this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
402 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

48886 readers
1013 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello people, my family recently bought a Renault 5 e-tech. The car itself is great, but there are some aspects that creep me out, especially the driver-facing camera. We didn't actually know that such a camera existed before we bought the car, it was only mentioned as the car was given to us.

The cameras official purpose is to see, if you are tired and paying attention to the road, by some "AI magic", I suppose. You can also let it scan your face, so that you automatically get logged into your profile.

I personally think, that that is kinda creepy, especially as there is no visual indication if the camera is currently recording and no official way to disable the camera hardware-wise. When it is being coverd, the car immediately complains about it.

When talking to friends or family about it, I got one of two reactions: equal concern, or "nice feature actually", "what about the camera on your laptop?", "you are way too paranoid", "I have noting to hide; it is only me driving being recorded".

I have also seen such cameras in other cars, BYD for example.

What do you think, is this creepy or am I too paranoid? Does anyone know where the actual data is processed, on device or on some cloud server? Do you have any experience with such cameras? I couldn't really find any information about it on the internet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 96 points 19 hours ago (3 children)
  • Camera
  • Internet connectivity
  • Proprietary software

No device should have more than two of these things.

[–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 30 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

I don’t see why a vehicle needs to connect to the internet at all. Or have a screen whatsoever. I don’t understand why a car can’t just be a thing with a gear shift and a fucking steering wheel that drives from point A to point B

We're being sold this idea of a car being like, a mobile family home or comfort space away from home. But the thing is, cars before 2015-ish were actually kinda comfy. Now they look and feel like robots. Kinda sickening. They all look so fucking ugly too every car is the same ugly round van/SUV shape now.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

I don’t see why a vehicle needs to connect to the internet at all.

Remote start (ICE) or remote starting heater (EV, ICE with Webasto) is a nice feature. Ability to check the status of your doors (are they locked), windows (maybe you left them open because it was hot and then the rain sensor didn't close them), etc. All great features. Ability to track it is great if you have kids and let them drive, I guess - mine isn't that old yet.

It would be much nicer if you could route all of that to your HA server instead of the manufacturer's server though.

But the thing is, cars before 2015-ish were actually kinda comfy.

Is why I keep driving utterly depreciated formerly executive/luxury shitboxes! Okay, I had one 2019 Mercedes, best car I've ever owned, other than the privacy issues. But you can get 90% of the actual physical car features that car offered in a car manufactured before they started connecting 'em to the internet. Would only be missing the 9G-Tronic transmission and the super efficient engine that made it feel like I was driving for free.

Now my dream car is a 2010-2012 Range Rover (L322). First of the ones with the good 4.4 diesel engine and the extremely good ZF 8 speed transmission. Last of the ones with the sexy boxy body shape. Connectivity? GPS, radio, bluetooth (only for calls). No internet. Price? About 10-15k EUR for a decent one. Good luck finding a brand new car for less than 100k with the same comfort level and towing capacity. Maintenance costs? OK if you know how to wrench, literal bankruptcy material if you don't.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 7 points 16 hours ago

wherever there's money to be made, capitalism will inevitably enshitify it and there's A LOT of money to be had by cars with cameras and sensors that record your habits to report them to insurance industry to charge the maximum possible fees and to the police to keep track of your whereabouts.

making cars comfy and convenient (as well has making it the only viable means for travel) is the way people get lured into this mobile panopticon by choice and they pay for the privilege to do so.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 38 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

No device should have the third, ever.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I have an offline dashcam and it's fine. It does everything I need it to, and does nothing I don't want it to. It can't connect to the internet so it can't spy on me if it wanted to.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Maybe there's room for compromise, but there is absolutely zero reason to concede such things in advance. The baseline expectation is that every device should be running Free Software and fully respect its owner's property rights, full stop.

If you instead approach the issue with the casual attitude that "oh, proprietary isn't so bad if it doesn't connect to the internet" the compromise after negotiations ends up favoring proprietary tyrants way more than you would've been okay with.

[–] Dr_Vindaloo@lemmy.ml 2 points 14 hours ago

Love it, I'll be stealing this comment thanks.