Big Brother In Your Front Seat

Rick Zeman writes "Would you give up your privacy in your car to save a few bucks on your auto insurance? 'Safe' drivers who plug an electronic device into their vehicles will be then eligible for a discount on their insurance. They say, '...the device constantly tracks car speed. By comparing that with a clock in the TripSense device, the device figures how far the car goes, mapping it against the time of day. At the end of each policy term, the customer would download the data and see what discount he or she would get. Customers can see all their data before deciding to send it to Progressive, and can decide not to send it -- and not get extra discounts.' I wonder how soon it will be that everyone has one except those resigned to paying extra as with grocery 'convenience' cards."

No

[Lord Grey (463613)]

Would you give up your privacy in your car to save a few bucks on your auto insurance? ... the device constantly tracks car speed ...

To make this as easy as possible for insurance company representatives (or any other representatives of big business and government) to understand:

Stay the f**k out of my life.

Re:No

[maximilln (654768)]

You know that, to save the children, eventually these things will be mandatory by law.

Re:No

[Xzzy (111297)]

> You know that, to save the children, eventually these things will be mandatory by law.

They couldn't enforce any such law on older vehicles. In this particular case, it would be any vehicle older than 1996, which is when the diagnostic adapter that this device uses started appearing.

I drive an early 60's, when I bought it it wasn't equipped with seat belts because at that point in history there were no seatbelt laws. First time I got pulled over for not wearing one it was quite fun to point out how I was exempt. I eventually installed some aftermarket ones because driving with no belt is plain out stupid, but the blank look the officer briefly gave me was well worth it. ;)

Considering the availability of vehicles, especially 1995 and earlier, you could go a long, long time snubbing any such law that was put in place.

Re:No

[Monkelectric (546685)]

I drive an early 60's, when I bought it it wasn't equipped with seat belts because at that point in history there were no seatbelt laws

Oh please :) Here's how it will work: Government will require you to have insurance (which in most states it does). Insurance companies won't insure a car WITHOUT the device.

A friend of mine from sweeden says, while marijuana is legal in sweeden, you can't get a job or car insurance if you use it, so you're effectively a non-citizen.

Re:No

[Mistlefoot (636417)]

How can this work.......

I believe most accidents happen in cities, and likely at speeds under 50mph. What good does this do for an insurance company to see that I often drive at 55mph or 60mph when I could quite likely be highway driving.

45mph in a 30mph zone is far more dangerous than 65mph in a 60mph zone. How can the device KNOW the speed limit when compared with the speed driven?

Re:No

[pizzaman100 (588500)]

How can the device KNOW the speed limit when compared with the speed driven?

Simple, flood the road ways with an inverse tachyon matrix.

Re:No

[ArsonSmith (13997)]

RTFA!!! It uses GPS and proximity generated sonic cameras (cool tech, uses ultra sonic emiters to generate 3D images) to see what your are doing and where you are at all times. The insurance companies then take this information and send it to the NSA wher they process everything you have done over the past year and give you a terrist rating. This is then used to prioritize the people that it tracks with greater details. If you are given a high enough rateing a thought monitor will be installed. Unfortantly the thought monitor comes in the form of a very uncomfortable anal probe.

I know because I beta tested this system.

Re:No

[Dr. Bent (533421)]

You: Stay the f**k out of my life.

InsureCo: No problem. Have a nice day and good luck driving your car without insurance.

Re:No

[Dr Caleb (121505)]

I second that. They are there to provide me with a service. They can judge how much that will cost me by how much I cost them in the past, not how much I might cost them in the future.

I can decide if I'm willing to pay their outragous prices and contribute to their record profits (last year for example). Stay the hell out of my life.

Re:No

[jridley (9305)]

Easy enough. Don't do business with companies that do things you don't like. But don't complain when you have to pay more than your neighbor because he's proved he's a good driver, while you're an unknown risk.

Re:No

[SlashHack (700614)]

I disagree with the premise. Who says that 'speeding equates to accidents?'. Give me a break. I've been almost run over by grandmas not paying attention going 10 miles an hour under the speed limit. Perhaps we should raise car insurance rates exponentially as age increases to get the real threat off the road.

