You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
advertising purposes or given to the cops.

You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
couldn't establish privacy rights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4

It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at birth.

On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>
> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>
> It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at birth.
>
The chip wasn't invented when I was born.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:24:38 -0800, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

>On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>>
>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>>
>> It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at birth.
>>
>The chip wasn't invented when I was born.

That's what they want you to believe.

suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>>Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>>messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>>advertising purposes or given to the cops.

>>You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>>discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>>couldn't establish privacy rights.

>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4

>>It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at birth.

>The chip wasn't invented when I was born.

That's the chip talking.

On 11/14/2023 8:35 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>>> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>
>>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>>> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>
>>> It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at birth.
>
>> The chip wasn't invented when I was born.
>
> That's the chip talking.
>
Uh huh...

In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>
> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4

That's exactly why I have no interest in my car having any of the shiny
new computer/internet tech that all these new cars have and people seem
to love so much. It won't be long before you'll be legally mandated to
have your car spy on you and report your every move to the government.
They're already trying it in California with their "variable mileage
tax" proposal, which, in order to work, would require GPS tracking of
everywhere you drive with that information reported by your car via the
internet to the state.

I drive a 1998 Toyota 4Runner and it has none of that fancy Orwellian
shit in it and it never will. (And for being 25 years old, the Old Girl
still looks great, too. I had two people in the last week in random
locations come up to me and tell me how much they liked my ride. One
offered to buy her from me.)

In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>
> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
> couldn't establish privacy rights.

I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
until now.

It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
phone to pay because there's no in-person service.

On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
city.

When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".

Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head out
the window or something and when you get home, wait for these assholes
to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and then
walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned property. It's
mine now. And you're own company boss is on record saying I could drive
away at any time. So fuck off."

I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies come
and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old one
back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to release
the thing without paying. He's parked there several times since and has
been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to take it off, he
just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how frustrated these
people are to keep finding their device abandoned with no car attached
to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
>is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
>until now.

I haven't watched that one yet. Is there actually a parking violation or
is it flat out extortion?

>It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
>attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive.

There is a YouTube video series that I haven't watched called The
Lock-Picking Lawyer. He has videos demonstrating the method to remove
wheel-locking parking boots.

>They're
>internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
>have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
>kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
>old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
>the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
>phone to pay because there's no in-person service.

>On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
>essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
>drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
>release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
>that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
>city.

>When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
>defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
>to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".

Can't these auto owners file police reports? I'm sorry, but this sure as
hell sounds criminal.

>Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head out
>the window or something and when you get home, wait for these assholes
>to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
>GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
>it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and then
>walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned property. It's
>mine now. And you're own company boss is on record saying I could drive
>away at any time. So fuck off."

Hehehe

>I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
>windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies come
>and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old one
>back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to release
>the thing without paying. He's parked there several times since and has
>been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to take it off, he
>just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how frustrated these
>people are to keep finding their device abandoned with no car attached
>to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.

Marvelous

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:24:38 -0800
suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

> On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> > You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> > Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> > messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
> > for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
> >
> > You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> > discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
> > owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
> >
> > It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at
> > birth.
> The chip wasn't invented when I was born.

If memory serves, the transistor was invented in 1945. Google says the
microchip/integrated circuit was patented in 1959, although of course
the first integrated circuits were not particularly small and therefore
not amenable to implantation in humans; they only got to their present
tiny implantable size after decades of improvements. So, chances are
pretty good you don't a chip in you unless you are a lot younger than I
think you are ;-) (You've mentioned having had school age children but
I think that was some time in the past.)

