We Finance! Le 4x4 Leather Roof Nav Bose Non Smoker No Accident Carfax Certified on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS: High numbers of drivers treat partially automated cars as fully self-driving

WASHINGTON — Drivers using advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot or General Motors Super Cruise often treat their vehicles as fully self-driving despite warnings, a new study has found. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an industry funded group that prods automakers to make safer vehicles, said on Tuesday a survey found regular users of Super Cruise, Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist and Tesla Autopilot "said they were more likely to perform non-driving-related activities like eating or texting while using their partial automation systems than while driving unassisted." The IIHS study of 600 active users found 53% of Super Cruise, 42% of Autopilot and 12% of ProPILOT Assist owners "said that they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving." About 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise — two systems with lockout features for failing to pay attention — reported systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate. "The big-picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technologyÂ’s limits," said IIHS President David Harkey. The study comes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is scrutinizing Autopilot crashes. Since 2016, the NHTSA has opened 37 special investigations involving 18 deaths in crashes involving Tesla vehicles and where systems like Autopilot were suspected of use. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Tesla says Autopilot does not make vehicles autonomous and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over. GM, which in August said owners could use Super Cruise on 400,000 miles (643,740 km) of North American roads and plans to offer Super Cruise on 22 models by the end of 2023, did not immediately comment. IIHS said advertisements for Super Cruise focus on hands-free capabilities while Autopilot evokes the name used in passenger airplanes and "implies TeslaÂ’s system is more capable than it really is." IIHS in contrast noted ProPILOT Assist "suggests that itÂ’s an assistance feature, rather than a replacement for the driver." NHTSA and automakers say none of the systems make vehicles autonomous. Nissan said its name "is clearly communicating ProPILOT Assist as a system to aid the driver, and it requires hands-on operation.

Automakers can, and do, use your private information however they want

The first paragraph of Mozilla’s *Privacy Not Included" buyerÂ’s guide about car privacy issues is worth repeating here: “Ah, the wind in your hair, the open road ahead, and not a care in the world Â… except all the trackers, cameras, microphones, and sensors capturing your every move. Ugh. Modern cars are a privacy nightmare.” “Ugh” may be an understatement. The crux of the matter is control: The nonprofit Mozilla Foundation has found that vehicle manufacturers have collected tons of “private” data from vehicle operators, thanks to the proliferation of sensors and cameras and smartphones connected in and to cars. In its report, Mozilla found that 25 car brands all failed the consumer privacy tests it carried out. Its research found that 84 percent of car companies review, share or sell data collected from car owners, and that the information was used for reasons unrelated to the operation of a vehicle or to a car brandÂ’s relationship with its owners. And beyond that, the report says that many companies — more than half — “say they can share your information with the government or law enforcement in response to a 'request.' Not a high bar court order, but something as easy as an 'informal request.'” Some other points made by the foundation: — Six car companies can collect intimate information, including a driverÂ’s medical information and genetic information. Plus info about how fast a person drives and the songs he listens to in the car. — Nissan earned its second-to-last spot (Tesla, not surprisingly, was worst) “for collecting some of the creepiest categories of data we have ever seen": In an apparent attack of full disclosure, Nissan said that it can share “inferences” drawn from the data to create profiles “reflecting the consumerÂ’s preferences, characteristics, psychological trends, predispositions, behavior, attitudes, intelligence, abilities, and aptitudes.” It also collects information about “sexual activity.” It's not clear how they can do that, but in their privacy notice they say they could. Not to be outdone, the report says, “Kia also mentions they can collect information about your 'sex life' in their privacy policy.” — Only two of the 25 brands reviewed, Renault and Dacia, stated that drivers had the right to delete their personal data. The brands are headquartered in Europe, where consumers are protected by General Data Protection Regulation privacy laws.

Nissan GT-R takes a bloody whack at supercar rivals in fake ads

A big part of what makes a supercar super is how it makes you feel, but the performance stats and bragging rights are undeniably a big part of the equation as well. Which means you can't ignore the fact that, even with its price ever escalating, the Nissan GT-R makes minced meat out of European exotics costing twice or three times as much.
That's the inspiration for this trio of fake ads from photographer Tim Kent. In this mock campaign, Kent has depicted the GT-R as a butcher's knife and the European exotics as pieces of slaughtered meat. Ferrari is symbolized by a package of horse meat, Porsche by a pack of sausages and Lamborghini as a pair of, um... "prairie oysters".
Of course the ads are never going to run anywhere, and if you're squeamish (or vegetarian) we wouldn't suggest looking at them in close proximity to your lunch. But we have to admit they're creative, and effective.