Certainly if one is not paying attention, no matter who they are, they're going to cause an accident. I disagree it's just the speeders.

--
You can have my sports car when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Re:No

[darksaber (46072)]

To make this as easy as possible for insurance company representatives (or any other representatives of big business and government) to understand: Stay the f**k out of my life.

Is now a good time to say, "Who is forcing you to use these devices? This plan doesn't even force to report results after you check them."

Ignoring slippery slopes for a moment, the insurance company is trying to "prove" that you aren't a problem case waiting to happen. And why wouldn't you want to let the crazier drivers pay for the risk? Do you really like subsidizing their rates? Of course, reading the posts in other articles here, slashdot readers are pretty crazy drivers (e.g. passing at 100mph driving on the wrong side of the street) so maybe I'll be mobbed in a minute.

Also, they aren't trying to collect much information at the moment, but I imagine it would be a lot harder to justify the increased benefits of full tracking logs vs just speed logs. That, and for the non-tinfoil crowd, the detail to really recreate an accident would probably take way to much storage unless it was only the most recent data. The tinfoil crowd isn't reading this anyway.

P.S. For those who worry about it being sub-poenaed and self-incrimination, I agree it shouldn't be but it probably will. I still don't feel sorry for those who actually cause accidents by being deliberately reckless time and time again and try to hide it though.

Re:No

[gfxguy (98788)]

But what about when they all require them?

It's an interesting dilema, and it's easy to say to just pick another company...

When they came for Progressive, I said I didn't have Progressive, so I did nothing.

When they came for State Farm, I said I didn't have State Farm, so I did nothing....

Etc., etc....

Until... then they came for Metropolitan, and there were no other companies to turn to...

Obviously, I think, we are beginning to understand that in order to continue having certain privelages, because so many people violate those privelages, we are going to have to accept enforcement of the proper use of those privelages and pay the penalties when we don't. Speed traps, red light cameras, black boxes... Sure, I know it's not the government... yet.

I could be flip about it and say "well, if you don't speed then why would you object?" But I won't, because we all know it doesn't end there. On the other hand, with so many people violating rules and laws, costing lives and money, something like this is inevitable.

Re:No

[sweetooth (21075)]

Well the whole reason you have insurance is so that if something bad happens while driving etc you don't have to foot the whole bill yourself. This seems much more like a tactic for the insurance companies to get out of liability should you be in an accident.

Say you are in one, the insurance company then pulls out your data and says: You drive an average of 3 mph over the speed limit based on the data you have provided for the last couple of years and that puts you in violation of our terms so you're on your own buddy.

While it may reduce the costs for some customers initially there is a point when all insurance companies will require it (assuming consumers don't complain and it's likely they won't). Then there will be no reason to give any one a price cut for using it and they can get out of paying for more claims as so many people violate the speed limit laws etc.

Then again maybe I'm just paranoid when it comes to corporations, privacy, etc.

Re:No

[dartboard (23261)]

It's only mandated if you want to drive on public roads. If you build your own [private] highway system then you no longer need insurance. Easy-cheesey!

It's not a tax

[SuperMario666 (588666)]

You still have a choice among insurance companies. Choose one that doesn't snoop into your business.

Re:No

[ekidder (121911)]

Indiana doesn't require you to have insurance. You can sign an affidavit stating that you can afford to pay for any accidents you're the cause of. Or something like that. I'm pretty sure you also need to supply some proof that you can afford it, too.

Re:No

[parkrrrr (30782)]

You need to supply proof in the form of a deposit of $40,000 for the first car and $20,000 for each additional car. See 140 IAC 1-7-3 [in.gov] (PDF format) for the gory details.

Most of us can't afford to tie up $40,000 cash just to avoid getting screwed by an insurance company.

Re:No

[cubicledrone (681598)]

It's not a tax

Government mandated payment = tax.

it's only mandated for people that own cars

Sales tax is only mandated for people who buy things.

Re:No

[dasmegabyte (267018)]

Government mandated payment = tax.