--
Rhino

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
> > You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> > Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> > messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
> > for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
> >
> > You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> > discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
> > owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
> I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles",
> which is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my
> notice until now.
>
> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel,
> it attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off.
> You have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone,
> you're kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and
> found an old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called
> the number on the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did
> have a smart phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
>
> On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
> essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you
> to drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box
> after they release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475,
> but still, that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if
> issued by the city.
>
> When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company,
> he defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're
> free to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
>
> Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head
> out the window or something and when you get home, wait for these
> assholes to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
> GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
> it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and
> then walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned
> property. It's mine now. And you're own company boss is on record
> saying I could drive away at any time. So fuck off."
>
> I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
> windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies
> come and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old
> one back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to
> release the thing without paying. He's parked there several times
> since and has been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to
> take it off, he just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how
> frustrated these people are to keep finding their device abandoned
> with no car attached to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.

It would be great if the guy published instructions for how to remove
the barnacle. (Preferably without a need for exotic and expensive
tools!)

I was watching a video a couple of months back that showed a rather
exotic vehicle which had a hinged windshield so that the window could
be opened. (It was a Volvo vehicle designed for military use and the
idea was that the window could be opened to enable navigation in the
dark when driving in a convoy.) Anyone slapping a barnacle on THAT
vehicle would find it useless to do so since the driver could just open
the window and drive without his vision being obstructed.

I found the video again, much to my surprise:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qFBJY2GAc [25 minutes]
Mind you, driving with the windshield open would present certain
problems too, like bugs in your face. Motorcyclists know that
a full-coverage helmet would take care of that problem ;-) I don't know
if driving with an open windshield would be legal either assuming you
had such a vehicle. Still, it would be fun to try this if you had such
a vehicle, just to mess with the people that stuck the barnacle to your
windshield!

--
Rhino

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:24:38 -0800 suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com>:
>>On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>>>Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>>>messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
>>>for advertising purposes or given to the cops.

>>>You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>>>discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
>>>owner couldn't establish privacy rights.

>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4

>>>It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at
>>>birth.

>>The chip wasn't invented when I was born.

>If memory serves, the transistor was invented in 1945. Google says the
>microchip/integrated circuit was patented in 1959, although of course
>the first integrated circuits were not particularly small and therefore
>not amenable to implantation in humans; they only got to their present
>tiny implantable size after decades of improvements. So, chances are
>pretty good you don't a chip in you unless you are a lot younger than I
>think you are ;-) (You've mentioned having had school age children but
>I think that was some time in the past.)

The President's Analyst (1967)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyr0w1Q0szY

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>>
>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
>I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
>is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
>until now.

I saw that. Hopefully they will come down hard against the
company/person doing that work as the owner knows that it is against
the law but is doing it any way in the hopes of forcing the city
council to change the law.

>It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
>attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
>internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
>have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
>kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
>old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
>the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
>phone to pay because there's no in-person service.

Except if you have a shim that can get under the suction cups or if
you are willing to be a bit more destructive and use a drill bit to
free up the suction by drilling through the barnacle.
>
>On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
>essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
>drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
>release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
>that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
>city.
>
>When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
>defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
>to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
>
>Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head out
>the window or something and when you get home, wait for these assholes
>to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
>GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
>it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and then
>walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned property. It's
>mine now. And you're own company boss is on record saying I could drive
>away at any time. So fuck off."
>
>I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
>windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies come
>and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old one
>back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to release
>the thing without paying. He's parked there several times since and has
>been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to take it off, he
>just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how frustrated these
>people are to keep finding their device abandoned with no car attached
>to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:44:52 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>>. . .
>
>>I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
>>is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
>>until now.
>
>I haven't watched that one yet. Is there actually a parking violation or
>is it flat out extortion?

It's essentially extortion. What apparently happens is they have
someone watching the lot and as soon as your time is up they show up
and put the barnacle on. They had one woman say that she was just
about five minutes late and they had already barnacled her vehicle.
Which means she was being fined $125 for being five minutes late. As
many people brought the typical way this is handled in most parking
lots is that you are charged for the extra time and have to pay for
that (so it might be a dollar or two for that extra five minutes.)
Also there's the fact that this isn't being run by the city so the
company has limited ability to come after people for the $$ if they
manage to remove the barnacle.

