Web Chat: OnStar Debunks Privacy Misconceptions
Privacy is a very important issue for consumers, and many have concerns about how the companies they interact with use and protect their personal information.
OnStar takes its subscribers’ concerns very seriously. We are committed to providing subscribers with safety and security, and our privacy policy support that focus. Recently, we’ve noticed conversations in the blogosphere about OnStar and privacy. Many of the conversations discuss misperceptions of our services and privacy policies.
We want to set the record straight.
Jane Speelman, OnStar’s Privacy & Compliance Officer is hosting a Web chat to talk about the privacy practices OnStar has put in place to ensure customer information is not used in a way that is inconsistent with the subscriber agreement. She will also talk about the common misperceptions about OnStar and privacy and why they are wrong.
The Web chat will take place, Thursday, November 12 from 2 –3 p.m. EST. Jane will try to answer as many questions as she can.
18 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Well, she didn’t address my main concern. The local cops where I live are like the stereotype control freaks who strut around with their thumbs behind their belt buckles. If they got a chance to stop a car engine without the driver’s consent they would certanly do it. – simply because they could. I realize GM would not readily hand over that capability but, in the future, they might not have a choice.
My concern is that law enforcement might be tempted to use the ability to stop a vehicle to enforce payment of speeding tickets, parking tickets, past due utility bills, child support, smoking in a public place, failure to file income tax returns on time, failing to return library books, etc.
Driving is a conditional privilege, not a right- which means they can do all the above, perfectly legally.
I realize GM would not readily hand over that capability but, in the future, they might not have a choice.
Believe me, if the possibility is there, our politicians and law enforcement community will figure out a way to use it to their advantage and our personal freedoms will only suffer.
Orwell’s “1984″ is getting closer and closer. The huge increase in surveillance cameras, unmanned aircraft orbiting overhead to monitor our every move, and now the ability to stop a car in its tracks from some “Master Control” will be too lucrative for our government not to grasp control of.
The possibility is also there that they are listening to you and using the GPS capability that is in 90% of cell phone products today to monitor your every move and listen to every word you are saying. I suggest you flush your cell phone down the toilet ASAP.
You are missing the point. I’m fully aware they can monitor cell phone calls, etc. There is nothing I can do about that so there is no point in fretting about it. What concerns me is them taking active control of my car.
Be afraid Chad, be very afraid.
By golly, your right David. I’d better start wearing my tin foil hat too.
Hello- commenting from Europe- Sweden 24th dec 09
I wrote yesterday a comment about Clive Hamilton´s “Orwelian discussion” and gave an example from my own life.
It seems that Fast Lane staff considered it as not appropriate,and that´s ok. But I would like to continue Hamilton´s perspective with another one: the high tech change makes autos better and better. Soon they will possibly be managed automatically by radar- autodriving a car. Is this orwelian too? Where goes the line between good and bad high tech applications in technology? And- as I´m a philosopher and social scientist: which is the implied view of man here in the new high tech applications. Good for a driver, driver´s family, society, ecological condition of the world..
Consider my some month´s research in ufology during -70´s. Take the scenarion that our reserch could solve the problem how to use the gravitation in our cartechnology. That is “flying cars”. Whatabout the climate change now-
does the humanity need this kind of tech as soon as possible. If so- are the high tech enterprises- as GM is- open to this kind of schumpeterian solutions, or will they first use the “old technology” to the maximum (oil- casoline using cars) to the last drop, before changing path? Unfortunately that could mean that the ecology- by huge amount of new cars in China, has ended the race by amount of pollution.
In such a kind of integrated perspective to the orwelian society- with both high tech-perspective, new view of man and reality (implied by the new paradigm of science- my lifework marginalised by current societies), social and ecological consequesces of the done or not evolved paths (first research,then in apps and high tech apps)- is really needed. I hope that GM – as a world leading company in this industry is really conscious of the future scenarios or those steps which would be needed when caring about the people and their future carusage in the meaning of win-win to all.. (checked up the staff of GM- it seems very bright and challenging with global sites and affiliated partners. I – a both thinker and entrepreneur- have fe. a radically different view of SAAB (one of GM:s big headaches today) and it´s reconstruction,with a concept not used by any so far… But I´m really alone here in Sweden- situation decribed in my former blog which seems to be not publischable by FastLane reporters.