No, a government mandated payment that goes to the GOVERNMENT is a tax. Your license and registration fees are taxes. Insurance is not a tax, it's quite different -- for one thing, you can't shop around for better rates on a tax or reduce your taxation by taking a ten hour "defensive citizenship class" Insurance is important -- it's a guarantee that if you drive your car like a weapon you'll be able to compensate your victims. In fact some states -- California comes to mind -- allow you to bypass insurance if you're willing to dedicate a certain amount of money to indemnify yourself. You can post a bond and even collect interest on it. Some other states allow super cut rate insurance on tiny cars and/or motorcycles where the chance of injuring others is low. Other states allow you to skip insurance on vehicles that are rarely used ("show" cars) and most will let you skip it if the vehicle is only driven on private roads.

You can also drive without insurance in some areas if you're renting the car -- at least, the rental company is not required to check proof of insurance before issuing the car/truck/hovercraft. But I wouldn't suggest it.

Re:go monopoly

[twbecker (315312)]

How about "Stay the fuck out of my car, eh?"

Everyone should have one

[by Anonymous Coward]

I wonder how soon it will be that everyone has one

I wonder how long till someone hacks it to get a discount on their insurance.
Oh and does it run Linux?

Re:Everyone should have one

[rworne (538610)]

The device is similar to the Davis Carchip [davisnet.com] if not this particular device. It hooks up to the OBDII port and reads the car's vitals from there.

Remember, it's a device drivers can simply plug in to the car. OBDII is a serial protocol that would be a bit harder to hack than the speedometer pulse wire.

Some things the CarChip does that this device will likely do:

1. Record times the device was disconnected
2. Record times data was downloaded/memory cleared
3. Keep a record of the speeds via timed snapshots
4. Keep a record of the date/time car was used (and how long).

It can keep track of vehicle usage (in my case) for the last three months with logging data points every 5 seconds.

No records of destinations or GPS tracking on these base models.

Disclaimer: I don't work for the company, but I have a Carchip E/X installed as insurance against unfair tickets and warranty "abuse" claims by the manufacturer.

Entrapment

[rainman_bc (735332)]

Gotta love this. It's entrampment. They assume if you don't wish to upload your driving data that you are a bigger risk.

Re:Entrapment

[wwest4 (183559)]

Isn't entrapment when you are goaded into doing something illegal you wouldn't otherwise do?

This is part of the trend toward automated mass transit. Suck all the joy/autonomy out of driving by constraining the ways you can legally drive, and after a while there will be no "freedom" in having your own car. You may as well get on the subway with a toy driving wheel and make vroom-vroom sounds.

Re:Entrapment

[base3 (539820)]

Finally--someone gets it. A "discount" for having the device is really a surcharge for not having it.

discount vs surcharge

[Animaether (411575)]

That depends..

If all my apples cost 20ct/piece for everyone, has for many years, whatever.
And you fill in a form that gets you a bonus card, and entitles you to get them at 15ct/piece.

Does that mean you got a discount ?
Or does that mean everybody else got a surcharge ?

Considering everybody else is still paying their 20ct/piece, as they have in the past, there is no change in the situation for them.
There is, however, for you. You can get them cheaper. You are getting.. a discount.

The situation you're talking about is this..

Apples used to cost 20ct/piece
Then I raise the cost to 25ct/piece, whilst introducing the bonus card. You fill in the info, I get you the bonus card, and you can once again get your apples for 20ct/piece.
Everybody else, however, would be paying the 25ct/piece.
In THAT case.. everybody else is getting a surcharge, whilst nothing changes for you.

Of course you could go halfway. Up the price to 22.5 or 17.5 for those with the card - in which case everybody else would get a surcharge - albeit a 'minor' one, whilst you would still get a discount - albeit a 'minor' one.

That said...
Of course insurance companies will raise the prices for those who opt not to get it. That's been the case for almost every piece of technology, though they're usually smart enough to make this a gradual change.
I.e. at the introduction of airbags, they didn't just raise the price insanely immediately - just gradually, until the time came where most cars do have an airbag - therefore not having an airbag makes you a clear minority.. a minority which, compared to the others, is a liability.

