-10-06 13:23 · Score: 1
  
  On the off chance that I should break down on the side of the road, sans tools and sans parts, on a trip so I'm not near my garage, it would be VERY useful for my car to automatically tell me where the nearest mechanic is; even better if it gave me a list with ratings and reviews, so I could call around while waiting for a tow and find one that could get me in ASAP, so I can get back on the road quicker.
  So, if you break down under said circumstances, pull your smartphone out of your pocket and you can have exactly what you're saying you want. You don't need to give Google perpetual, unlimited access to your driving data for you to have it.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
37. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-06 13:48 · Score: 2
  
  Or block the passenger from doing it, just like my car does with the GPS. It's my fucking car, unless it's against the law, it shouldn't be controlling my behaviour (Even then it still shouldn't).
  Same goes for stupid seat-belt warnings, or door open warnings which prevent me from playing the stereo while cleaning out my car. Oh no, the door is open and the key is in the ignition, I'll sound an unending obnoxious warning sound to prevent you from doing something every car owner has done for decades.
  My next car will be a vintage car. I've had enough of technology that makes my life harder...
38. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-06 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  A couple of years ago, your probably asked why a phone needed sensors - like gyros, compass, temperature, motion, fingerprints, cameras, etc.
  Nope. I did ask why the phone manufacturer requires me to have a registered account and my credit card details before I can use it though.
  Not all technology is good.
39. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by mjwx · 2015-10-06 13:55 · Score: 1
  
  Mixed feelings: Porsche (do want) with nanny controls( don't want). Sort of like watching your Ferrari going over a cliff driven by your mother-in-law.
  However people who drive performance cars often do want to know a lot of information about them including throttle position, coolant temp (everyone should want to know this, but sigh), oil pressure, boost pressure, oil temp, intake pressure and a heap of other stats... Especially if they're a tuner... and what kind of a car buyer buys a Porshce over a Mercedes?
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
40. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by ToasterMonkey · 2015-10-06 14:10 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
  All of my car stereos so far, have never had to have any connection to car info to play my songs as I barrel down the road. On custom installs, I've never hooked to any of the car data, etc.
  Why would an entertainment system need to know any of that information at all?
  My car stereo from 2005 increases the volume as my speed increases, and that feature probably goes way back.
  Then there's maybe the option to suppress notifications while you're driving some people might like.
  Who's software is responsible for displaying the backup camera view, and what draws all the overlay info on that screen? The infotainment system right?
41. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by perpenso · 2015-10-06 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  Adding things like current speed and wheel angle can really help with dead reckoning when GPS is having a problem getting a lock like going through a tunnel.
  A motion sensing chip, like the ones found in tens of millions of cell phones, does a far far better job.
42. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:38 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Google absolutely did want all the data set back to their data center. Porsche clearly states this.
43. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:40 · Score: 1
  
  Google's only customers are the advertisers. What they want from you is your location and engine performance so they can sell extremely targeted ads to mechanics. People really don't understand Google at all.
44. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Wovel · 2015-10-06 14:44 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty sure there is a reason you are driving the Integra and the other guy is driving the Jaguar (although Jaguar is a bad example since they are overpriced crap, but nevertheless). You are gaining nothing by pumping 6 extra octane into your integral. I know there is where you try and defend this absurd 40 cent a gallon decision, but your really not.
45. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 14:59 · Score: 1
  
  No, because they're open about what they're doing (tracking and showing ads) and why they're doing it (to show relevant ads that i'll find less annoying). It's not like they have some guy sitting there tracking my every move; now that might be creepy, but a computer? Pfft.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
46. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 15:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, sure, I can do that while I'm calling for a tow. Wait, no. Well, I can, but not as conveniently as having my car do it for me. Plus, I can do cool stuff with that data, but I have to be able to get at it, first. If my infotainment system can do it, I don't need to find somewhere to mount another piece of hardware to do it (which I've done in every car I've owned since I started buying 1996 and newer, when OBD-II became the standard).
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
47. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Wolfrider · 2015-10-06 15:04 · Score: 1
  
  --Some audio systems auto-adjust volume settings to adjust for (say) wind noise, depending on vehicle speed. Simple.
  
  --
  .
  == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
48. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Noah+Haders · 2015-10-06 15:24 · Score: 1
  
  what's the diff between a dude and a computer? NSA does all its tracking with a computer, but I still find it creepy.
49. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-06 15:44 · Score: 1
  
  NSA does data collection and filtering for manual review (e.g. by a human) with a computer. Google does data collection and filtering for automated ad delivery (e.g. by a computer) with a computer. Subtle difference, I know.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
50. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by davester666 · 2015-10-06 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Well, the person you hit while scrolling through that list of songs might differ on that point. And their lawyer will be very interested it as well.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
51. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Mal-2 · 2015-10-06 17:03 · Score: 1
  
  Acuras typically do spec for Premium. I know when I had one, it didn't feel right on anything else.
  
  --
  How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
52. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by fractoid · 2015-10-06 17:54 · Score: 2
  
  And it's perfectly reasonable for the in-car electronics to have and display all of these things. The problem is this conflation of "the local device needs this information to do its job" with "the company supplying the local device needs to upload all of this information to its servers and log it against your profile."
  
