Thread: Someone explain this to me.

I have seen the commercial I think it is sick. To me there is no difference between big intrusive govt and big intrusive corporations. The corporations are a little more subtle and use positive "marketing techniques" to gain voluntary behavior whereas the government hasn't any tact and the IRS is especially distrusted.

The biggest issue I see is the real reason for the gadget. It is marketed as something to record your "safe" driving habits to receive discounts. The truth is more like data they can use to raise your rates. If some yo-yo pulls out in front of you and you slam on your brakes, swerve, and accelerate to avoid traffic, you avoided a crash. You are an alert, safe driver. However, they will look at the data and see you are an erratic, aggressive driver. Therefore, your rates must go up.
Because it is a company's policy and not the government's law, I don't have too much of a problem with it. I don't like it or want one. Therefore, I choose not to do business with them and will do business with a different company. That is how the free market works.

To add to the above post: It is simply impossible to obey traffic laws in some cities, if you don't go with the flow of traffic, no matter what the speeds or local customs you will be the traffic hazard or the endangered.

Data on itineraries are valuable. Can be sold. Suppose they find out that a higher than average proportion of Cadillac drivers uses a certain stretch of Highway X. GM or Ford will be willing to pay for that information to know where they want to put up billboards and where not.

Originally Posted by milehiscott

Because it is a company's policy and not the government's law, I don't have too much of a problem with it. I don't like it or want one. Therefore, I choose not to do business with them and will do business with a different company. That is how the free market works.

This idea breaks down when there are few companies competing with each other.

Will I have to stop farting while I drive?

I think it would depend on what exactly is being monitored, and for how long.
As long as it is optional and they are upfront about the data, there is nothing wrong.
And frankly: a 10% discount sounds good to me. It's not like there is anything in my driving patterns which could cause me problems.

All that glitters is not gold, and neither is a 10% discount.

Ace, fart on. You may get a discount for recycling.

Originally Posted by markdfhr

Ace, fart on. You may get a discount for recycling.

Only if someone breathes it in or burns it for fuel. Until then it is strictly an emission.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I think it would depend on what exactly is being monitored, and for how long.
As long as it is optional and they are upfront about the data, there is nothing wrong.
And frankly: a 10% discount sounds good to me. It's not like there is anything in my driving patterns which could cause me problems.

Insurance companies in the US, notably Progressive, are promoting "usage-based insurance" in which they send an electronic device to you via mail with instructions on installing. You leave it in your car for 30 days which gives them access to (AFAIK - damn Wikipedia blackout!) only time, distance and place. They can calculate your driving risk by those factors and will give you a discount based on them. Progressive specifically states that your rates will not increase as a result of the data.

The only behavioral data it collects (again, AFAIK -- let me know if found otherwise) is "hard stops" in which it senses sudden decreases of speed. There is no GPS in the device and as many of us have noted, it's a voluntary program that can net you a discount of up to 30% off your existing rate.