As someone who got into a rollover accident which ended with my car upside down on a freeway, hearing only the onstar person talking to me while half conscious, this is sad.

I do distinctely remember strongly disliking the user agreement I signed for the "internet connected" features of the car when I bought it. 100% rubbed me the wrong way and I couldn't' find a way to opt out, and I wasn't so motivated to physically remove it from my new car. Thankfully.

Shouldn't have to trade privacy for safety.

There's absolutely no reason an emergency e-call system needs to connect via the car systems such as infotainment. It could be a standalone module that does its own thing regardless of whether the car is permanently disconnected from everywhere. Probably should too, given its nature. And not just could: there are aftermarket e-call systems that do not integrate beyond requiring 12V supply.

This is how cars used to be made. Features were standalone modules: there could be some bus traffic about optional data (wiper module with rain sensor could broadcast that it's raining and body control module could hear that and could be configured to close windows when raining) but they weren't strictly integrated in any meaningful capacity. You could change the radio unit to whatever you liked: if you were lucky you could get one that can actually understand what the other modules in the car were saying and show some non-enterntainment info on its screen as well. Navigation used to be a standalone system that had GPS receiver but nothing else in the car couldn't necessarily tap into the location data.

SUre, it meant some more wires and maybe the features had disconnects because they weren't aware of each other that much but all in all that was a good thing. It kept everything simple, isolated and repairable. Now because of more integration the modules need to know who they're talking to which leads to bizarre things like having to code in new headlights and pair them with other modules or they won't be recognized and just stay off.

>Shouldn't have to trade privacy for safety.

You shouldn't have to, and yet...

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/01/...

> As someone who got into a rollover accident which ended with my car upside down on a freeway, hearing only the onstar person talking to me while half conscious, this is sad.

My phone does this now. Most phones do it now.

Maybe in theory, but I trust Apple to detect a crash correctly about as far as I can throw my iPhone without breaking its glass back or front.

This is the company whose flagship voice assistant, in 2026, can’t tell the intended recipient in a sentence like “Text Bob Mary signed the deal.” And if my phone happens to be thrown into the back of the car by the crash, I doubt anyone will be able to hear me.

Not to mention that OnStar has operators who talk to first responders. the cell phone thing will just call 911 and hope for the best.

I pay for OnStar, and think it’s worth it.

Lol, same thing for Android, too. It has full access to my contact list, but if I tell it to "Call Stephan Beier" I see the transcript for "Beyer" and then it fails. That sounds the same in German, now what shall I do. Stupid thing.

When they forced us to use Gemini as the assistant, saying "hey Google call X" stopped working because it came up with a list of phone numbers for them and I couldn't tell it "home" or "mobile" because I had to manually select.

That lasted about 6 hours before I figured out how to switch back to Assistant.

Other "it's the future year 2026 how the hell are things still this bad" examples:

1. For years "Navigate Home" has done exactly what you'd expect, then one morning it decides traveling to Home Depot is the only possible interpretation.

2. A bog-standard timed alarm goes off, and half the time "Silence Alarm" leads to it insisting that there are no alarms going off right now.

What stings is that these aren't issues with ambiguous grammar or unusual phrasings, these are extremely predictable commands for features I would expect in the minimum viable product.

Why do you trust the car companies more? The premise of this discussion is that they cannot be trusted to act in the user's interest.

> This is the company whose flagship voice assistant, in 2026, can’t tell the intended recipient in a sentence like “Text Bob Mary signed the deal.” And if my phone happens to be thrown into the back of the car by the crash, I doubt anyone will be able to hear me.

You can be using CarPlay to navigate at that moment to a destination, and because of the way my fiancee has Siri set up, if she says "Get me directions to the nearest Starbucks", Siri will say, "I'm sorry, I don't know where you are."

sorry, I didn't find someone named "bob mary" in your contacts list

Yup! Or it starts a group text with Bob AND Mary saying “signed the deal”

"I found this on the web. Check it out."

Stress test your mounts!

My phone does this now. Most phones do it now.

Only if it hasn't been crushed, damaged, or otherwise flung out of the vehicle that crashed so violently that it's actually upside down, as noted in the original comment.

The same is true of the cell phone hardware built into the vehicle that is crashed and upside down.