  --
  Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
53. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by davester666 · 2015-10-06 20:32 · Score: 1
  
  Well:
  1) this discussion is not about "banning" anything. And nothing in my comment even hints at banning anything.
  2) my comment is that, for the people who get distracted playing with their in-car entertainment/guidance system, and then hit/kill someone, which has repeatedly happened in the past, this makes lawyers eye's light up. And if they can establish that whatever company that created that system didn't do a good job in managing the risk of this distraction happening, it gives the lawyer a boner and/or sploosh moment. And this specifically is the core of your vaunted "free-market", where when you do something stupid, you pay for it.
  3) companies that make these in-car entertainment/guidance systems generally employ both a bunch of reasonably smart people and reasonably smart lawyers. And they generally will come to the decision that it is much better for their bottom line and the public perception of their company if they design their systems so that they don't get sued for enabling the driver to distract themselves while driving. enlighted self-interest.
  4) feel free to mount a laptop as your in-car entertainment system, and then listen to music on it, or watch the latest Miley Cyrus video, or whatever. You clearly seem to be one of those "special" people who can handle it.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
54. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by N1AK · 2015-10-06 20:49 · Score: 1
  
  My car stereo from 2005 increases the volume as my speed increases, and that feature probably goes way back.
  I thought that initially but then it occurred to me that the stereo should probably be using background noise level rather than speed to decide volume. I'm sure I've been doing 30mph on some bad roads and had more noise than doing 90mph on a decent motorway. It seems a bit backwards to use a primitive proxy like speed, when devices capable of detecting noise directly are available.
55. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Plumpaquatsch · 2015-10-06 22:56 · Score: 2
  
  To block passengers in your car from doing useful tasks while you are driving such as editing a playlist, browsing your contact list, or searching for food/gas/bathrooms on your route.
  FTFY. This nanny corp crap really needs to go away.
  Nice try. The user interface is placed for operation by the driver. Whatever the passengers do with it will at least be in the peripheral vision of the driver, if not actually in the way of his right hand and arm - which I would count as a distraction again. Not to mention that to reach the UI, the passenger will likely need to move from his seat, probably including unbuckling, putting him in danger in case of accident. Which is actually more likely because he is fucking distracting the driver.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
56. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Plumpaquatsch · 2015-10-06 23:01 · Score: 1
  
  Fandroid much? Google demands vehicle data for Android Auto, Porsche is dumb that they don't put in Android Auto and then don't fucking use it because they don't like it? What fucking sense would that make?
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
57. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by dave420 · 2015-10-06 23:24 · Score: 1
  
  "The next thing you know" - so you are merely guessing. If Google is making an automotive operating system, it makes sense that they'd want that data. Google should be asking for this stuff, as it's needed by their OS to provide car-centric apps with car-centric data. It's a lot more than just an audio entertainment system, which you know if you've read anything about what they're doing.
  Your idea of a stupid feature is someone else's idea of a great feature. You are not the arbiter what what is useful or useless, sucky or awesome.
  You sound old and scared.
58. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by shortscruffydave · 2015-10-06 23:36 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
  My car audio system certainly hooks into vehicle telemetry - it automatically adjusts volume according to speed, to compensate for road/wind noise. Works very well.
59. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-06 23:45 · Score: 2
  
  What they are really worried about is people being able to install apps that diagnose problems with their car automatically. No need to buy and fit a cheap OBD-II dongle, just head over to the app store and download an app. They are probably also worried about things like emission data becoming common knowledge. The car has sensors, it knows how bad its exhaust is, but most people never see the data from them.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
60. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by AmiMoJo · 2015-10-07 00:14 · Score: 1
  
  In the EU it would be illegal for Google to provide that data to insurance companies. I really doubt they would violate a very clear, unambiguous law like that.
  Specifically, data protection rules require clear opt-in for such a scheme, and insurance rules do not allow insurers to penalize people who don't opt to supply the data. We have been here with driving monitor black boxes before. Much as the insurance companies would love to force everyone to have one, they can't.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
61. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by metrix007 · 2015-10-07 00:39 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like it's time for some custom firmware to override that nanny nonsense.
  
  --
  If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
62. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by houghi · 2015-10-07 00:46 · Score: 1
  
  For those who are willing to do want to look at the data 7 EU BlueTooth dongle will give you what you want.
  I think geeks should be using it more and hacking it more. There are also Wifi ones available. And even complete systems
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
63. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by houghi · 2015-10-07 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  1. It is a company, so I assume they are lying
  2. No need to send it back to Google. It can stay inside the car
  3. No need to send it back to Google. It can stay inside the car
  If they are even a littlebit inteligent, you will have the maps offline. Because how do you connect to Google inside of a tunnel, when you need that data?
  All of the data is available via OBD-II. The question is if you must send it to Google or not. I would say no. I would say it would not even need to go to Porche. It needs to stay in the car.
  For Google it is standard: It is data, we want it. Regardless of what they are going to do with it. I am sure they have no idea yet about that for now, but when somebody suddenly has a great idea on how to use it, they have it already and if not, it is just a bit of extra data costing them almost nothing.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
64. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by LWATCDR · 2015-10-07 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  Actually gas is gas. All gas comes through a pipeline. ARCO and Shell are the same gas. After it leaves the pipeline the different companies add different additives but the gas it's self is the same.
  Now a rundown station may have more crude in it's tank than a new or well maintained station so that is an issue.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
65. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by LWATCDR · 2015-10-07 01:22 · Score: 1
  
  "1. It is a company, so I assume they are lying"
  Porsche is owned by the VW group. So you agree that Porsche is lying about Google wanting that data.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
66. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by loufoque · 2015-10-07 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  Finding out why some functionality suddenly became greyed out is more distracting that actually letting people use it as intended.
67. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by ndavis · 2015-10-07 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  Google absolutely did want all the data set back to their data center. Porsche clearly states this.
  Hmm this is interesting because my biggest complaint with this would be how much data does this use? Sending data like this frequently would probably start to add up and I would think that could open up Google to complaints/lawsuits from using more data than necessary.
68. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by otuz · 2015-10-07 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  Mine has speedometer information available to the car stereo. It adjusts the volume automatically depending on the speed the car is doing, so I haven't really had any need to adjust volume on it while driving.
69. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Plumpaquatsch · 2015-10-07 02:19 · Score: 2
  
  So you are okay with Google checking if your car service light comes on and then to send you straight to the garage paying them to give them precedence over all others.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
70. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by cayenne8 · 2015-10-07 02:20 · Score: 1
  
