Can I disable all data collection from my vehicle?
Rivian’s new option to disable all internet connectivity in its vehicles has reignited concern over data collection in modern cars, which Mozilla and regulators have flagged as some of the worst products for privacy. Commenters welcome any official way to shut off telemetry, but criticize that doing so disables features like navigation, lane-keeping assistance, and over‑the‑air safety updates, framing it as a forced trade‑off between privacy and functionality. The thread broadens into worries about remote control, resale of location data, regulatory gaps—especially for EVs—and calls for hardware kill switches or truly offline vehicle designs rather than software toggles with dark‑pattern side effects.
Overall reaction to Rivian’s “disable connectivity” option
- Many see this as unusually user‑respecting for a modern carmaker and a potential reason to consider Rivian.
- Others view it as mostly PR: still inconvenient (service appointment in most regions), and bundled with loss of useful features.
- Comparison is made to software with global “disable AI” toggles: seen as a similar class of user‑respecting setting, but late and partially motivated by backlash.
Privacy vs. connectivity and data collection
- Strong distrust of automotive telemetry: multiple car brands have been caught selling or misusing location and driving data.
- Mozilla’s review of car privacy and examples like “sex life” and “genetic information” in policies are cited as evidence of extreme overreach.
- Several commenters stress that what people really want is to stop collection and retention, not all connectivity or functionality.
- Some argue most buyers don’t care, or see personalized services as fair trade for data.
Safety, emergencies, and remote control
- OnStar‑style crash response is praised by some, who credit it with helping after serious accidents.
- Others counter that phones now provide crash detection, though reliability and in‑crash usability are disputed.
- Concerns about remote disablement of vehicles (by OEMs, governments, or attackers) recur, including hypotheticals about national security and mass disruption.
Lane keeping, navigation, and disabled features
- Rivian’s lane keeping and “highway assist” reportedly depend on up‑to‑date maps / geofencing; disabling connectivity disables these.
- Some see this as a genuine technical constraint for their current implementation; others call it a dark pattern to punish opting out.
- Many find lane keeping annoying or unsafe and consider its loss a bonus; others like it when tuned gently.
- Frustration that navigation and basic safety updates require always‑online systems instead of offline maps and dealer/Wi‑Fi updates.
Hardware workarounds and older/“dumb” cars
- Multiple anecdotes about physically disconnecting telematics modules or antennas (OnStar, Toyota, VW) and using harness kits.
- Some advocate for RF kill‑switches, relays, or simply replacing antennas with resistive loads.
- A sizable group prefers pre‑connectivity cars or low‑tech EVs, viewing modern “computers on wheels” as insecure, over‑complicated, and not truly owner‑controlled.
Regulation, geography, and uneven controls
- Canadian users reportedly get an in‑car toggle; others must visit service, which is widely attributed to stricter local rules.
- Commenters draw parallels with how software and OS vendors only honor privacy‑friendly defaults where regulation forces them.