Ford's plan to turn the inside of your car into one big eavesdropping, ad-spewing smartphone



Be careful what you say while driving — your car may be listening.

Automaker Ford has recently applied for a patent for what it calls the“In-Vehicle Advertisement Presentation System.”

If this doesn’t anger you, wait till you're bombarded with texts, messages on your center screen, and more garbage emails.

This technology uses in-car microphones to listen to passengers’ conversations and display targeted advertisements. It can also analyze voice commands and navigation data to serve relevant ads, like promoting local businesses or services.

This is no doubt welcome news for those of us who can't get enough of billboards — or those of us who've always wished our vehicles could invade our privacy as much as our smartphones do.

The Ford patent is just one of the ways automakers are exploring ways to monetize user data — a sign that the days of the automobile as a sanctuary for private conversations are coming to a close.

But the Ford Global Technologies patent is particularly invasive, demonstrating insidious “systems and methods” to bombard you with personalized ads.

Not only would the new technology be able to listen to conversations, it would also capture and analyze data such as vehicle location, speed, and traffic conditions.

The system would also use information on the driver’s destination and location history to predict what kind and what length ads to show them.

Listening to passengers' conversations would also help the company learn how they react to the ads and the best times to run them through audio and human-machine interface systems installed in the car.

The application also mentions using historical user data and third-party app information to refine ad targeting.

Ford has shrugged off any privacy concerns.

"Submitting patent applications is a normal part of any strong business as the process protects new ideas and helps us build a robust portfolio of intellectual property," a Ford spokesperson told the Record. "The ideas described within a patent application should not be viewed as an indication of our business or product plans."

In other words: We're not really doing it ... and it's good that we're doing it.

In a follow-up statement, Ford said it "will always put the customer first in the decision-making behind the development and marketing of new products and services."

The patent application does not offer specifics regarding data-protection measures, likely adding to the unease expressed by privacy advocates.

While such a system would rely heavily on data, the patent doesn’t show the collected data would be protected. Nevertheless, as with many issued patents, the released document doesn’t guarantee that the invention will be implemented in the future.

It also should be noted that auto manufacturers have been found to sell data about drivers' habits behind the wheel to auto insurance companies, which is then used to set insurance rates. This suggests that they view user data as another revenue stream to market to interested parties other than advertisers.

If this doesn’t anger you, wait till you're bombarded with texts, messages on your center screen, and more garbage emails.

Ford has filed other patent applications that have raised privacy concerns. One recent example is a patent for "Systems and Methods for Detecting Speeding Violations." We have covered this on our channel.

And another controversial patent, which Ford later abandoned after widespread criticism, proposed a system for repossessing vehicles from owners who had missed payments. The system would either direct self-driving cars to repossession lots or disable standard vehicles by locking their steering wheels, brakes, and air conditioning.

For more on this, see the video below:

Drive carefully — your car is watching



It's coming from inside the car!

I've told you about the AI-enabled cameras that can tell if you're speeding — or on your phone. Now, car manufacturers are joining the assault on your privacy.

'Our investigation revealed that General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy and broke the law. We will hold them accountable.'

Take Ford, for example. The iconic American company recently filed a not-so-American patent for technology that would allow a car to snitch on drivers.

Entitled "Systems and Methods for Detecting Speeding Violations" — not quite as catchy as "Built Ford Tough" — the patent filing details a system that would use vehicles' cameras and sensors to detect speeding motorists and report them to authorities.

The filing includes basic sketches and flowcharts illustrating how this technology senses speed violations, activates cameras to capture images, and transmits data to nearby "pursuit vehicles" or logs it to a server. The captured data, including speed, GPS location, and clear imagery or video, can then be sent to authorities for potential action.

According to Ford, it is developing this technology for police cars. In other words, don't worry: This invasive surveillance tech will be exclusively in the hands of the state.

And I'm sure the company would never think of adapting it so your own car can inform any nearby police that they should pull you over.

Then there's GM.

Did you know the company's so concerned about empowering you to keep your data secure that it just consolidated five different lengthy privacy statements into one disclosure document?

Talk about putting the customer first! Yeah, a massive lawsuit and widespread public backlash have a way of encouraging that.

Last month, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit on behalf of the state against GM, accusing the automaker of installing technology on more than 14 million vehicles to collect data about drivers, which it then sold to insurers and other companies without drivers’ consent.

The suit contends that the data was used to compile “Driving Scores” assessing whether more than 1.8 million Texas drivers had “bad” habits such as speeding, braking too fast, steering too sharply into turns, not using seatbelts, and driving late at night. Insurers could then use the data when deciding whether to raise premiums, cancel policies, or deny coverage.

The technology was allegedly installed on most GM vehicles starting with the 2015 model year. Paxton said GM’s practice was for dealers to make unwitting consumers who had just completed the stressful buying and leasing process believe that enrolling in its OnStar diagnostic products, which collected the data, was mandatory.

“Companies are using invasive technology to violate the rights of our citizens in unthinkable ways,” Paxton said in a statement. “Our investigation revealed that General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy and broke the law. We will hold them accountable.”

