Insurance Companies Try Out Auto Black Boxes 669
tekiegreg writes "It looks like the first black box test for auto insurance companies is underway. While this may be a privacy issue, it can also make better drivers out of everyone if insurance rates are adjustable based on the way everyone drives. This was covered on Slashdot before however this seems to be one of the first workups, that can even include tests on speed and braking, not just location."
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
--
Play the free Gmail game. 35 invites availiable. Best odds on the net. [retailretreat.com]
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay kidding, I live in Canada, Saskatchewan to be specific. Our mandatory (auto) insurance comes from Saskatchewan Government Insurance. Its a regulated body. If they want to raise rates, they have to justify it. The most I have ever paid for insurance is $1000/year (for a '99 Sunfire GT in 99). There is a flat rate per car, not per driver. If you have a good driving record over the last few years, you get a small reduction up to I believe 7%. However, if you have a bad driving record, it can go over the base rate. It might not be perfect, but it does let safer drivers (or at least lucky ones) pay less than bad drivers.
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Picture this: Me (17) and my cousin (18) drove nearly identical cars (1G DSMs). I'm in Alberta, I payed $3200 a year. He's in Sask, he payed $800 or so. I was like "WTF?! Mom, Dad, can we move BACK!?" Ok, maybe not that last part...
Since then though, my insurance has gone as high as $4200, and is just now (that i'm 21!) dropping back down to around $2800, even though i've got a spotless record. My cousin wrote off his
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
The simple explanation here is that the Saskatchewan taxpayers are picking up the difference. Sheeple are actually pretty dumb. Ontario has been grappling with this issue for a little over a year. We've got drivers crying for lower rates, and pointing to New Brunswick and Saskatchewan as examples. However, they ignore the benefit caps that have been instituted in those provinces. If you have a car accident that paralyzes you for life, the insurance providers in those provinces only have to pay out a certain, capped amount. The government can't require them to lower rates while keeping the same high payouts. However, in Ontario, if you were to require such a catastrophic claim, the payout would be much higher.
But people don't see that. They only see the short-term benefits. "Yes, your rates would drop $800/year, but if you were to be seriously injured, the insurance company would only have to pay for the first $100,000 of health care. After that, you'd be on your own." Most people tune out after, "drop $800/year."
Since then though, my insurance has gone as high as $4200, and is just now (that i'm 21!) dropping back down to around $2800,
Didn't it occur to you to perhaps consider trading in your pocket rocket for a less conspicuous, more practical car?
Re:No. (Score:3, Informative)
Poking around the site, it looks like you can get sample driving reports, a listing of the data they capture, and a (simplified) discount calculator.
Re:No. (Score:3, Informative)
The hyperlink is actually https://tripsense.progressive.com/ [progressive.com], if you don't want to copy/paste the link.
Re:No. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
If you want cooperative insurance, in the real sense of the word "co-op," there's NJ CURE, which stands for something that has the words "reciprocal exchange" in it. It's like a credit union for car insurance...the policyholders own the company, which is a non-profit group.
In NJ, you need your head examined if you don't get your car insurance through one of these two companies.
Re:No. (Score:3, Funny)
Not always the best choices... (Score:4, Informative)
Then Geico started doing business in NJ. I filled a form online, got a computer generated quote automatically, I followed up with a call that was answered immediatelly and in about 30 minutes I had a new policy that was $500/year lower than NJ Cure and approx $1000 lower than my previous insurance. So I guess I really did "save a bunch of money by switching to Geico"
I guess the rest of the country is already used to this, but for us, insurance handicapped NJersians, this kind of service is like the Second Coming...
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
State Farm is the largest insurance company in the country with something like 15 million policy holders. I worked for a company that wasn't even half as big, and they didn't do up-to-the-minute underwriting. In fact, they can't - your policy is a contract that, barring certain exceptions, can't be cancelled or changed until renewal.
When an insurance company is losing money, they tighten up the underwriting and raise the rates. The bottom line is that any claim is an instance where they had to pay money to you - that's what insurance is for, but obviously the company is going to prefer customers that don't file claims, or file less claims. In hard times, the definiton of "less claims" gets much stricter.
They didn't "screw" you any more than you'd be "screwing" them if you chose to take your business elsewhere. Insurance companies have the choice (within set guidelines) to do business with a customer or not.
I am no longer an active insurance man. Even when I was, I'd recommend all family and friends to rate-shop at least once a year, if not every six months. The reason is because while State Farm could be having bad times in one area, Progressive could be having a favorable claims climate and GEICO could be doing even better, or maybe there's some local upstart agent with a lot of cash in the bank trying to build a book of business. The principle of insurance is the exact opposite of that of the stock market, but the fundamentals are the same - know the strength of your company and factors that affect it. If your company is in the red for a quarter or a year, it's probably a good sign that rate increases or tigher underwriting coming soon.