  However people who drive performance cars often do want to know a lot of information about them including throttle position, coolant temp (everyone should want to know this, but sigh), oil pressure, boost pressure, oil temp, intake pressure and a heap of other stats... Especially if they're a tuner... and what kind of a car buyer buys a Porshce over a Mercedes?
  But, what does that have to do with my "entertainment" system? I don't need tuning information to play my mp3's.....
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
71. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by JackieBrown · 2015-10-07 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  Mine 2015 Camry as well. Same with trying to set the navigation to anything other than a past address or saved address - which is frustrating because it has the worst voice recognition I have ever seen.
72. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by JackieBrown · 2015-10-07 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  To block passengers in your car from doing useful tasks
  Most modern cars have weight sensors in the front seats, so the computer will know if there is someone in the passenger seat. If the car is in motion, and there is no passenger, then it is reasonable to change the UI behavior.
  I'd agree if it actually worked that way. My Camry's entertainment center does not detect for a passenger - not sure I really want that much data being tracked by my car, but that ship has sailed.
  I wish they would set it up like Waze where it asks you if you are a driver or passenger. Seems like that would cover the car companies liab
73. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by Hognoxious · 2015-10-07 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  If you're so dumb that it isn't obvious why it's greyed out you shouldn't be driving at all.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
74. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Hognoxious · 2015-10-07 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  There are tunnels in Brussels that branch.
  But anyway, you don't need any external sensors - an accelerometer (or two) and a bit of calculus will do it.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
75. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  No, and that's not how it would work, either. At worst, they'd have a couple sponsored results, which would be labeled as such, jus like current Google Maps searches. More to the point, though, nowhere was it ever said that this data would be streamed back to Google on a continuous basis; Google only need know my locatuon and that I need a mechanic and they're pretty good about letting you limit what they collect (have you ever actually looked at Google account settings in-depth?) so I'd be surprised if the data did get shared with Google on a continual basis without an obvious option to turn that sharing off.
  
  Besides, if you don't like it, don't use it; personally, as stated in my previous post, I would like my infotainment system to have access to as much data as possible about the state of my vehicle, provided it allows me access to that data as well. An android-based solution would be ideal, in my eyes, as I already use Torque for that.
  
  I know it might surprise you, but most people are fine with sharing a bit of data if they get something useful in exchange. Even moreso when the data being shared is relevant to the product or service being received.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
76. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by cellocgw · 2015-10-07 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  Sort of like watching your Ferrari going over a cliff driven by your mother-in-law
  That's some funky mother - in-law you got if she can drive cliffs!.
  
  --
  https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
77. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by UnderCoverPenguin · 2015-10-07 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  why do they even need to know if the car is in MOTION at all just to play music??
  
  So they can add features that could be distracting to the driver if used while driving the vehicle.
  In theory, the entertainment system could use it's own sensors to detect vehicle motion, however, this puts additional legal liability on the entertainment system manufacturer. Also, the legal definition of "vehicle in motion" may differ from the physical definition. For example, any time the transmission is not in "park" might legally be considered as the vehicle being in motion. Simpler and less risky to use information already being determined by another module in the vehicle.
  
  --
  Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
78. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by UnderCoverPenguin · 2015-10-07 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  I have friends in the automotive industry, including 2 that work for suppliers of in-vehicle entertainment systems.
  The automotive companies isolate entertainment system modules from the rest of the vehicle to minimize legal liability for the operation of modules that are not part of the actual vehicle operation. Basically, they are treated as untrusted. Any vehicle status information gets to the entertainment system via a special gateway module. The information that is relayed is carefully reviewed for potential legal liabilities. The fact that a given signal is required to be available via the OBD port is not sufficient justification for relaying it to the entertainment system.
  Even, for example, in vehicles where notification sounds are played through the entertainment system's speakers, the sounds are generated as a secondary function of a vehicle control module and provided to the entertainment system as an audio input. AND the sounds are also emitted by a speaker connected to the module providing the sounds.
  Also, in vehicles where "driver information" is presented via the same display used for controlling the entertainment system, the display and it's user controls are part of the Driver Information System, which sends (among other things) commands to the entertainment system and receives (among other things) status from the entertainment system.
  
  --
  Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
79. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by feldmark · 2015-10-07 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  Older model Prii also. There used to be a way to override in a Prius, but no more. It should really detect a passenger and allow it to be enabled. Ideally, perhaps, it would only allow unrestricted access to functions when it detects the movement comes toward the screen from the passenger seat. This wouldn't take a lot of granularity I suspect -- perhaps a simple ultrasonic sensor, plus seat sensor. Or a good application for force sensitivity in displays -- detect which direction the force against the screen is coming from. It should be doable. But anyone with custom firmware for a Prius please let us know!!!
80. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by Plumpaquatsch · 2015-10-07 06:49 · Score: 2
  
  No, and that's not how it would work, either. At worst, they'd have a couple sponsored results, which would be labeled as such, jus like current Google Maps searches
  Yeah right. Get with the times, fanboy. Google has been selling search results without indicating it in their "special" searches like "Hotel Finder" and "Flight Search" for years.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
81. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Grishnakh · 2015-10-07 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  My next car will be a vintage car. I've had enough of technology that makes my life harder...
  Fuck that. I don't want a car that kills me in a minor fender-bender, I want a car that has state-of-the-art crashworthiness, and also has useful technological features integrated such as a Bluetooth phone interface.
  Or block the passenger from doing it, just like my car does with the GPS.
  Yep, my car used to do that too. Thankfully, however, it's a Mazda and the infotainment system runs Linux, so a bunch of people have been hacking on it for a while and figured out how to change things. Now, after logging into it with my laptop and editing a file, it doesn't block the passenger (or driver) from doing anything while the car is in motion.
  Most modern consumer router firmware is crap, but the answer isn't to give up on WiFi, the answer is to get a router supported by OpenWRT or DD-WRT and use that instead. Similarly, with cars the answer is to get a car that has a hackable infotainment system.
82. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  That's not selling search results, that's selling API access to be able to list available room/flight and rate data, there's a difference. They can't simply browse this data because nobody provides it in a browseable (e.g. without entering an infinite combination of values into a set of fields) format, mostly as a result of the technical impossibility of doing so. Providing an API for hotels and airlines to enter this data themselves, on the other hand, that's perfectly possible. They don't even charge for that access (beyond an initial setup, during which they verify identities and whatnot), so there's essentially no barrier to entry, though they do take a cut of any referrals, but that's standard practice.
  