At the same time “my SAAB- perspective” is only a one of my practical lines of company Vidorg paths.
As regards USA, I have even tried to come in into the Obama-team and help to evolve the Health Care- reformation/ industry/social solutions- partly because have tried it in vain here in Sweden.
It´s very interesting to follow the GM´s Saab- decisions and the implied values here: short time money, high tech- paths supposed, consultatant´s or partners preferred as bidders to Saab, etc.
Then- at the same time- USA and Swedish government´s perspectives: whats their perspectives to industries, social developement, letting global enterprises or consultant’s a plattform to play, not controlling to the latest dollar och crown the shorttime earnings.. By the way- if the financial markets had used my new M.O. (Management Option) application, my new 3-fold secure derivate instrument, the whole financial crises hadn´t happened at all- according to me. As nobody has cared,no expert on this apartment of science commented, I continue to believe in it, even if the perspective is really shumpeterian..
Lasse T. Laine, Uppsala, Sweden (so far)
Seriously, if they want to stop your car they have about 20 ways of doing it. As a law-abiding citizen why would they need to resort to using OnStar, Spike Strips, a PIT manuver, or anything else to stop your car? Chances are all they need to do is turn on their lights and you are going to pull over. If your local police are control freaks they aren’t going to bother with the hassle of OnStar to stop you if they feel like stopping you.
What are the odds cops will be in pursuit of a stolen car and need to shut it down? I would wager most cops have never been in that sort of scenario. GM is fixing something that isn’t broken and they are forcing something upon us with their usual arroagance.
I’m ok with the OnStar except the part about them taking over control of the car withoiut my consent. I can’t see any advantage in OnStar versus a GPS and cell phone.
Of course they have many ways. But wouldn’t you want to use the easiest — send a signal stopping a car dead in its tracks, all while sitting in the comfort of an air-conditioned “Law Enforcement Master Control?”
Why would they do it? Because they can!!!!! As Chad said, they are control freaks and they would get great delight in shutting someones car down. It would be more “fun” to them than the methods you listed. They would abuse the ability – especially while it was a novelty to them. I’m talking about cops that were promoted from being dog catchers. Before that, they were garbage collectors. They have all the intelligence of a door knob but they do love to demonstrate their authority. Now do you see why I don’t want that sort of power in their hands?
Others might find OnStar valuable but, to me, it is a useless gimmick. I would much rather gm spend the money on improving seals and gaskets so their engines wouldn’t leave puddles of oil on my driveway. Having to scrape and clean the gunk off is annoying and the resulting stains look embarrassingly red neck.
I’m over hearing laugh at this thread. GM has every right to do whatever they want with Onstar. Of course they must abide to certain privacy and security concerns as is necessary by law. But after all that has been said and done, it’s their product and if you want to use it then you have to abide by their rules.
it’s their product and if you want to use it then you have to abide by their rules.
And it’s our right to decide whether or not we want to buy it. I’ll stick with my cell phone and portable GPS.
Saw an OnStar ad on TV today where Howie Long was telling a prospective car buyer that OnStart was much better than a cell phone since the customer would probably be disoriented after a crash and unable to use his cellphone.
Question: Just how robust is OnStar and how likely is it to survive a crash? What are the chances OnStar will survive a high-speed crash and still be able to work? I’m sure you’ve done tests and know the answer, so please tell us.
I don’t know how robust the OnStar module is but I do know that it has it’s own internal battery so that even if the battery in the vehicle is destroyed or the power cables are severed the module can still place the call and the vehicle can be located. As far as the module taking a direct hit only the engineer that engineers the module could answer that.
Thanks David.
To: The engineer that designed the OnStar module
What’s the answer? How robust is the module and what are the chances it will survive a high-speed crash and be able to establish contact with OnStar “Master Control?”