This is exactly what was predicted as the result of corporate surveillance and targeted ads. They are part of schemes to extract more revenue from you. Another example is the rising premium for health insurance. But people apparently had "nothing to hide"!
Ugh. That reminds me of a time probably around 2012. I was working for a pretty large company, and they had our health insurance provider come in. The insurance provider was offering $100 to any employees that came in and gave a sample of blood. This was not a blood drive, they wanted samples. There was a line going down the hallway of people excited to get a benjamin. I encouraged them to get off the line because they were just going to use the data from the blood tests to raise our rates. Everybody laughed at me.
Couple months later all of our insurance rates got jacked up. Like how did people not see what was going on? Did they really think the insurance company was there to give away free money and not somehow turn a profit? Fucking bananas.
100% against everything being monitored and data sold like it is….. but part of me wishes there was a way to work towards getting bad drivers off of the roads.
This is not the way to do that as the insurance companies only have one goal and that is to raise profits.
But when you stand on any random street corner and 30-60 % of every driver driving by is looking down at their cell phone, it is very scary.
People don’t use turn signals, speed through residential neighborhoods, change lanes in the middle of intersections, it’s insane. We need to make our world less car reliant, it’s unacceptable.
You get rid of cars and you stop designing society to accommodate the one edge case where someone lives 100miles away from a city that they have to commute by car to everyday for some reason.
You will never be able to take away someone's license for bad driving if doing so basically makes them unemployable and incapable of taking care of themselves. We need cheap, practical alternatives to cars in order to reduce the impact of bad drivers.
Yup. There’s a cause-and-effect chain that the anti-car crowd likes to ignore. The reality is that we need widely available alternative transport before restricting cars. If you start by restricting cars, all you’re doing is making it impossible for struggling people to get and keep a job. And that’s not good for anyone.
Give us cities that are walkable, with no point less than a 10 minute walk away from a train station.
Give us trains that are affordable and run regularly, not $10 per ride and only run every 45-60 minutes.
Give us actual separated sidewalks and prioritized pedestrian traffic, instead of roads without sidewalks and intersections that make pedestrians wait 2-4 cycles before giving them a crossing signal. Give us busses that actually run on time and run regularly.
Give us public transport that doesn’t shut down at 2AM, when all of the drunks are leaving the bars and are pushed into driving home because there is no public transport available after the bars close.
My daily commute by car is 13 minutes. Via public transport, it is nearly three hours. Without a car, I need to go 20 miles north to a connecting city, wait roughly hour for the next train, then go 20 miles south to get near my work. Then it’s another 20-30 minutes of waiting for the bus (if it’s even running on time) for another 5 miles. Or I can just fucking drive the 10 miles and be there in 13 minutes. No, I can’t walk because it’s nearly all highway driving and there are no sidewalks. No, I can’t ride a bike because no bikes are allowed on the highway.
Fix public transport. Make it usable. And then start restricting cars. If my commute was a 13 minute drive or a 15 minute train ride, I’d pick the train ride every time. But it’s not.
Obligatory US, I think the better way of filtering bad drivers is more stringent and frequent testing through the DMV (or your state's equivalent). Look at Germany, they don't mess around when it comes to licensing. I'm mid 30s, and haven't had to retest or do any form of continuing driver's education or retesting since I was 16.
It's a little trickier here in the US due to our cities being built for cars, and being without one can be a huge detriment, especially with most public transit being a shitshow. But I agree, we definitely need some mechanisms to weed out bad drivers.
Well GM and Goodyear lobbied against public transit when they wanted everyone to buy a car, and probably still do , is why public transit is so awful.
That, plus GM literally bought up streetcar companies and shut them down or converted them to running buses.
Reliable public transport with a robust interstate passenger railway system coupled with a well designed intracity bus system, along with well maintained biking paths everywhere else would go a long way to getting bad drivers off the road.
We can't get bad drivers off the road when basic everyday living requires driving. There are cost effective alternatives in use across the world. America just has to learn to accept good ideas that others have pioneered.
Autonomous vehicles are the only achievable solution to distracted driving. Individuals can be nice but people as a whole are lazy and selfish pieces of shit. You'll never get anywhere close to even 90% doing the right thing just by relying on people's good intentions.
Full autonomous vehicles, and particularly significant levels of adoption of them are decades away. It's taken roughly 20 years for hybrid vehicles to become "big", and that's after the tech already existed. We still don't even have anywhere close to reliable full autonomous driving.