  If it's something more nefarious than that, where are the DOJ and FTC investigations and where is the EFF outcry?
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
83. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  And who said anything about a constant stream being shared with Google? Their system requiring the information does not mean their system sends any of it back to them; and even if it does, Google has always been good about allowing users to opt out of sharing any data not required for the service being provided. You've clearly never looked at Google account settings, or you'd know this.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
84. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Pubstar · 2015-10-07 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  Im running a high compression all motor ITR swap. I need premium gas for my car.
85. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Pubstar · 2015-10-07 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  You say the same thing as my dad, but I have a mechanic that can guess by the condition of your pistons and valves teh gas that you normally fill up with. He had a friend of his drop off her Civic Si with 120k miles on it for a service. He did a scope on the pistons to see how much crud was on them. This lady had virtual no carbon buildup. She had been filling her car with Shell Premium since she bought it. Anecdotal, I know, but I tend to get better pulls at the Dyno with Shell than when I was using Arco.
86. Re: Why do they need ANY info? by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  If you can't work out that the functionality has been trimmed and a message says "Not whilst car is in motion" means pull over first, you deserve to die.
87. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:16 · Score: 1
  
  What a lot of self entitled pricks with first world problems there are on Slashdot.
88. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  Your Google fanboyism has blinded you to reality. I stopped using any Google services the day I found that they'd kept a log of every single search I'd done for at least 2 years without ever asking me.
  Whether or not they have complex UIs for turning off some features after the fact, if you ever find out about it, does not excuse their ever increasing forcible collection of your data. They are a despicable company.
  If Apple was doing this you'd be attacking them.
89. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:34 · Score: 1
  
  Even after VW's shame, I still have less trust for Google. That's not to say I trust VW. Just that Google is so untrustworthy.
90. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  they'd kept a log of every single search I'd done for at least 2 years
  And you can delete that log easily.
  
  complex UIs for turning off some features
  If a series of checkboxes is too complex for you, perhaps Google is a bit beyond your comprehension. It's probably for the best that you stopped using their services.
  
  If Apple was doing this you'd be attacking them.
  Funny, they do and I'm not.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
91. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 11:24 · Score: 1
  
  And you can delete that log easily.
  First you have to know about it. Most people they are collecting data on don't know. Then you have ot find out how to turn it off.
  
  If a series of checkboxes is too complex for you, perhaps Google is a bit beyond your comprehension. It's probably for the best that you stopped using their services.
  Even before checkboxes you have to find the fucking page, moron.
  
  Funny, they do and I'm not.
  They don't and you just DID attack them by lying. Apple is the most protective company of user's rights to their own data. Obviously you'll post to an edge case of some user centric feature, and call that spying. But it's not. Spying on users is Google's business model, not Apple's. Apple's customers are users, Google's are advertisers.
92. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 11:38 · Score: 1
  
  First you have to know about it. Most people they are collecting data on don't know. Then you have ot find out how to turn it off.
  
  Most people who don't know don't care; conversely, most who do care do know. As for finding out how to turn it off... Google it? It ain't hard.
  
  Even before checkboxes you have to find the fucking page, moron.
  Fucking Google it, moron.
  
  They don't and you just DID attack them by lying.
  Have you ever read an Apple license agreement? They do, they just don't let you see it like Google does. And why would I attack Apple? I have 2 MacBook Pros and an iPad Air, and my wife has a MacBook Pro, iPhone 6+ and iPad Air 2. Why does everyone think I'm anti-Apple? I'm not, I'm just a realist who knows how to actually read what is presented to him (e.g. Apple EULAs) and research what is not (e.g. how to disable Google features).
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
93. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-07 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  Nesting fail......... I'm sure you'll sort it out, though.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
94. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-07 21:45 · Score: 1
  
  Fuck that. I don't want a car that kills me in a minor fender-bender, I want a car that has state-of-the-art crashworthiness,
  
  Don't believe the hype. I've been driving 30 years and haven't come close to crashing. I'm sure it happens, but I think the industry feeds on fear. I've also been riding motorbikes for 30 years, so maybe I haven't become as accustomed to the false sense of security the modern car industry likes to pedal, I also tend to keep my wits about me on the road which is 99% of the problem.
  
  and also has useful technological features integrated such as a Bluetooth phone interface.
  Aftermarket parts can fix that easily
  
  Or block the passenger from doing it, just like my car does with the GPS.
  Yep, my car used to do that too. Thankfully, however, it's a Mazda and the infotainment system runs Linux, so a bunch of people have been hacking on it for a while and figured out how to change things.
  I have a Mazda, please post a link and save me from this hell...
95. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-07 21:46 · Score: 1
  