>>It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
>>attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>>blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive.
>
>There is a YouTube video series that I haven't watched called The
>Lock-Picking Lawyer. He has videos demonstrating the method to remove
>wheel-locking parking boots.

There were a couple of means discussed in the comments of how to
remove the barnacle. I'm sure someone will end up posting videos of
how to do this if the company producing these things continues to get
business.

>>They're
>>internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
>>have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
>>kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
>>old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
>>the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
>>phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
>
>>On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
>>essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
>>drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
>>release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
>>that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
>>city.
>
>>When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
>>defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
>>to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
>
>Can't these auto owners file police reports? I'm sorry, but this sure as
>hell sounds criminal.

It's against the city rules as they explicitly disallow any device
that prevents the vehicle from being driven. The owner of the company
doesn't care as she says in a video so the question is going to be
will the city enforce their rules or will they continue to allow the
company to keep putting the barnacles on vehicles.

>>Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head out
>>the window or something and when you get home, wait for these assholes
>>to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
>>GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
>>it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and then
>>walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned property. It's
>>mine now. And you're own company boss is on record saying I could drive
>>away at any time. So fuck off."
>
>Hehehe
>
>>I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
>>windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies come
>>and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old one
>>back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to release
>>the thing without paying. He's parked there several times since and has
>>been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to take it off, he
>>just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how frustrated these
>>people are to keep finding their device abandoned with no car attached
>>to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.
>
>Marvelous

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:05:54 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800
>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>> > You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>> > Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>> > messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
>> > for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>> >
>> > You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>> > discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
>> > owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
>>
>> I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles",
>> which is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my
>> notice until now.
>>
>> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel,
>> it attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
>> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off.
>> You have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone,
>> you're kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and
>> found an old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called
>> the number on the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did
>> have a smart phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
>>
>> On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
>> essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you
>> to drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box
>> after they release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475,
>> but still, that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if
>> issued by the city.
>>
>> When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company,
>> he defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're
>> free to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
>>
>> Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head
>> out the window or something and when you get home, wait for these
>> assholes to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
>> GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
>> it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and
>> then walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned
>> property. It's mine now. And you're own company boss is on record
>> saying I could drive away at any time. So fuck off."
>>
>> I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
>> windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies
>> come and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old
>> one back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to
>> release the thing without paying. He's parked there several times
>> since and has been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to
>> take it off, he just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how
>> frustrated these people are to keep finding their device abandoned
>> with no car attached to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.
>
>It would be great if the guy published instructions for how to remove
>the barnacle. (Preferably without a need for exotic and expensive
>tools!)

They did in the comments. The easiest method was to run the defroster
for about fifteen minutes. Apparently that's enough to cause the
suction to be released.

>I was watching a video a couple of months back that showed a rather
>exotic vehicle which had a hinged windshield so that the window could
>be opened. (It was a Volvo vehicle designed for military use and the
>idea was that the window could be opened to enable navigation in the
>dark when driving in a convoy.) Anyone slapping a barnacle on THAT
>vehicle would find it useless to do so since the driver could just open
>the window and drive without his vision being obstructed.
>
>I found the video again, much to my surprise:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qFBJY2GAc [25 minutes]
>
>Mind you, driving with the windshield open would present certain
>problems too, like bugs in your face. Motorcyclists know that
>a full-coverage helmet would take care of that problem ;-) I don't know
>if driving with an open windshield would be legal either assuming you
>had such a vehicle. Still, it would be fun to try this if you had such
>a vehicle, just to mess with the people that stuck the barnacle to your
>windshield!

