<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi everyone, I’m a reporter who has covered the auto industry and transportation in general. The MA ballot measure is a right to repair issue masquerading as a data privacy issue (although I’d argue the two are increasingly overlapping, especially in the auto industry). The auto industry’s lobbyists have put out <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj4ayw/auto-industry-tv-ads-claim-right-to-repair-benefits-sexual-predators" class="">some truly gross ads</a> that are nothing more than cheap scare tactics. <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The privacy argument is fundamentally based on the idea that the existing law, which requires hard-wiring into the car to read the data, is safe but if that same information is transmitted wirelessly it is vulnerable to hackers. Considering the fact most of us conduct our digital existence via wireless devices in a largely safe manner, this is an absurd argument on its face. <div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Furthermore, the auto industry is in no position to take the high ground on data privacy considering the industry’s standing practice of hoovering up data from new vehicles and selling it onto third parties without customer awareness (or, I would argue, consent, but that’s another story).The Washington Post did a great investigation into this last year: <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/17/what-does-your-car-know-about-you-we-hacked-chevy-find-out/" class="">https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/17/what-does-your-car-know-about-you-we-hacked-chevy-find-out/</a></div></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Hope this helps alleviate some confusion.</div></body></html>