  What a lot of self entitled pricks with first world problems there are on Slashdot.
  I can't speak for others, but I live in the "first world", so by defintion all my problems are first world. Which world do your problems come from?
96. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Grishnakh · 2015-10-08 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Don't believe the hype. I've been driving 30 years and haven't come close to crashing.
  That just means you're lucky. Most people in fact probably don't have a life-threatening crash in their lifetimes. However, over 30,000 people a year die in the US alone (I think it used to be closer to 50k, but it's fallen thanks to safer cars). Do you want to play the odds? I don't.
  Aftermarket parts can fix that easily
  Then you wind up with a car with crap stuck all over the inside, wires hanging around, etc. And even if you get some nice all-in-one stereo you're still stuck with a noisy car (they've gotten a lot quieter in the past decade or so), and a gas-guzzler (fuel economy has increased greatly in the last 5 years). Plus you also have a car that's constantly having problems and needs expensive repairs because things wear out after 100-200,000 miles.
  I have a Mazda, please post a link and save me from this hell...
  If it's one of the newer ones with the JCI/Visteon infotainment systems, check out mazda3hacks.com and mazda3revolution.com. Disabling the speed-related touchscreen lockout is pretty simple once you figure out how to log in (you'll probably need a USB-to-Ethernet adapter).
97. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by LWATCDR · 2015-10-08 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  Based on what?
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
98. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Plumpaquatsch · 2015-10-08 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  And Google is owned by "Alphabet - we don't even pretend not to be evil". And Google is known to lie a lot. Like they did about the WLAN data. And of course, Porsche's decision was made when Google did ask for that information. And whenever Google has to paddle back from something, they will later try to get it anyway. Which reminds me - have they finally deleted the WLAN data they claimed they never had, then claimed to have deleted, then claimed again?
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
99. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-08 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  That just means you're lucky. Most people in fact probably don't have a life-threatening crash in their lifetimes. However, over 30,000 people a year die in the US alone (I think it used to be closer to 50k, but it's fallen thanks to safer cars). Do you want to play the odds? I don't.
  This is my point, it isn't luck, it's awarness that prevents accidents.
  Have you ever watched Air Crash Investigations? I have a similar thing for car crashes, I take interest in all the major accidents in my local area, and you'll be surprised how many accidents (ie most of them) are caused by simple carelessness ie whether via speed, alcohol, drugs, fatigue, inattention, or mechanical failure, accidents can mostly be avoided by being an attentive, focussed driver.
  
  Then you wind up with a car with crap stuck all over the inside, wires hanging around, etc. And even if you get some nice all-in-one stereo you're still stuck with a noisy car (they've gotten a lot quieter in the past decade or so), and a gas-guzzler (fuel economy has increased greatly in the last 5 years). Plus you also have a car that's constantly having problems and needs expensive repairs because things wear out after 100-200,000 miles.
  I've owned a few old cars, like an old house the character makes up for the flaws. I'm not talking an old bomb, but a classic.
  And if you have an interest is fixing things yourself, and old car can be a labour of love :)
  
  If it's one of the newer ones with the JCI/Visteon infotainment systems, check out mazda3hacks.com and mazda3revolution.com. Disabling the speed-related touchscreen lockout is pretty simple once you figure out how to log in (you'll probably need a USB-to-Ethernet adapter).
  Yeah it's a brand new CX5, I'll check it out thanks.
100. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Grishnakh · 2015-10-08 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  This is my point, it isn't luck, it's awarness that prevents accidents.
  Bullshit.
  I don't care if you're Mario Andretti (and I guarantee you aren't). It doesn't matter how great a driver you are, because in many of those "easily prevented" accidents you look at, some moron is doing something stupid, and then running into another driver. There's only so much you can do to avoid someone else hitting you. Being attentive will not prevent someone else who's inattentive from running into you at a stop light (where you have pretty much no way to evade).
  Notice that the IIHS is placing a lot of emphasis on offset-frontal crashes, including the new small-offset frontal crash (where, BTW, your new Mazda shines; Mazdas are IIHS top picks for safety, which is one of the big reasons I got mine). If you're driving on a narrow, windy country road and some drunk hick in a pickup going the opposite way veers into your lane, this is exactly the kind of accident you're likely to have. Being attentive will only help so much; if the road is only so wide, and has no shoulders and only steep ditches on the side (or trees), which is the case for the country roads where I currently live, then you have nowhere to go. In your Mazda, if this happens to you, you're likely to walk away. In some old POS, you're dead.
  BTW, on mazda3revolution.com, look for the thread entitled "The Infotainment Project" under "2014+ Mazda 3 Skyactiv Audio & Electronics". It's a lot to digest but there's a lot of people working on hacking these systems, plus plenty of directions, scripts, etc.
101. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-08 15:25 · Score: 1
  
  This is my point, it isn't luck, it's awareness that prevents accidents.
  Bullshit.
  I don't care if you're Mario Andretti (and I guarantee you aren't). It doesn't matter how great a driver you are, because in many of those "easily prevented" accidents you look at, some moron is doing something stupid, and then running into another driver.
  Well actually they aren't. Those do happen but they are in the minority, and as a motorcycle rider who has been riding for 30 years and faces fuckwit drivers on their mobile phones, or old grannies with limited vision cutting me off nearly every day, I assure you that being aware of those around you is the greatest preventative measure to reducing accidents.
  
  BTW Mario Andretti skills are different from defensive driving skills. He was good as getting a car around a track quickly, but these are not the same skills required to avoid crashing your car, or avoid being run into in traffic.Yes some amount of crashes are out of your control, but the majority can be avoided with suitable awareness.
102. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Grishnakh · 2015-10-08 15:44 · Score: 1
  
  That still doesn't mean that ALL crashes can be avoided with awareness. Plus, are you at your 100% best every single time you drive, every day? You never have a bad day? You never, ever make a mistake?
103. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by Jack+Griffin · 2015-10-08 17:05 · Score: 1
  
  That still doesn't mean that ALL crashes can be avoided with awareness. Plus, are you at your 100% best every single time you drive, every day? You never have a bad day? You never, ever make a mistake?
  Never said they did. Ultimately it's risk management, and I'm comfortable that I don't need to spend more money on a safer vehicle, when even the unsafest car is still safer than my motorcycle.
  Out of interest do you wear a helmet when you drive? It would be safer, yet you probably don't do it. This is exactly the same logic.
104. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by tsa · 2015-10-10 16:42 · Score: 1
  
  And rightly so. There have been too many deaths due to people texting while driving already.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
105. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by tsa · 2015-10-10 16:47 · Score: 1
  
  I can switch ads off in /. because of my awesome karma. It's a feature that slashdot has had for many years now.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
106. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by tsa · 2015-10-10 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  Why not just look that up on your smartphone? You have that thing with you anyway.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
107. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by BronsCon · 2015-10-10 18:16 · Score: 1
  
  I could, or I could be compiling the list while on the phone with the tow company. Either way, having my infotainment system give me access to my vehicle's OBD-II data (and, running Android, I'd have access to Torque) would be useful; I wouldn't need another, externally-mounted device anymore. Honestly, I value the benefits Google could provide me from their device having access to that data (whether streamed to them or not) more than I worry about how they might use that data; if it ever comes out that they share the data with insurance providers or law enforcement I can always log in, delete my profile (there are no Google services that do not allow this, I see no reason why this would be any different) and disable the device. Until then (if ever), there's no reason not to use it.
  