In article <20231114140554.00002094@example.com>,
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
> > "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> > > Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
> > > messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
> > > for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
> > >
> > > You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> > > discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
> > > owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
> >
> > I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles",
> > which is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my
> > notice until now.
> >
> > It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel,
> > it attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
> > blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
> > internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off.
> > You have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone,
> > you're kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and
> > found an old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called
> > the number on the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did
> > have a smart phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
> >
> > On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
> > essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you
> > to drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box
> > after they release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475,
> > but still, that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if
> > issued by the city.
> >
> > When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company,
> > he defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're
> > free to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
> >
> > Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head
> > out the window or something and when you get home, wait for these
> > assholes to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
> > GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
> > it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and
> > then walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned
> > property. It's mine now. And your own company boss is on record
> > saying I could drive away at any time. So fuck off."
> >
> > I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
> > windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies
> > come and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old
> > one back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to
> > release the thing without paying. He's parked there several times
> > since and has been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to
> > take it off, he just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how
> > frustrated these people are to keep finding their device abandoned
> > with no car attached to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.
>
> It would be great if the guy published instructions for how to remove
> the barnacle. (Preferably without a need for exotic and expensive
> tools!)
>
> I was watching a video a couple of months back that showed a rather
> exotic vehicle which had a hinged windshield so that the window could
> be opened. (It was a Volvo vehicle designed for military use and the
> idea was that the window could be opened to enable navigation in the
> dark when driving in a convoy.) Anyone slapping a barnacle on THAT
> vehicle would find it useless to do so since the driver could just open
> the window and drive without his vision being obstructed.

The presidential limousine has hi-def video cameras all over it, so when
a protester, for example, heaves a bucket of paint across the
windshield, expecting to disable the car by obstructing the driver's
view, the vehicle can still be driven via the cameras, which project
what's in front of the car onto the inside of the windshield in a
quasi-hologram. It's like the heads-up displays in fighter jets.

On 2023-11-14 19:25:33 +0000, shawn said:

> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>>> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>>>
>>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>>> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>>
>> I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
>> is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
>> until now.
>
> I saw that. Hopefully they will come down hard against the
> company/person doing that work as the owner knows that it is against
> the law but is doing it any way in the hopes of forcing the city
> council to change the law.
>
>> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
>> attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
>> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
>> have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
>> kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
>> old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
>> the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
>> phone to pay because there's no in-person service.

If someone can come put it on, then someone can some take it off again
.... pure and simple.

> Except if you have a shim that can get under the suction cups or if
> you are willing to be a bit more destructive and use a drill bit to
> free up the suction by drilling through the barnacle.

Or simply smash the windscreen.

>> On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
>> essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
>> drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
>> release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
>> that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
>> city.
>>
>> When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
>> defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
>> to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
>>
>> Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your head out
>> the window or something and when you get home, wait for these assholes
>> to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I mention they're
>> GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive away, they can track
>> it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car without permission and then
>> walked away and left it there. I consider that abandoned property. It's
>> mine now. And you're own company boss is on record saying I could drive
>> away at any time. So fuck off."
>>
>> I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
>> windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his buddies come
>> and remove his windshield and replace it, then they took the old one
>> back to their shop where they spent hours figuring out how to release
>> the thing without paying. He's parked there several times since and has
>> been barnacled every time and now that he knows how to take it off, he
>> just leaves it in the parking spot and imagines how frustrated these
>> people are to keep finding their device abandoned with no car attached
>> to it. Or hopefully stolen by random miscreants.

In article <uj0j12$1c6ug$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

> On 2023-11-14 19:25:33 +0000, shawn said:
>
> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> >> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
> >> attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
> >> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
> >> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
> >> have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
> >> kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
> >> old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
> >> the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
> >> phone to pay because there's no in-person service.

> > Except if you have a shim that can get under the suction cups or if
> > you are willing to be a bit more destructive and use a drill bit to
> > free up the suction by drilling through the barnacle.
>
> Or simply smash the windscreen.

Yeah, if you can get it replaced for less than the ridiculous $175
they're charging, then that's the way to go. Last time I had one
replaced it cost me $90 but that was with insurance footing part of the
bill.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>The presidential limousine has hi-def video cameras all over it, so when
>a protester, for example, heaves a bucket of paint across the
>windshield, expecting to disable the car by obstructing the driver's
>view, the vehicle can still be driven via the cameras, which project
>what's in front of the car onto the inside of the windshield in a
>quasi-hologram. It's like the heads-up displays in fighter jets.

