The level of involvement here is going to largely depend on the vehicle and how many sensors/cameras and other crap the manufacturer shoved in the car. Something like a Tesla? The only viable way forward is to hack the onboard computers that collect and report the data, there’s just too many codependent systems.

Most other cars, the only cameras installed are ones that you can access, like reverse cameras, plus maybe one for Lane keep or something? Which isn’t facing the cabin, the only risk there is that someone will know that you’re driving on a road, and maybe get your location if they’re really good at Geo guesser, they get lucky with a road sign, or they have GPS info (which is more likely). Microphones, as far as I know the only cabin mic in most cars is for handsfree operation of phones and whatnot… Disabling that would ruin that functionality.

I’m sure there are cars that are more invasive on these fronts, but I dunno how much I’d want to bark up that tree.

For sensors, stuff like seat pressure sensors actually ties into SRS safety systems, so I’m not sure I’d want to mess with that. It could disable the passenger side airbag if the pressure switch is disabled… The driver side basically can’t be disabled, the car doesn’t go if there’s no driver, so even if the pressure switch is there and disabled, the SRS should still function. Belt sensors (to tell if the belts are fastened) all tie in here too.

A lot of the external sensors are either for adaptive cruise, driver awareness, or safety systems (like crash detection for SRS).

I’m just not sure going and unplugging a bunch of sensors is the way to go.

I would assume that the data collection would come from the CANbus, so it can operate without interfering with the functions of the car, or from the BCM/ECU or other various computers around the car directly.

If the monitoring device is independent of other systems, either remove it, or sabotage the connection between it and the CANbus. Should cover most of the data being collected.

This is a good point. I’ve been mulling around with the idea of building an EV from the chassis of a car I’ve liked since the first time I set eyes on it. The Pontiac Fiero. Specifically the 86-88 GT.

It just looks like a wicked fun car and with the power of an EV driving it, then it probably is.

I don’t have the space, money, or time, for a project car like that, but if I ever do, then that’s definitely on a short list of possibilities. My only real concern is with insurance. I’ll for sure be doing everything I can to bring the safety standards up to something modern (air bags, etc), and to reinforce the frame and make sure everything is copacetic, but I don’t think insurance will care, they’ll see an 80’s era vehicle, that has been heavily modified…

I dunno. I’ll make that call when I get there. The only real “new” features I care about are adaptive cruise, and Android auto/Apple car play… Everything else can be very bare bones… I have a very short list of things I care about beyond that, almost all of which were standard in some level of trim for the original car.

The vehicle has standard GM mounting points for the engine, same as any 3.4-3.8 V6 supercharged or NA engine from that era, so I’m sure some EV conversion kit will fit into the frame with little if any modifications needed.

Worth considering at least.

This stuff is why I’m apprehensive of buying anything remotely new.

The problem is, I also don’t want to burn prehistoric forests to travel.

So this sits in opposition to the fact that I want to travel around using the light from the sun as my primary energy source.

For those that can’t read between the lines, I want an EV, that I can charge by solar.

I am also aware of the slate truck. I have thoughts on it, but it’s worthy of consideration.

You could just pull out the LTE/IoT module, and disconnect the service…

Whether that will have major down sides for the usability of the vehicle is the big question.

Not yet.

As a network guy: Ethernet over power lines can be fine, but you basically need to be an electrician, and have a working knowledge of how powerline Ethernet works before you can get there.

Even if you do, or stumble into a working setup by accident, you can absolutely end up with all kinds of bad things happening because power lines are notoriously bad with crosstalk and EMI, both on the wire and emitted from it.

If you absolutely cannot do rj45/Ethernet runs, and WiFi isn’t viable for whatever reason (or even if it is), look into MoCA. Thank me later.

It won’t cost you any more than powerline, and you’ll get a cleaner signal, more consistent performance, and overall a better experience.

In order of preference, I prefer the following connection options:

• fiber
• Ethernet
• MoCA
• Wi-Fi
• powerline

Fiber, not because it’s faster or better (there are many ways it’s actually worse than Ethernet), but because it’s almost impossible to interfere with, unless someone physically disconnects the cable (or breaks/cuts it). As long as the line is protected from damage, it will give the most consistent performance.

Ethernet, more robust than fiber in terms of physical disability, can be faster at propagating data (the time it takes to get from one end of the cable to the other), but only works over relatively short runs (100m or less, by spec), and it’s susceptible to alien interference and crosstalk. However, it is far more rugged than fiber.

MoCA is half duplex but shares a lot of the benefits of Ethernet. The main improvement here is that coax is commonly present in most homes already, while Ethernet is relatively uncommon in homes, so many homes are already wired in a way that works with MoCA.

Wi-Fi is also half duplex, it can go faster than Ethernet under the right conditions (which are almost impossible to achieve in real world conditions). Propagation is as fast as Ethernet but it has more overhead, and it is much more prone to interference from other Wi-Fi networks or other things operating on the same, unlicensed, bands.

Powerline should only be considered if all of the other options are disqualified for some reason.

Also, anyone using wifi extenders (not talking about mesh or anything, just actual Wi-Fi extenders), should probably not be doing that. Wi-Fi extenders are often just retransmitting the packets on the same wifi channel, which dramatically cuts the available bandwidth. You’ll end up with a stronger connection, but a much slower one.

Thank you for coming to my Ted talk.