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you are, then let me ask you a question. I recently hear of people's rates being raised...or even having coveraged DROPPED due to results of a credit check?!?!?
If someone has a good driving record, what the hell does their credit rating have to do with their rates or insurability??
This seems like something that needs to be illegal or discriminatory in some fashion...
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
So my new masters are Allstate. They ran a credit check and decided to up my auto premiums 'cause I have a bankruptcy a few years back on my credit report
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, for the insurance company, the first few years is like giving you a loan. For an automobile, you're getting anywhere from 20k - 1 million in liability coverage generally, so they want to know if A) you're going to have a catastrophic loss tomorrow, which a correlation has been found between poor credit and more claims, and B) they want to know if you're going to pay your premiums. One of the most comm
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now which is more expensive--finding new insurance right after an accident, or finding new insurance four years after an accident? It sounds like State Farm saved you a lot of money by continuing you insure you.
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
It do
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
Cheers,
Erick
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
What you've said would be like telling a 45-year old man, living a comfortable middle-class lifestyle with $1 million in an IRA or 401k that he should cash it out and blow it on a big house, car, and vacation because he obviously doesn't need the money - he's living well now. Fact is, he IS going to need that money someday when he retires. And that money in the bank fo
Re:No. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Cheers,
Erick
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
And no, big brother isn't worth the dollars. Besides which, I don't understand how people can even imagine bitching about auto insurance rates. I pay 1200 bucks a year for car insurance, it's nothing. Decent health insurance costs me over 5000 a year by comparison, and I'm a healthy, single 25 year old male. At least that's the ratio in Ma
Speed vs Stupidity (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
But there has to be some value to the consumer to counter the privacy concerns, right? (so the insurance mega-corporations will have time to get this implemented to such a wide degree that it
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
My Valentine One has paid for itself many, many, many times over....both in tickets and potential insurance rate raises...
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you no experience in the real world?
The most likely outcome is that the rates will stay the same and the payouts will be reduced as they find you don't "deserve" a payout becuase when you were hit by a drunk driver you were going two miles over the speed limit.
Re:No. (Score:2, Insightful)
Exactly (Score:2)
Prove them wrong. Get your insurance cheap by driving right. Sounds good to me and it's not something I had a chance to do at 18 when I drove a Firebird.
Re:No. (Score:2)
And how can they prove that their software is accurate to what you are doing?
how speed limits are really set (Score:3, Insightful)
do this is to set a low speed limit and then not
bother enforcing it much. This way, the slow old
people are happy knowing that the elected officials
have done something about those awful fast drivers,
while the rest of us can go about our business as
fast as needed.
So it is assumed that we break the law.
The one problem is that, in some states, small
towns along a highway will decide that the
highway is going to be a revenue source. Better
states will only allow en
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
I had a psyc prof point out one time that if the various motor vehicle admins out there sent out a notice to everyone each year who did not get any points, the recognition alone was likely to cause some good. But, as a society, we are far more focused on pathology than what is good.
Cheers,
Erick
http://www.brainglass.com
The Sad Black Box. (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean one person is monitored being good, the other one is not monitored being good, but penalized. Kinda ironic in a society of presumed innocense. Frankly, I'll drop any insurance company that pulls this crap.
Re:The Sad Black Box. (Score:3, Informative)
You have the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. However, this is only in respect to the government, as you have no choice over what it does.
When it comes to your insurance company, you have entered into that relationship voluntarily.
--
OT: I already have all the FreeIpods referrals that I need, but I'm running a FreeIpods.com link pool [digdug.cx].
Also, there are now FreeDesktopPC.com [qdb.us] and FreeFlatScreens.com [qdb.us]
Re:The Sad Black Box. (Score:3, Insightful)
With a particular insurance company, yes. But if all of them do it, is it voluntary any longer? (currently a what-if scenario)
"However, this is only in respect to the government..."
Ah, yes. But the government mandates insurance (or proof of financial responsibility). If the government mandates something, implemented by corporations/private companies, are they not acting on behalf of the government? If so (a
Re:No. (Score:2)
Safety first? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Safety first? (Score:5, Insightful)
I couldn't agree with you more. There is absolutely no reason a speed limit should be constant under all weather, traffic, and time conditions. Just last year, I was fortunate to drive a few hundred miles on Germany's Autobahns [wikipedia.org]. Yes, I was cruising around 100 MPH for extended periods of time, but was this dangerous? No, not really (as a matter of fact, people were passing me at much faster speeds than that). There's something called lane manners that Germans seem to adhere to fairly well, meaning that they stick to the right lanes unless passing. Combine this with better driver education and awareness and you have a huge improvement in safety compared to that of the States. Also, when traffic becomes more congested or as the autobahn is near a city, a speed limit is often set in place with dynamic values according to various conditions.