Re:Entrapment

[Lumpy (12016)]

doesn't matter, Progressive tries entrapment all the time. Dont send them an affidavit from your last insurance company? well that "low" rate now is increased by 50%.

progressive = insurance for bad drivers. Most mainstream insurance companies like State Farm and AAA are actually much cheaper than progressive if you are a safe driver already. I'm insuring 2 vehicles + a RV for almost $100.00US less a month than the 1 vehicle I had insured under progressive.(I have had no tickets or accidents for almost 14 years now) also, if you ask for any discounts after they jack your rates, they tell you to sod off.

it's a gimmick trying to get more bad drivers to switch to them... and then they up your rates like MAD when you have to renew.

you have to look at the company first.

And with that news

[Evets (629327)]

Porsche stock went down 22%

Progressive?

[eln (21727)]

The catch is that you have to be insured by Progressive. Bleh. I had their service for a year, then jumped to State Farm and am paying $300 less per 6-month term then I was before.

Also, what about those of us who constantly go 5 mph above the speed limit? Would we be targeted as reckless drivers because we "speed" most of the time? No thanks.

That would RULE

[ToadMan8 (521480)]

Mine would say I do 6 MPH below the speed limit at every given time and I never tailgate and always stop for little old ladies in the crosswalk... Regardless of my 110 MPH habits.
Or if I'm going to be crazy for a little bit I'll just deactivate it.
Remember a tip of security of a device... if you can get your hands on it, especially in your house or garage for a matter of months, it's as good as hacked. Other, non-tech savvy people may think otherwise about it though.

Re:That would RULE

[sploo22 (748838)]

And the word of the day is... INSURANCE FRAUD. Meaning 5 years in prison and a $50,000 fine [csaa.com] if you get caught.

Not for me

[ack154 (591432)]

The customer would then plug the device into the on-board diagnostic port under the dashboard. The port is on all models sold in the USA since 1996.

Looks like I'm out, I have a '94. I don't have Progressive anyways, but it's not even compatible with my car.

In Minnesota, where the highway speed limit is 70 mph, drivers who go over 75 less than 0.1% of the time get an extra 5% discount.

Less than 0.1% of the time and it's only 5%?! Now I don't live in Minnesota, but I don't think I'd get much discount at all. The highway speedlimit here in NY is either 55 or 65 (depending) and my avg speed would probably be 65+ and 75+ (respectively) for a lot more than 0.1% of the time. Maybe that would get me 0.1% discount?

IMO, I think they'd have to offer a little bit more of a discount for the masses to really consider it. I'd slow down a bit if it were worth it. But for someone who may be paying $500/yr for insurance and getting MAYBE 5% off, that's only $25, or maybe $2/month. Just doesn't sound too enticing to me, though some people may jump at the opportunity to save a little. But your results may vary.

do NOT do this, and do NOT support it

[acroyear (5882)]

Because once its in there and shows positive statistics, the government might mandate it.

And once THAT happens, it becomes information they could subpoena.

So you get into an accident that you *know* was the other guys fault, but your little black box says you were speeding slightly at the time, and the courts could quickly decide that you really were partially at fault and force your insurance company to pony up (and thus increase your rates) where now the other guys insurance would have to pick it up.

Information you are not in control of will be used to control you. Better it simply not exist at all.

Interesting.

[Hanna's Goblin Toys (635700)]

So if you're going 16 in a 15mph zone, and I drive into the side of your car by running a stop sign while going 15mph, you're at fault?

Awesome. Where do you live?

Re:do NOT do this, and do NOT support it

[selderrr (523988)]

I know that in the USA, speed limits are different from europe. Where I live (Belgium), speed limit is 120km/h on highways. Practically everyone goes over that by a margin of 10km/h. Which is tolerated by cameras. I used to do it too, until we bought a new car, a renault traffic, which is a LOT bigger than our previous car, an opel tigra. The renault can do 150km/h easily, as did the tigra (shitcar BTW), but since you have a completely different view of traffic (it's a van), you feel speed diferently. Nowadays I drive 120km/h tops, and found out a few things :

