No. They aren't. VW is. And VW, not the owner of the car, is controlling that tracking.
I'm arguing against a comment that implied tracking is good, even if it is controlled by others, because it might save a child. The best version of such a system is if it is owned by the government, not some company trying to make money off of it, so that's the version I decided to argue against.
A private company. From whom a person decided to buy a car. Hyundai, Kia, Mazda and Nissan make cars without trackers or even GPS. That's obviously not most consumers' preference.
> best version of such a system is if it is owned by the government
I strongly disagree. That said, if someone wants to install a government tracking device on their car, I suppose I'm not against it. (Didn't you start by arguing against mandated surveillance?)
Kias get stolen so often you can't insure them in some places; hyundai's have that "catch on fire spontaneously" controversy, and that steel shavings in the engine problem; nissan has their infamous CVT transmissions. I don't know much about mazda.
It's hard to find a reliable car. Last time I dug into the subject it was a stress-nightmare
Honda and Toyota are the canonical reliable cars, I thought that was well-known, so not sure how finding a reliable car is difficult. I associate Kia and Hyundai with inexpensive, so that wouldn't be my first choice for reliable. (My two Hondas have been fantastic. I bought my Honda Fit used, and from 75k miles to 150k miles I have had no problems at all, no maintenance required besides oil changes. (I suspect the clutch is going to need to be replaced soon, though.)
I'm arguing against a comment that implied tracking is good, even if it is controlled by others, because it might save a child. The best version of such a system is if it is owned by the government, not some company trying to make money off of it, so that's the version I decided to argue against.
That's not a red herring. It's steelmanning.