Big bro's watching you.
Gee, that's just what we need. Every GM vehicle's movements tracked by a global corporation....is it just me or does this sound like a James Bond villian?
sounds more to me like a last attempt to not go bankrupt. theyre lossing all of their market to hyundai and kia. and their outdated line of suvs isnt going to be replaced til late 2006 early 2007
Lilliput; XPC/FLEX mobo; 1.7 ghz P4 Mobile;512 DDR; 160 gb HDD; opus 150; slot usb dvd-rw
My work log
@wizardPC: On most new GM vehicles, you can just pull a fuse to disable the OnStar. That, or disconnect the antenna. That's what the 19 year old crack heads that are stealing all the Escalade trucks are doing. From what I understand, it takes about 30 seconds for them to disable OnStar so they can't be tracked. Great theft deterrent.
Though off-topic a tad, I think it works exactly the opposite if you ask me. Any other high-end auto, a thief should be aware there may be Lo-Jack, etc installed. But most of the people with that have been sold OnStar as a "feature" for theft deterrance now believe that's all they need. So, as a thief, the crack-heads can be pretty comfortable that once they've disabled OnStar (trivial) there's not going to be a Lo-Jack leading the local constabulary to their garage.
Just my nickel's worth.. YMMV.
Yeah... they're just plummetting into bankrupcy...Originally Posted by Peoples
...after all, you can't run a company on billions in government contracts and subsidies alone.
Not just movement... don't forget:Originally Posted by wizardPC
OnStar can be used as a wiretap
The important point in this article, I think:
"The problem (the court had) with the surveillance was not based on privacy grounds at all," Sobel said. "It was more interfering with the contractual relationship between the service provider and the customer, to the point that the service was being interrupted. If the surveillance was done in a way that was seamless and undetectable, the court would have no problem with it."
It's use as wiretap was ruled illegal solely because during the operation of the tap, the OnStar emergency contact system becomes unusable to the vehicle operator (where you push the button and talk to the OnStar center). If they can find a way to tap without disabling the system... it's fine.
Regardless of whether its remote activation is legal or not, I'd rather not have a car with a built-in wiretap (and of course the remote tracking, remote locking, remote ignition disabling, etc.).
"This is the last time you will ever have to feel alone on our nation's roadways."
No joke.Originally Posted by mpattonm
It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you.