This isn't the first time Texas has stood up for its drivers. In 2019 Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill to ban red-light cameras, two years after KXAN-NBC in Austin, Texas, reported that almost all cities with red-light cameras had illegally issued traffic tickets.

Their investigation also found that drivers paid the city of Austin over $7 million in fines since the cameras were installed, and cities in Texas made over $500 million from the cameras since 2007.

Blue Cities Like Philadelphia Feeds Citizens’ Private Data To Democrat Vote-Harvesting Outfit

Philadelphia has collected personal citizen information for years through a company now instructing Democrat get-out-the-vote foot soldiers.

How Gambling Explains Our Modern, Complex World

Nate Silver’s new book, On the Edge, uses poker and sports betting to help explain the risks of crypto, AI, and other complicated new ideas.

Is your car spying on you? Here's how to check



At least eight carmakers in the U.S. have admitted they would backtrack on a voluntary privacy agreement and turn over personal customer data to government and police, prompting calls for an investigation.

Automotive News reports 19 carmakers had voluntarily signed up for the Consumer Privacy Protection Principles in 2014 — standards that would require U.S government agencies (including police) to obtain a warrant or court order to access customer location data.

However, eight automakers misled customers about giving driver data to police, and now U.S. lawmakers are raising questions about whether automakers can be held to account for departing from promises made about user privacy.

So who is giving your information to others? Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, Volkswagen, BMW, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, and Kia would turn over the data if a subpoena was produced — in violation of the standards they signed up for. More smoke and mirrors when it comes to your privacy.

These car companies are following the agreement they signed: General Motors, Honda, Ford, Stellantis, and Tesla require a warrant for location data, unless it is an emergency or customer consent was provided. Tesla is also the only brand to notify its customers of legal demands.

This has not only raised concerns about what other privacy promises carmakers have made that they won’t keep but has led two U.S. senators to call for the companies to be investigated by the Federal Trade Commission.

“Automakers have not only kept consumers in the dark regarding their actual practices, but multiple companies misled consumers for over a decade by failing to honor the industry’s own voluntary privacy principles,” said Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) in a letter to the FTC.

“Vehicle location data can be used to identify Americans who have travelled to seek an abortion in another state, attended protests, support groups for alcohol, drug, and other types of addiction, or identify those of particular faiths, as revealed through trips to places of worship.”

Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, and Kia all defended their practices, while the Alliance for Automotive Innovation — a lobby group for the car industry — claimed government agencies only request location information when there is clear danger to an individual.

“Vehicle location information is only provided to law enforcement under specific and limited circumstances, such as when the automaker is provided a warrant or court order or in situations where there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to an individual,” an AAI spokesperson told Automotive News.

The calls for an investigation into the data-sharing habits of carmakers comes after General Motors ended its partnerships with two major data brokers, following accusations of sharing information on drivers without their consent.

In March, the New York Times published an in-depth investigation about a Chevrolet Bolt owner who had been quoted a significantly higher insurance renewal premium, later discovering his driving data was being sold to insurance firms by data broker LexisNexis.

This was followed by a second report, detailing a proposed class action lawsuit put forward by a Cadillac XT6 owner who claimed he was denied insurance by seven companies on account of his LexisNexis driving report provided to the firms without his knowledge.

Both of the vehicles were equipped with OnStar, GM’s connected services brand, which gathered data used by LexisNexis.

In the wake of the reports, General Motors subsequently ended its partnership with both LexisNexis and Verisk, a similar company that also sold driving data to insurance companies.

According to the New York Times, an internal document circulated within General Motors showed more than 8 million vehicles were actively supplying data through OnStar’s Smart Driver program as of 2022.

Here's how to find out what your car is revealing about you:

  • See the data your car is capable of collecting with this tool.
  • Check your connected car app, if you use one, to see if you are enrolled in one of these programs.
  • Do an online search for “privacy request form” alongside the name of your vehicle’s manufacturer. There should be instructions on how to request information your car company has about you.
  • Request your LexisNexis report.
  • Request your Verisk report.

Remember, you own your data, not these companies. Just because they make the software doesn’t mean they get to control what happens to your information. The problem is that you sign away your ownership when you use the systems. Keep an eye out for opt-out options and support government bills that protect your privacy.

Prolifers Sue Indiana For Records That Reveal Abortionist Atrocities

‘This isn’t about protecting women. This is about protecting dangerous abortion providers from public scrutiny and consequences for illegal activity.’

Stalin Would Have Killed For The FISA Reform Congress Just Passed

Stalin didn't need warrants, but he would have wished for the U.S. government’s ability to buy American citizens' data from data brokers.

Leftists Who Insisted Covid Health Care Was ‘Racist’ Test Positive For Confirmation Bias

The view that systemic racism contributed to Covid-19 misery continues to hold sway in medical articles today — but it's false.

Four Years Later, Indiana Attorney General Corrects Governor’s Inflated Covid Data

The Indiana Department of Health overreported Covid-19 infections by a factor of six in 2020, says Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita.