Big Brother IS watching...

[StealthWyvern]

I just remembered, does anyone recall that thread about TPMS being able to be tracked in the event you had committed a crime, they can track the radio frequency ID's of the TPM sensors and trace you like that.

I tell ya what, it's not long before it's like Fast & The Furious 2 with that high tech car stopping s***.

yeah its called onstar on the GM cars. lol I'm sure if they can turn it on, and unlock they can shut it down.

 

[CWPspeed3]

They wont shut down a car while its moving that would be too dangerous to anyone around but they will have it turn off after the next time its parked. The fast and furious 2 thing was some crazy EMP grenade with a very short effect radius, they could probably do that now but wouldnt shoot it into the side of a car like that...

Sooner or later there will be all kinds of tracking and monitoring devices built into cars and they will pull out some dumb excuse like its a privilege to drive not a right so we can monitor your driving habits.

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

The day that happens, i'm leaving this country and moving to Germany.

On a side note, OnStar blows balls. I had gotten lost in my brand new Trailblazer SS and decided to call OnStar to get help. She told me i'd have to sign up for directions assistance before they could help me. I asked "Don't I get a free trial of one trip assistance?" And she said "NO." I called the next day to find out the truth, and yes indeed, I get one free trip. That skank wasn't on her job. I was pissed. I didn't extend my service contract after that.

 

[Rogue]

Sooner or later there will be all kinds of tracking and monitoring devices built into cars and they will pull out some dumb excuse like its a privilege to drive not a right so we can monitor your driving habits.

Actually, it is a privilege and not a right.(inout)

 

[MakeMeGoFast]

But I have to the right to do anything I want (within reason) because I'm supposed to live in a free country. But people always pull the "its a privileged not a right" nonsense. And it works on most people and they just roll over on the issue. Next thing ya know it'll be a privileged to live.

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

It's something younger kids need to appreciate moreso than grown ass adults.

 

[CWPspeed3]

Actually, it is a privilege and not a right.(inout)

Yes I know, but using that as an excuse to monitor your driving is over the edge.

 

[MakeMeGoFast]

Wouldn't you say that once you pass the Drivers test its your right.
Not my fault its so easy.

 

[CWPspeed3]

Thats a totally different subject, I think drivers training should actually be training, you dont learn or do s***. I think there should be actual driving classes and everyone should be made to learn to drive on a manual.

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

And they should be enforcing proper driving habits, like drive right pass left.

 

[mysleeper6]

And they should be enforcing proper driving habits, like drive right pass left.

And how to merge!

 

[MakeMeGoFast]

And they should be enforcing proper driving habits, like drive right pass left.

This wouldn't be a problem if slower traffic stayed to the right.

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

And how to merge!

Agreed!

This wouldn't be a problem if slower traffic stayed to the right.

Gotta start changing peoples mindset somewhere. I think we should do what Canada does, enforce the rules with signs everywhere on the highway. Up and down 401 HWY, they have signs like:

"Take A Break"
"Speeding Costs You! = 110k/mh $100, 120k/mh $200 so on and so forth"

My philosophy has always been if people actually KNEW the law, they'd probably abide by it, or understand why, if we took the time to have things explained to us. As citizens, we arn't explained anything, just told. And people get fed up with that over time.

 

[jred321]

I live in the middle of no where and on an occasion I have had to do the hurry up and drive to get home for the bathroom and thats about 10 miles of no places to stop for a bathroom so something like this would litterally cost me out my ass because when I gotta go I add alitte extra to the gas peddal and brake hard and fast for turns .

so are you being more or less safe when you're driving like that? also your assuming it would cost you "out your ass" is a big assumption. if it is truly as rare as you say then it will have little impact on your premium. if it's more frequent then you are in fact presenting more of a risk.

the goal of all of these programs (and all insurance in general) is to accurately reflect the risk being presented by the insured. this is just a method to improve accuracy instead of making actuaries build predictive models which are more guesses based on what's been said. it may cost you more or it may cost you less but it's because the risk you represent is actually being reflected, not a guess.

Technically, all cars already have "black boxes". If they really wanted to, they could tap into that.

In reference to the current "black boxes", I think they only store a few seconds worth of data, like the moments leading up to a crash.