- I consume 15% to 25% less fuel. Amazing isn't it ? This is mainly due to not constantly accelerating to 130-140 just to break again 1 minute later. My speed remains far more constant
- I get everywhere at the same time as i did when i drove faster. There is ZERO difference on average. I do Brussels-Ostend (150km) every week, and there's really no difference since i started driving slower.
- I feel safer, calmer and less stressed. I never thought that this 10km/h speed difference would make such a mental difference. I 've started listening to music again, since at 130-140km/h, i had to focus on traffic instead of music.
- the whole 'you have to drive along with the flow' thing is complete and utter bollocks. Traffic flows in blocks, that group themselves around a group of trucks who can't bypass eachother since they have speed limiters. Cars just move from block to block. The speeders wiggle their way thru these blocks a few % faster than the rest, and then pull up to 150km/h untill they reach the next block 10secs later. I just reach that block 12seconds later.


Honestly : just give it a try and drive slower. you'll notice that most of your prejudices are balooney.


Note : driving slower has one explicit effect : middle fingers from freaks who think their lives are so filled up, they really need those 10% they think they can shave off in traffic. Usually types who wash their car every week and thereby lose hours of time :-)

speed and time of day?

[morcheeba (260908)]

I wonder how well Progressive's device will corralate with actual accident rates. It can't tell the difference between going 55 on a highway and going 55 in a preschool parking lot. Or, for that matter, 20 mph in the lot, and 20 on the highway.

Hopefully they'll do more than just histogram your speeds -- maybe they'll try to categorize your driving -- local, stop-and-go, freeway -- and then maybe check to see how often you suddenly decellerate. Jazz it up right, and you could detect cell phone usage, too.

Why this idea is crap.

[GoRK (10018)]

The only standard way this data is available on vehicles is via OBD-II. Such dataloggers are already commonly available and used by mechanics to diagnose problems, but here is the real problem -- you could dupe them VERY esily. It would take any sensible programmer with a copy of the (free) standards less than a day to create some kind of simulator that you plug the device into instead of your car.

The only real benefit I see to this problem is that if you call them out on it, you'll probably be able to get the 'safe' rate without having to plug the thing into your own car.

there are already database records of speeding

[gnat_x (713079)]

any person who has an ez-pass [ezpass.com] which is the new trend at least on the east coast is already having their travels through toll booths recorded in a database.

if you enter the NJ turnpike at the south end and drive to the north end, its a simple equation to figure out if your average speed was higher than the speed limit.

there are ez-pass scanners everywhere, including buildings all over manhatten. but everyone in the NYC area has them because it makes their lives and their commutes easier (as the name would suggest) and cheaper.

people don't seem to have a problem with those things being recorded if it means they don't have to pay more/ wait in line.

Boycott Progressive

[asv108 (141455)]

The best way to deal with blatant violations of privacy by a large corporation is a strong negative consumer reaction.

1. If your a progressive customer call up your agent and complain, tell them you won't be doing any further business with the company.
2. If your not a progressive customer use their contact form [progressive.com] and let them know what you think.

How does the device know

[Tenebrious1 (530949)]

The progressive device doesn't include a GPS. So how's the device know if I'm doing 55 down a highway, or 55 down the adjacent local road blowing through red lights?

Re:How does the device know

[earthforce_1 (454968)]

And that time it recorded me doing 75 MPH, I was vacationing in Montana.

Fixed speed limits are a crock anyway, how does it tell the difference between driving on an icy covered road in a blizzard, and a clear day with dry roads and unlimited visibility, with no traffic? Driving 50 in the first case may be suicide, yet it is legal. Doing 50 on the open highway in clear conditions, you are a traffic impediment.

Data Context?

[slackerboy (73121)]

According to the article: In Minnesota, where the highway speed limit is 70 mph, drivers who go over 75 less than 0.1% of the time get an extra 5% discount.

So what happens with the guy that always drives 60, but only drives in the 25MPH school zones? Data without context is worthless!

Plus, on a $1200 annual insurance bill, you'd only save $60 by giving up your privacy...

Good idea - consider the flip side

[Moooo Cow (79655)]

I'm an independent computer consultant, probably like a lot of other Slashdot readers. So, put your business hat on and consider this from that perspective.

