OnStar reports location and speed data to the car manufacturer. Sometimes they will sell this data to insurance companies to raise your premium, as several news stores pointed out a few weeks ago. I couldn’t really find an advantage to OnStar, (I have my phone to call emergency services) so I disabled it by pulling it’s fuse.
For my 2019 bolt, it’s f31 in the instrument panel fuse box, just down and to the left of the steering wheel. The fuse box cover comes off when you pull it hard from the bottom.
I was able to find which fuse went to OnStar in the owners manual and labeled on the inside of the fuse box cover. You should be able to find it for your model car there too if it uses OnStar.
I did have the casualty of my speaker for calls and texts. I’m not able to use it right now. I’ll see if I can dig in and reconnect it somehow, but we’ll see.
Who knows that other into they’re snitching back to GM, or what they could do in the future, so I recommend disconnecting it. Good luck!
inb4 manufacturers start baking it into the fuel injection cpu, and spending (your) extra money with encryption to lock the “owner” out like modern phones
My cell phone doesn’t have a fuel injection cpu.
Pathetic, how old is your phone??? Like a thousand years or something???
Cadillac here. I just unscrew the cellular antenna from the onstar module before leaving the lot. Looks like the onstar module is less conveniently located for bolts (it’s under my rear seats, I think it’s behind your screen), but that’s a good way to avoid collateral damage to other things on the same fuse. Since it’s a separate antenna from the gps, I even still get navigation, just without map updates. It’s all the good of a cell jammer, with none of the prison or fines. For now.
Even better because without the antenna load, the transmitter may burn out.
For older cars, if the only “smart” thing you have is GPS, you should be fine since it only receives and doesn’t transmit.
So if they’re charging more for bad drivers, they’ll charge less for good drivers, right?
If one company raises rates on bad drivers and uses the difference to offer lower rates to other drivers, they’ll get more customers.
You should do stand-up, that was hilarious
I literally started typing “please don’t reply if it’s just some knee-jerk response” then decided it wasn’t necessary. Yet here we are.
The thing even some reporters who’re alarmed at this story like: usage-based insurance which does actually let people pay less if they’re provably safe. Safe, and/or low mileage. They also want drivers to be alerted when aggressive driving is detected to be given a chance to improve.
I think a program like that might be OK today for those who are very well informed about it. One day if every new car is web connected, I can imagine insurers trying to gouge anyone not in a driver monitoring program.
Such a privacy & liberty nightmare has a small silver lining I almost refuse to acknowledge: in a full-on Big Brother driving world, with human-expert-equivalent analysis of behavior, raging murderous drivers would certainly find it harder to do 100+ MPH with their lights off entering an active crosswalk while passing a schoolbus in the rain.
This turns out to be a bad thing. Enough people are uninformed or don’t care about their privacy that over time an option that doesn’t sell customer data loses customers and becomes more expensive and gets cancelled.