There are also some legal issues with using black box recorder data, since the owner of the car is the owner of the box, and the data in it. You have to give consent, theoretically, at least, to allow police to view the data.

true in all cases. black boxes only store a few seconds of data and what data they store is limited. they were designed as a tool to improve airbag deployment in crashes. also the owner of the car does own that data so the insurance companies cannot access it. the only time they could is after a crash where the car is totalled and the insurance company then does own the car. i know of none that do this as the data is stored in a proprietary format determined by each manufacturer and that data will have little impact on a claim typically.

these devices used by progressive and others typically plug into your OBD port and transmit data via cell networks. your OBD port gives you a lot more information than the black box.


this has been around for YEARS. progressive filed their first patent on the subject in 1996, right around the time of GPS and OBDII. they've since filed several subsequent patents as follow ups. that's the biggest hurdle insurers will face in this space. their patents lock up a lot of the normal ways people would go about this. because GM has onstar they can luckily get around it. others will either have to come up with a different way to do the pricing (and then patent that) or license this from progressive.


also keep in mind that each state has its own insurance department. all pricing and rating values and methods MUST be approved by them. if this is something you feel they should not approve you should speak to your state representative

 

[Rogue]

But I have to the right to do anything I want (within reason) because I'm supposed to live in a free country. But people always pull the "its a privileged not a right" nonsense. And it works on most people and they just roll over on the issue. Next thing ya know it'll be a privileged to live.

Your rights are described in the Constitution. We are governed by the local, state, and federal laws, and we are free to live and do as we please within those laws. If there is a law that you feel is unconstitutional, then you can get it overturned. As far as driving, to my knowledge, there is nothing in the US Constitution giving citizens the "right" to drive. It is controlled by the laws set in each state.

Yes I know, but using that as an excuse to monitor your driving is over the edge.

Agreed. It would be a cheap excuse to use to control people.

if this is something you feel they should not approve you should speak to your state representative

+1. This is the benefit of how our government (is suppose to) work. If there's something you want to make sure does or doesn't happen, contact your local rep.

Remember: Don't complain about the things you're willing to tolerate.

 

[mysleeper6]

the goal of all of these programs (and all insurance in general) is to accurately reflect the risk being presented by the insured. this is just a method to improve accuracy instead of making actuaries build predictive models which are more guesses based on what's been said. it may cost you more or it may cost you less but it's because the risk you represent is actually being reflected, not a guess.

Herein lies the problem. The assumption this is based upon (presumably) is that speeding or hard conering, or whatever, (even driving more miles) leads to more accidents. Whereas this may be "true" actuarily-speaking, there are many outliers to that statistical model who currently have low rates because they have gone years without an accident (because they are more skilled or attentive than the average speeder/hard conerer/high mileage driver), so you might say they have earned that low rate. Would these drivers, who have "defied the odds" through luck, or more likely skill/attentiveness/awareness, end up paying higher rates? Undoubtedly, and that's what burns me.

 

[jred321]

they may or they may not. if they truly are a low risk it will be reflected in their claims history and driving record. these will still be big factors in rating. at this point since this type of data has never been collected the models built now will evolve greatly as more data is collected.

another factor to consider is severity of the incident, not just the frequency. let's say you're the best/luckiest driver but you drive 100 everywhere. you may go 10, 15, even 20 years without any incident. then one day grandma wanders into your lane and you swerve. you're probably going to have some major medical bills as will anyone else that is hit as well as a totalled car or several. could easily be a couple hundred thousand dollar claim instead of a few thousand. that will add up to more money in claims than a person who drives normally but gets in 1 fender bender every 5 years.

so is a person who speeds inherently more likely to get into an accident? maybe not. if they do though it will definitely cost that much more and thus their risk of costing the insurance company money is greater. statistics is real tough to beat in the long run. just ask casinos. you may be up for a little while but you keep playing you're going to lose. insurance companies pay a lot of smart people a lot of money to make sure the odds are accurate because they know if they're not they'll lose money, either through claims or by losing the business all together to a different insurance company. you may not like or agree with what the statistics say but they're based on facts not on feelings or emotions

 

[93mx6]

they need to enforce people getting up to speed on onramps to the highways, i dont know about u guys but i enjoy my "spirited" driving and something like this happening is a bunch of bulls***