I want one of those!

K.I.T.T. had anti-vandal countermeasures.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:58:20 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <uj0j12$1c6ug$1@dont-email.me>,
> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-14 19:25:33 +0000, shawn said:
>>
>> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> >> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
>> >> attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
>> >> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
>> >> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
>> >> have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
>> >> kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
>> >> old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
>> >> the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
>> >> phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
>
>> > Except if you have a shim that can get under the suction cups or if
>> > you are willing to be a bit more destructive and use a drill bit to
>> > free up the suction by drilling through the barnacle.
>>
>> Or simply smash the windscreen.
>
>Yeah, if you can get it replaced for less than the ridiculous $175
>they're charging, then that's the way to go. Last time I had one
>replaced it cost me $90 but that was with insurance footing part of the
>bill.

In the comments people said the standard rates most were paying were
around $200 without insurance.

In article <ndi7lilud046tlfuuvpktb9ajb5ng7gkci@4ax.com>,
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:44:52 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
> >BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>. . .
> >
> >>I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles", which
> >>is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped my notice
> >>until now.
> >
> >I haven't watched that one yet. Is there actually a parking violation or
> >is it flat out extortion?
>
> It's essentially extortion. What apparently happens is they have
> someone watching the lot and as soon as your time is up they show up
> and put the barnacle on. They had one woman say that she was just
> about five minutes late and they had already barnacled her vehicle.
> Which means she was being fined $125 for being five minutes late. As
> many people brought the typical way this is handled in most parking
> lots is that you are charged for the extra time and have to pay for
> that (so it might be a dollar or two for that extra five minutes.)
> Also there's the fact that this isn't being run by the city so the
> company has limited ability to come after people for the $$ if they
> manage to remove the barnacle.
>
> >>It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
> >>attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
> >>blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive.
> >
> >There is a YouTube video series that I haven't watched called The
> >Lock-Picking Lawyer. He has videos demonstrating the method to remove
> >wheel-locking parking boots.
>
> There were a couple of means discussed in the comments of how to
> remove the barnacle. I'm sure someone will end up posting videos of
> how to do this if the company producing these things continues to get
> business.
>
> >>They're
> >>internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
> >>have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
> >>kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
> >>old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
> >>the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
> >>phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
> >
> >>On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what is
> >>essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to coerce you to
> >>drive across town and return the damn thing to their drop box after they
> >>release it. If you do that, they refund $300 of the $475, but still,
> >>that's $175 for a parking ticket that would only be $25 if issued by the
> >>city.
> >
> >>When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle company, he
> >>defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not disabled. You're free
> >>to drive away at any time." With an implied "if you can".
> >
> >Can't these auto owners file police reports? I'm sorry, but this sure as
> >hell sounds criminal.
>
> It's against the city rules as they explicitly disallow any device
> that prevents the vehicle from being driven. The owner of the company
> doesn't care as she says in a video so the question is going to be
> will the city enforce their rules or will they continue to allow the
> company to keep putting the barnacles on vehicles.

I don't know why she's so nonchalant about it. If she's breaking the
law, she can be fined per incident and I'm sure the city will ensure the
fines for non-compliance are more than she makes barnacling the car.

And if she persists in violating the law, they can escalate it from
fines to arrest.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:13:19 -0000 (UTC)
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:24:38 -0800 suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com>:
> >>On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
> >>>You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
> >>>Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your
> >>>text messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then
> >>>be sold for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>
> >>>You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
> >>>discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
> >>>owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
>
> >>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>
> >>>It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at
> >>>birth.
>
> >>The chip wasn't invented when I was born.
>
> >If memory serves, the transistor was invented in 1945. Google says
> >the microchip/integrated circuit was patented in 1959, although of
> >course the first integrated circuits were not particularly small and
> >therefore not amenable to implantation in humans; they only got to
> >their present tiny implantable size after decades of improvements.
> >So, chances are pretty good you don't a chip in you unless you are a
> >lot younger than I think you are ;-) (You've mentioned having had
> >school age children but I think that was some time in the past.)
>
> The President's Analyst (1967)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyr0w1Q0szY

I'm thinking they may have taken a bit of dramatic license in
describing the amount of miniaturization possible in 1967....