  Seriously, what are they going to do if they know you do 90 on the freeway or your NOx emissions are nearing inspection limits? I have an Android phone and use Google Maps; if they care to know I do 90 on the freeway, they already know; and the worst they could do with my OBD-II data is alert me that I'm not gonna pass smog inspection this year without some maintenance.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
108. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by CauseBy · 2015-10-12 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  "Boo hoo. A company insists on considering product safety. I'm butthurt about it. Nanny freedom patriot something something profit."
109. Re:Why do they need ANY info? by CauseBy · 2015-10-12 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe we should wait to consider that until we have an alternative.
Dash Computers are Suboptimal by Bruce+Perens · 2015-10-06 08:33 · Score: 1

In 10 years, it will still be a fine car but the dash computer will be an antique. My car has bluetooth and a phone jack, and that will allow me to hook up the latest equipment to navigate and entertain me, for a long time, and replace it on my own schedule.

--
Bruce Perens.
1. Re:Dash Computers are Suboptimal by Bruce+Perens · 2015-10-06 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  I think the big problem is manufacturers using the radio GUI to replace all but the most essential knobs. All using their own implementation, of course. I have spent a lot of bucks on RAM mounts. I actually own this one, among others.
  
  --
  Bruce Perens.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-10-06 08:34 · Score: 1

I can neither confirm nor deny that I work the for the NSA. But I had worked for Google back in the day. The roasted duck and Mac & Cheese on Fridays was excellent.
Note to automakers by pllewis · 2015-10-06 08:38 · Score: 1

All I want is tell the automakers that I'm not changing my phone for my car to work correctly. That should be the case for anyone, especially for those in the tech community. All features/interactions between phone and car computer need to work regardless of the vendor. If not, I don't want your car.

Apple is notoriously poor at this. Just look at the Apple Watch, or unreleased APIs of iOS working with OSX for chat and phone calls.

Google is only marginally better. They're usually late with iOS support and it can be incomplete. It took how long to release iOS support for android wear? Plus, if I don't have a google account, I want to still get maps and services.

I don't want vendor lock-in is the point here. Amazing though that we don't have some sort of standards body out there that could help with these sorts of things.
Not acurate by vovin · 2015-10-06 08:39 · Score: 4, Informative

My information *may* be outdated as I did the work over a year ago.
Google and Apple both *want* a similar (small) set of data, neither actually *require* much of the data to operate. Car companies are really weird about providing the access (although the Head Unit either as a vendor, the common case, or the company itself, need the data anyway).
IIRC Google's version wants to know if you are in reverse, and compass heading. Apple will infer.
The biggest difference as an integrator for the systems is that Apple call audio used the same USB channel as entertainment / navigation audio.
Google's call audio requires the Bluetooth HFP 1.5 which most head units already support.
Each solution had it's own challenges, Apple with it's USB wackiness that severely the hardware options[1] and Google with the Bluetooth adding to the audio mux logic.
Personally I find it *MUCH* more likely that Porsche vendor has CarPlay(tm) working and has a USB hardware issue with using the same port for both systems and/or dropped the Bluetooth from the CarPlay(tm) head unit to save cost.
Basically most vendors had over a year longer to get CarPlay(tm) working before they had access to AndroidAuto but getting AndroidAuto working once you have done the work to get CarPlay(tm) to work was pretty trivial. As always getting things into production quality takes time and effort and for many of these head units it may only require a software update to get either/both systems working. In my initial prototype I supported the use case of AA for navigation and ACP for playing music handling phone calls [in part because my initial HFP work kinda stank, damn you Broadcom :-)].
[1] Original described as variation of USB-OTG but it really isn't ... any chip with hardware/firmware OTG is unlikely to work.
Re:Really apple was willing to pay more. by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:51 · Score: 1

Really apple was willing to pay more.
Prove it, or GTFO.
I don't believe this story by dafradu · 2015-10-06 08:51 · Score: 1

So Porsche is so concerned about our privacy that they refused to enable Android Auto? Why don't they let us choose? GM's MyLink supports both...
Re:cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:53 · Score: 1

cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago land.
It's seems like posted 55 (few areas at 60-65) have a real speed limit of 70-75
Wow, what slowpokes!

Down here in Indianapolis, the Cops routinely go at LEAST 90 in a 55. Seriously.
Re:What I'd Like To See by macs4all · 2015-10-06 08:56 · Score: 1

is things do one thing well. You know, that old UNIX tenet. It nicely extrapolates to life as well.
I'd really like to see a mobile device that is not tied to any ecosystem. I've rather grown tired of Apple, Google, and Microsoft sticking their noses where they don't belong. I really do hope Blackberry can make a comeback. I miss the relative privacy of a Blackberry.
I don't know about the rest of them, but leave Apple out of it, willya? They simply DON'T do that shit, and when they do, they at least give Users a nice, GUI way to turn it off.

Prove me wrong, or GTFO.
Re:My biggest fear by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2015-10-06 09:09 · Score: 1

How? Both companies are so rich and valuable the other doesn't have enough funds to buy out the other, let alone the stock premiums and regulatory costs involved.
I know this is very, very unlikely, but what if they decided to merge?