Suppose you're bidding on a contract to upgrade/replace a computer system for a potential customer. In order to give a proper cost estimate, you'll need to know as much detail as possible about the requirements. Perhaps this would include something like the average number of transactions per day performed. If all the customer can do is say that there is "a bunch" of transactions, your estimate will be very approximate, and you'll have to pad it accordingly or add a large contingency factor.

However, if the customer could produce for you an automated log of all daily transaction counts for the last month, you would have a precise understanding of what to expect, and could estimate accordingly. This may result in a lower estimated cost, and increase your chances of winning the bid.

Essentially, this is what Progressive is doing - they are asking for more detailed information in an effort to win your continuing business. If you don't provide that information, that's fine... but then they will have to rely on a more approximate estimate of risk, and the quote they provide you with will likely be higher based on less precise information. If you're a prudent businessperson, you'd be trying to do the same thing whereever you can.

Here's how the insurance companies will scam you

[Billy the Mountain (225541)]

It's just like grocery store member cards, you start using them, you save right? Wrong, initially, maybe, but now, by using them, you're paying what you would have paid before the program existed and if you don't use the card you're hosed.

Same thing with this: You start out saving money, prices creep back up to normal. Those that refuse to submit to the program are hosed.

BTM

Re:I doubt this will take off

[mc6809e (214243)]

Especially if they decide that you should pay more for excessive speeding. How many people actually obey the speed limit all the time?

It may not even matter to the insurance company.

Seriously. An insurance company looks at all these things statistically. If there is no statistical relationship between speeding and how much they have to payout on a claim, they aren't going to charge extra for speeding.

And it makes business sense, too.

Suppose speeders showed no difference in their odds of getting into an accident, yet Big Insurance Corp A charges extra money for people with speeding tickets.

Big Insurance Corp B discovers during routine data-mining that there is no relationship between speeding and payouts and so charges less for insuring speeders.

At some point Corp B has all the "speeders" business while A is out of luck because they over-charged.

Profitable insurance companies look at all kinds of things that might not seem relevent like credit reports, car color, and profession. Yet, when they dump all this information into their systems they find correlations. And these correlations allow them to more accurately price insurance for people.

Those companies that use personal judgements like, ALL SPEEDERS ARE A BIG RISK -- CHARGE $$$!!! aren't going to be able to compete if their judgements are inconsistant with statistical reality.

Re:Great Idea!

[rainman_bc (735332)]

Anyone else notice how cops are immune to DUI laws? We used to own a restaurant in Vancouver. When the cops came in, it was friggin' christmas for us. Fifty drunk cops acting like asses. Then when it came time to leave you'd get the response "I'm a cop, I don't lose my license if I get stopped at a road block; they just follow me home"

Friggin' crock of shit if you ask me.

Yup

[Greyfox (87712)]

One explained that to me once. If you ticket a cop speeding through your zone, they'll ticket you for speeding through their zone. Even if you weren't particularly speeding. So everone exercises a quid-pro-quo and no one tickets anyone else who's a cop. That means as a cop you could habitually do 110 in school zones and you'll never get ticketed for it.

If you donate to their pension fund and put that little sticker they send you on your car, they'll be more inclined to let you go. It's not the get out of ticket free card that being a cop is, but unless you were doing something radical or they're WAY under quota, you'll likely just get off with a warning.

Bidding starts at $1 - NO RESERVE

[birukun (145245)]

You are bidding on one (1) Sunday Driver Profile (SDP)package.

Includes:
1 SDP download (compatible with GEICO, AAA, Allstate, Progressive, and Farmers)
1 SDP handbook that includes background information of driving habits for answering those aggressive insurance agents

Don't pay extra for insurance! Let the Sunday Driver profile work for you - guaranteed to meet the specifications of your insurance company or your money back.

SATISFACTION GUARANTEED

"I used the SDP package and saved 100s of dollars on my insurance! Thanks SDP!" - M. Gecko, San Diego

Re:Ugh

[Chris Mattern (191822)]

Good for you. Countless studies prove you wrong, of course. Greater speed means more accidents and more deadly accidents as sure as night follows day. But people don't want to believe that, so they don't.

Chris Mattern