--
Rhino

On 11/14/2023 10:06 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold for
>> advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>>
>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle owner
>> couldn't establish privacy rights.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>
> That's exactly why I have no interest in my car having any of the shiny
> new computer/internet tech that all these new cars have and people seem
> to love so much. It won't be long before you'll be legally mandated to
> have your car spy on you and report your every move to the government.
> They're already trying it in California with their "variable mileage
> tax" proposal, which, in order to work, would require GPS tracking of
> everywhere you drive with that information reported by your car via the
> internet to the state.
>
> I drive a 1998 Toyota 4Runner and it has none of that fancy Orwellian
> shit in it and it never will. (And for being 25 years old, the Old Girl
> still looks great, too. I had two people in the last week in random
> locations come up to me and tell me how much they liked my ride. One
> offered to buy her from me.)
>

It's not as large as the newer 4runners either. One parks next to me and
it's huge.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:39:01 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> In article <20231114140554.00002094@example.com>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800
> > BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <uj00pn$18rn0$1@dont-email.me>,
> > > "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car
> > > > via Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads
> > > > your text messages and contacts, looking for key words, that
> > > > can then be sold for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
> > > >
> > > > You can deny access to some things, but does it really work?
> > > > Lehto discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the
> > > > vehicle owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
> > >
> > > I'm watching a Lehto episode right now about "parking barnacles",
> > > which is a bit of Orwellian nonsense that had completely escaped
> > > my notice until now.
> > >
> > > It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your
> > > wheel, it attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade
> > > suction cups and blocks the driver's view, making it impossible
> > > to drive. They're internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY
> > > way to get them off. You have to pay via smart phone and if you
> > > don't have a smart phone, you're kinda screwed. The local news
> > > did an investigative report and found an old lady who didn't have
> > > a smart phone and when she called the number on the barnacle, she
> > > was told to find someone else who did have a smart phone to pay
> > > because there's no in-person service.
> > >
> > > On top of that, they charge $475 to release this device for what
> > > is essentially a parking ticket. $300 of it is just a way to
> > > coerce you to drive across town and return the damn thing to
> > > their drop box after they release it. If you do that, they refund
> > > $300 of the $475, but still, that's $175 for a parking ticket
> > > that would only be $25 if issued by the city.
> > >
> > > When the news reporter confronted the owner of the barnacle
> > > company, he defended his practice by saying, "Your car is not
> > > disabled. You're free to drive away at any time." With an implied
> > > "if you can".
> > >
> > > Just like Lehto, I'd take that as a challenge. Drive with your
> > > head out the window or something and when you get home, wait for
> > > these assholes to show up demanding their barnacle. (Did I
> > > mention they're GPS-equipped, too, so if you do manage to drive
> > > away, they can track it?) "Hey, you attached something to my car
> > > without permission and then walked away and left it there. I
> > > consider that abandoned property. It's mine now. And your own
> > > company boss is on record saying I could drive away at any time.
> > > So fuck off."
> > >
> > > I also read a story on Quora where one guy who happened to own a
> > > windshield replacement company got barnacled and he had his
> > > buddies come and remove his windshield and replace it, then they
> > > took the old one back to their shop where they spent hours
> > > figuring out how to release the thing without paying. He's parked
> > > there several times since and has been barnacled every time and
> > > now that he knows how to take it off, he just leaves it in the
> > > parking spot and imagines how frustrated these people are to keep
> > > finding their device abandoned with no car attached to it. Or
> > > hopefully stolen by random miscreants.
> >
> > It would be great if the guy published instructions for how to
> > remove the barnacle. (Preferably without a need for exotic and
> > expensive tools!)
> >
> > I was watching a video a couple of months back that showed a rather
> > exotic vehicle which had a hinged windshield so that the window
> > could be opened. (It was a Volvo vehicle designed for military use
> > and the idea was that the window could be opened to enable
> > navigation in the dark when driving in a convoy.) Anyone slapping a
> > barnacle on THAT vehicle would find it useless to do so since the
> > driver could just open the window and drive without his vision
> > being obstructed.
>
> The presidential limousine has hi-def video cameras all over it, so
> when a protester, for example, heaves a bucket of paint across the
> windshield, expecting to disable the car by obstructing the driver's
> view, the vehicle can still be driven via the cameras, which project
> what's in front of the car onto the inside of the windshield in a
> quasi-hologram. It's like the heads-up displays in fighter jets.