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Re:Isn't it obvious? by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-10-06 09:19 · Score: 1

I work for the taxpayers. Taxpayers are people, including corporations.
Re:Google claims NOT to collect throttle + temp da by ic3m4n1 · 2015-10-06 09:25 · Score: 1

*In version 0.1
Subject to terms changing further at Googles discretion. Just because they are so nice we should trust that they always will be when they have control over market and are in hard need to monetize it.
Not so Mild Irony by cant_get_a_good_nick · 2015-10-06 09:31 · Score: 1

Weren't the founders worried about Russia and data collection from the government? They've created away of collecting data about you across multiple devices and environments that the CIA/NSA/KGB/The Stasi do/would dream about. As indicated by the NSA trying to use Google cookies to track users. The additional irony of Google then being pissed that the NSA using those cookies to track. Hey only WE can track people across everything, not agents of an elected government.
(The last sentence is not saying NSA are choir boys in this, just that Google a company that 99.999999% of humans have no control over is tracking me with much greater efficiency than a government that i can conceivably vote out of office).
Re:Fools! by ic3m4n1 · 2015-10-06 09:32 · Score: 1

You do realize that data doesnt need to reach Google. It can very well be on your computer considering well its your data not some marketing companies.
Re:cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago by Joe_Dragon · 2015-10-06 09:51 · Score: 1

It's not just the cops they also let people go way over the limit as well.
A bit to much traffic to do 90 much at times in chicagoland some times going 15-20 is good.
my opinion by Anonymous Coward · 2015-10-06 10:07 · Score: 1

Having worked on early GPS navigation in the PocketPC days, I would have killed for speed and direction (i.e. forward or reverse gear). It might seem like a simple thing, but it can make a huge difference in initial prompting for navigation cues.
As for the rest, why *not* give access? Fast and Furious fans would get a kick out of it, and surely it opens up opportunities for things like, say, notifying central dispatch when one of the rental cars begins overheating. Instead, people will have to plug in a Bluetooth OBDII reader to get the same information, but with less standardization.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-10-06 10:09 · Score: 1

People pay taxes. Non-multinational corporations pay taxes. Hence, they are all taxpayers.
If you got crayons, I can draw a picture fore you.
I think I'll pass... by sd4f · 2015-10-06 10:20 · Score: 1

If this becomes the norm, I think I'll find the last decent car which doesn't have any of this data mining crap masquerading as an infotainment system, buy a few of them, and rotate among them as cars, hopefully to last until I can't drive anymore. It's good to see that Porsche didn't get suckered in, but seriously, this is getting ridiculous with the amount of data they want to know.
As for the connected car, well, I think the concept of a car has worked reasonably well for the last 100 years, maybe people can make apps for cars or something which is google's excuse for the data, but seriously, this 'innovation' is the google equivalent of razor blades; add more blades. I can't see much of an advantage just throwing 'smarts' into everything.
Yes and HNo by SuperKendall · 2015-10-06 10:36 · Score: 1

Exactly - people want to see all this data
Yes (well, some).
and have Google log/display it.
HELL NO.
Why do you think we (or anyone) want Google to log it? That is not needed, if I want it logged I would GREATLY prefer that be done by a local app of some kind, where I control the data from it directly.
I can imagine future politicians, where it's leaked exactly how many times the driver of his car went over 75MPH... as just one example why not everyone wants Google to log it.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Yes and HNo by Ksevio · 2015-10-06 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  To clarify - when I said "Google" I meant the android system in the car, not that the data should go to the Google cloud (though that would also be a good option if you could select which data).
Re:Isn't it obvious? by fisted · 2015-10-06 10:44 · Score: 1

Cross-thread whoosh?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
"Vendor lock in" vs "Targeted ads" by TapeCutter · 2015-10-06 10:52 · Score: 1

True, this "middle class joe" doesn't have a porsche or a smart phone, nor am I interested in what data my car can provide. However my mechanic is interested and it would be neat if he could pull my car's diagnostics with an off the shelf device rather than have to pay the manufacturer thru the nose for proprietary equipment and certifications. My car even has a sticker behind the visor proudly boasting that only approved Mazda dealers can install upgrades for the car's software, for my safety of course, nothing to do with their after market sales figures...

Google are also interested in monetising my car's data but in a different way, the people who buy my data cannot link it to me, selling it to a third party has no direct/indirect impact on me other than dictating who pays for the adverts I see, it doesn't add to the cost of maintaining my car, in fact it could help to reduce servicing costs.

Data (information) has intrinsic value, it is the fuel that has driven the technological explosion over the last century, it can be traded for cash or used as a tool for 'good' or 'evil'. When everybody has access to it, technological and cultural progress goes into hyperdrive and everyone has a better chance of "keeping the bastards honest". When it is in the hands of a few, human nature dictates it will be used to extract/deny resources from/to those who don't have access.

Disclaimer: If I swapped my Mazda 6 'Sports model' for a real sports car, I would definitely want it to have a geeky performance display on the dash. If the car had an open API, it might even inspire my artistic side to write my own display layer.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by nytes · 2015-10-06 11:16 · Score: 1

Is that you, Edward?

--
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
Re:Incorrect by Namarrgon · 2015-10-06 12:42 · Score: 1

Nor is a trope a "hard fact" as much as you wish it to be. Try offering actual evidence, if you want to claim the status of a fact.

--
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Re:What I'd Like To See by macs4all · 2015-10-06 14:17 · Score: 1

All the companies provide options.
Android doesn't work very well when you turn all the tracking off (ie: google now/voice commands). Microsoft hides the options and still sends some tracking home. Apple had their big fiasco sending all iphone WAP data home in plain text.
I wouldn't give anyone a free pass on this issue. Google is the only company that's main business model is based off of this data though.
All "fandom" aside, I really do think that Apple is the only one of the three that honestly isn't trying to actively data-rape it's Users.