It usually is much more effective to make plans and changes based off what currently exists rather than anything that isn't absolute immediate future. No reason to say no to the good because you're busy waiting for "perfect".
Could public transit be considered to reduce the need for everyone to drive?
How about trains? That way 99% of people dont' even need to drive, ever.
part of me wishes there was a way to work towards getting bad drivers off of the roads.
There is: it's called zoning reform.
Make the passing grade for a driving test 20% higher than it currently is, and make everyone take a driving test every five years. You get one re-test if you fail.
And once you hit 70, driving tests every year.
Anyone who fails under the new regulations would have been causing a lot of problems on the roads.
OK but why is my state mandated minimum insurance nearly $90 a month for a Toyota Prius that I only drive like 30 miles per week?
My liability only plan was $55 in 2018.
I'm over 30 years old with no tickets or accidents on my record.
Maybe the whole data farming thing is being used as an excuse also, but this is bullshit all up and down.
My vehicle is not trackable but my insurance tripled in two years so there is more going on than data harvesting
The article alleges, though without evidence, that the tracking is just an excuse to raise rates.
A quick search didn't turn up quite the right statistics, but traffic fatalities have been seriously on the rise in the US. That probably implies higher payouts. (WP)
But also, when trackable unsafe drivers have to pay more (and trackable safe driver less), then the unsafe drivers will prefer to be untrackable. You may be on the receiving end of the recalculated actuary tables.
Untrackable might mean you get lumped with the worst actuary table in terms of risk as an unknown quantity or as a form of pressure to let them track you or as a way to create a defence moat of people (your rates will go up like these untrackable vehicles) if the government tries to intervene to stop them from basing rates to tracking.
“Cost of living”. Sure people will start getting inflation beating payrises soon.
I'm driving way safer and way less miles, combination of shorter commute and I don't want to wear my truck out driving like an ass....I'm my rate is literally doubled
Is it too much to ask for a car that doesn't spy on me, is reasonably comfortable, is efficient, and maybe has a few extra "smart" features to help me not run into other people? I guess my bike will do for now.
I have a 17 year old car with ESP (electronic stability) and without any 'smart' stuff. I'll run it until its last breath.
So they'll lower rates if the data shows safe driving right? Right?
It's a group thing. Because everyone around you are collectively driving like assholes, your rate goes up to compensate
False
Can’t wait till all the genealogy companies like 23 & me start selling our genetic information to insurance companies.
... you think they don't? You need to read the fine print again. It's not proven where it's going, but they absolutely have the right to sell your genetic information and already do.
https://gizmodo.com/23andme-is-selling-your-data-but-not-how-you-think-1794340474
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-30/23andme-will-give-gsk-access-to-consumer-dna-data
The usual warnings about "anonymized data" and "data aggregation" apply.
In a civilized world, heads would roll over this.
It used to be that when someone used the phrase "in a civilized world", it was intended to move you back into it. Nowadays it just feels like wild gesticulating at an impossible state...
Makes me glad my, going on 17 year old Toyota will likely run forever and is as dumb as a box of rocks regarding this stuff.
us insurance always sounded like a scam.
moreso now.
Mine tried to get me to plug in a monitoring device into our cars' OBD-II ports after we signed up. I said Hell Naw and returned them shits to the sender. They said my rates would go up if I didn't use it and they didn't really change.
Next car I get will have to be neutered of such spyware, since they're apparently building it all in now. Current car just had a box I unplugged to disable the 3G cellular network connectivity and the car works just fine without it.
We lowkey need a database of how to airgap cars. Spying hardware started being common long enough ago that people aren't really going to be able to avoid it when buying used, unless they have the time and money to maintain a classic car.
It isn't just your driving either. They also very commonly log location and audio inside the car as well.
Yes!! It frustrates me so much when the proposed answer is "buy an older car", which is not a longterm solution.
It would be cool to have an iFixit-like score for each model.
I just don't understand how car manufacturers can do this. We need better privacy laws. Also, why is it a game of always protesting and backlash just to keep our basic rights? Smh
The problem is that in the past you would have your rates increased because you get into accidents because of bad drivers like this or the kind of car you drive being more popular with bad drivers. Driving slower will cause you to get into more accidents. Now they can do a root cause analysis and find the true reason for accidents. Unfortunately if you can afford higher rates then this doesn't help anyone. States should have stepped in a long time ago to make getting a license more difficult and making testing more frequent.
maybe there is a way to disable the mobile module in these vehicles?
No data means you get the highest rates.
You can't solve systemic problems without regulations.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)