That would get the job done even if you didn't have the exotic Volvo
that is featured in the video I linked. Of course, it's probably a VERY
expensive thing to do to a vehicle so it's probably out of reach for
mere mortals....

--
Rhino

On 11/14/2023 10:45 AM, Rhino wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:24:38 -0800
> suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/2023 6:38 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> You know how tempting it is to connect your phone to your car via
>>> Bluetooth for hands-free communication? Your car downloads your text
>>> messages and contacts, looking for key words, that can then be sold
>>> for advertising purposes or given to the cops.
>>>
>>> You can deny access to some things, but does it really work? Lehto
>>> discusses some lawsuits that were dismissed because the vehicle
>>> owner couldn't establish privacy rights.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTn_i1PMd4
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter. We all had the chip implanted in our brain at
>>> birth.
>> The chip wasn't invented when I was born.
>
> If memory serves, the transistor was invented in 1945. Google says the
> microchip/integrated circuit was patented in 1959, although of course
> the first integrated circuits were not particularly small and therefore
> not amenable to implantation in humans; they only got to their present
> tiny implantable size after decades of improvements. So, chances are
> pretty good you don't a chip in you unless you are a lot younger than I
> think you are ;-) (You've mentioned having had school age children but
> I think that was some time in the past.)
>
Yeah, my oldest son has a high schooler. He's almost 45 and I was 28
when he was born.

I think we had a transistor radio in the early 60s. And my brother also
made a radio with a copper wire for an antenna. Only got the local
station 10 miles away and it was pretty staticky.

In article <idk7li9i3t4gmns3bl1v8rldegkqri0l3a@4ax.com>,
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:58:20 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <uj0j12$1c6ug$1@dont-email.me>,
> > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2023-11-14 19:25:33 +0000, shawn said:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:23:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> It's kind of like a car boot but instead of attaching to your wheel, it
> >> >> attaches to your windshield with industrial-grade suction cups and
> >> >> blocks the driver's view, making it impossible to drive. They're
> >> >> internet-enabled and, in fact, that's the ONLY way to get them off. You
> >> >> have to pay via smart phone and if you don't have a smart phone, you're
> >> >> kinda screwed. The local news did an investigative report and found an
> >> >> old lady who didn't have a smart phone and when she called the number on
> >> >> the barnacle, she was told to find someone else who did have a smart
> >> >> phone to pay because there's no in-person service.
> >
> >> > Except if you have a shim that can get under the suction cups or if
> >> > you are willing to be a bit more destructive and use a drill bit to
> >> > free up the suction by drilling through the barnacle.
> >>
> >> Or simply smash the windscreen.
> >
> >Yeah, if you can get it replaced for less than the ridiculous $175
> >they're charging, then that's the way to go. Last time I had one
> >replaced it cost me $90 but that was with insurance footing part of the
> >bill.
>
> In the comments people said the standard rates most were paying were
> around $200 without insurance.

It might be worth it to eat that extra $25 just to fuck with these
vultures.