And to set the record straight, Apple made a clean breast of the Location Tracking info's raison d'être, what was in it (cell and WiFi hotspots), what it was for (anonymous crowdsourced location data), how it was never sent outside of Apple without the User's express permission EVERY TIME, and the steps taken to improve the security (encryption, and the ending of backing up in iTunes) and reduce the size of the "Location" database stored on the device.

So, Apple's explanation "feels" like an honest description of something (crowdsourced location data) that a bunch of geeks would dream up to solve a problem (slow response when the USER asked for the current location of the Device). Or else why wouldn't it simply be a "bread crumb trail" of a SINGLE Location (the Device's current computed Lovation?), instead of a "tile's" worth of Location data of pretty-much everything BUT the Device???
Re:My biggest fear by shione · 2015-10-06 15:53 · Score: 1

The two are basically a duopoly and it is highly unlikely for a duopoly to merge. As well as the regulatory obstacles there is very little benefit for either of them to merge together.
volume adjusted to speed? the 12V line is enough! by Herve5 · 2015-10-06 18:37 · Score: 1

Abour 15 years ago I had a camper -an average European camper, based on a very robust Ford base, the only issue was the noise when driving.
I bought, at that time 15 years ago, a radio that simply detected the speed based on the variations in the 12V mains line, that visibly is modulated by the engine rate.
I thought there would be some settings to adjust, at least.
It worked out of the box. 15 years ago.
Without GPS, numeric car speed indication, or 'engine fluid temperature'.
That we need a numeric connection to the car to perform this is a lie. I know it. Not sure I convinced you, since I sold the camper since then and forgot the radioset name...
But I know it.

--
Herve S.
Openstreetmap doesn't read your mic ;-) by Herve5 · 2015-10-06 18:40 · Score: 1

Ideally, what it should do if you say 'no' is proposing to download Openstreetmap instead;-)
Preferably from the F-Droid repository.
But now, now. You get what you want...

--
Herve S.
Easy way round... by advocate_one · 2015-10-06 19:42 · Score: 1

Put it on it's own separate Canbus and feed it crap data... it should never be connected directly to the real bus.

--
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Google is not Apple by nospam007 · 2015-10-06 22:12 · Score: 1

Take a look at Google Earth, it already shows the speed of the cars on highways determined by the android phones of the drivers, this would just make it more precise and perhaps predict blockages.
Apple vs Google car. by WindBourne · 2015-10-06 23:16 · Score: 1

Apple is said to start their production line in 3-4 years. Is Google starting one earlier?

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You are the vendor, not the product by sjbe · 2015-10-07 01:27 · Score: 1

Hint: You are NOT a Google customer. You are Google's PRODUCT.
Not quite. Information about me is the product. If I were the product then that would be called slavery. I am the vendor and sole distributor of information about me. In a sense I am "selling" said data to Google in exchange for online services. Arguably this is a rather bad deal for me but I'm not the product - I'm the one selling the product. It just is that most people don't value data about themselves very highly.

Google's CUSTOMERS are INTERNET ADVERTISERS looking to strip mine your life for data.
Exactly. Google's customers want DATA about me. The data is the product. I just happen to be the source of said data and the only one that can "manufacture" actual true data about me.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by dave420 · 2015-10-07 01:37 · Score: 1

Or because they're developing an automotive computing system which is intended to be able to replace an entire dashboard should the market want. It needs this data to function properly. If it was just a dumb music player/gps system you'd have a point, but as it isn't, you don't have a point.
Re:Really apple was willing to pay more. by dave420 · 2015-10-07 01:42 · Score: 1

Did he hurt your wittle feewings? Awww poor boy. It's OK the nasty man is gone.
Re:Fools! by wardrich86 · 2015-10-07 01:45 · Score: 1

The article itself doesn't say that Google wants the data... Maybe Maybe my assumptions were wrong, but I assumed that Google was asking for their system to be able to probe deeper into the ECM and get access to other vehicle computers - in order to allow apps to use this data, where Apple just wants to know if the engine is on or not. I'm not sure that they're actually asking to phone this data home.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-10-07 03:08 · Score: 1

Ask Mitt Romney about that one. :)
Re:Really apple was willing to pay more. by macs4all · 2015-10-07 03:23 · Score: 1

Did he hurt your wittle feewings? Awww poor boy. It's OK the nasty man is gone.
So, let me get this straight: You, who (like me) put their Karma on the line (like me), are actually DEFENDING an Anonymous COWARD?

Yeah, ok.
Re:My biggest fear by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2015-10-07 03:29 · Score: 1

I know, I know....but what if they did? The odds against it are a trillion to one or more.
I'm just putting it out there as kind of a "what if" thing or a thought experiment.
I know it will probably never happen....but what if it did?
All hail our new Gapple Overlords!

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
WTF, Google! How about some working options?! by martinfb · 2015-10-07 09:23 · Score: 1

I can totally relate to the invasions by Google! And other apps! I went to install GasBuddy on my Droid, and it wanted access to GPS. Okay, that is fine; it makes sense - you need to know where I am to see what gas stations are nearby. Yet, when you also want access to my contacts, camera, and local files (like pics and audio), I DEFINITELY draw the line! WHY do you need that? How about installing an option to enable/disable any of those things. And, let us know what will not work if we disable anything.

--

Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Re:Isn't it obvious? by martinfb · 2015-10-07 09:25 · Score: 1

If Google wants the data, it's probably because the NSA wants the data.
NSA will likely get it anyway. Google is just an easy source!

--

Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Re:My biggest fear by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 10:53 · Score: 1

It'd be conflicts of interest all the way.
Apple serves the consumer, and puts restrictions on advertisers.
Google serves the advertisers, and farms user information to do so.
Re:My biggest fear by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2015-10-07 11:14 · Score: 1

It'd be conflicts of interest all the way.
I'm sure that some substantial cash payments to the right parties would allow this minor concern to be legislated away and/or ignored.

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Re:My biggest fear by BasilBrush · 2015-10-07 11:26 · Score: 1

No doubt. The point is that Apple wouldn't do it because of the conflicts.