I'm told the situation is better elsewhere in the States, but highways here in the north east (especially CT) are a joke. Many officials and media try to blame the high amount of accidents here on speeding, but after driving on some of Germany's excellent autobahns, I've come to realize that much of it here has to do with poorly designed roadways and lack of driver education.
Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:4, Informative)
This is why I didn't renew my
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
Dupe disaster. (Score:2, Informative)
Upcoming "dupe".
"Trials are complete. All your cars belong to us!"
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:4, Informative)
The trials will begin this year:
Progressive will announce its TripSense trial in Minnesota on Aug. 24. Customers who sign up will get a device the size of a Tic Tac box to plug into their cars. The device will track speed and how many miles are driven at what times of day. Every few months, customers would unplug the device from the car, plug it into a computer, download the data and send it to Progressive. Depending on results, discounts will range from 5% to 25%.
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
If this continuing sloppiness starts costing Slashdot money, maybe they will clean it up.
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
I emailed on no less than 5 stories about dups and spelling errors and the didn't change them nor did the even bother to respond. But the did remove me from the moderator poll and ban my ip for 2 weeks.
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:2)
Really? Can you point to me where they promise no dupes? The FAQ is pretty clear [slashdot.org] about that.
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:3, Informative)
First off, this feature doesn't change anything for non-subscribers. All Slashdot stories are put into the story queue before you see them. The time stamps on these stories vary tremendously. Sometimes the story is posted days in advance (like, say, a Book Review or an Ask Slashdot where time isn't critical and we post a set number a week) Other stories are "Breaking News" and are posted just seconds before they go live. But most stories are
Re:Why I didn't renew my /. subscription (Score:3, Funny)
Slashdot is a public forum. He forfeited the 'none of your business' argument when he posted. If he has a right to complain, then I have a right to challenge him on it. Mod points are at stake!!
discounts? (Score:5, Insightful)
The first time they clock you doing anything over 75 or 80 mph they'll probably be sending you notices. They start sensing sharp breaking and wild turns you may just find yourself without insurance. Chris Rock once said it should be called "in case shit" because you have in case shit happens. And you don't exactly get your money back if you don't. Now they'll see the shit coming and drop you before they have to make a payoff.
Re:discounts? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:discounts? (Score:2)
On second thought, probably not. Insurance companies will do what they continue to do now and manufacture statistics to make sure they can disc
Re:discounts? (Score:2)
Isn't that the whole point of insurance? "I'll pay you x-amount of dollars per month so that I don't have to pay xxx-amount of dollars when the shit hits the fan. If the shit doesn't hit the fan, well, thanks for betting on me." What's so hard about this concept?
Yeh, right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Insurance is about getting you to pay for something that won't ever likely happen... want me to prove it? Keep having stupid accidents, and see if they don't drop you.
Re:Yeh, right. (Score:2)
If it can be used to truly identify the idiots... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's about a reasonable level of privacy. These black boxes don't give it, and I'm sure then can/will be abused.
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:2)
There is a percentage of the population in the United States that seems to think there are no laws at all relating to how you drive a car. They're driving around paying almost no attention at all to what they're doing and they're wrong. The people who can't obe
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:3, Funny)
Putting a camera in your house is not a violation of your rights if you agree to it. And it's not a violation of your rights for any insurance company refuse to cover you if you don't have one. Considering how crappy it would be not to have home insurance, such a refusal would almost make it a requirement to have a camera in your house, recording all your actions without any explicit violation of your rights.
All that would be necessary to make this situation just like the car insurance/black box case
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:2)
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:4, Insightful)
Every time I go to work, once I settle into the flight deck, there's one black box recording every movement of the controls, and another recording every scrap of conversation. In the event of incidents, this data is available to investigators for analysis. That's the way it is in aviation, and now techology has made it economical to apply this principle to cars on the road. It's long overdue. btw, the 'black boxes' are actually flourescent orange, makes it a lot easier to find them in a wrecked vehicle.
If you want privacy, go take your vehicle and drive it on private roads. The history in aviation shows, data recorders are a GOOD THING. When there are incidents, the recorders have records of what happened. People learn from that data, it reduces accident rates, and helps designers make safer vehicles. Sometimes it can be used to identify liability and responsibility. Race cars are the same, much knowledge has been gained from post race data analysis, especially with regards to incidents.
If your data recorder shows you are not safe on the public roads, and that results in loss of insurance, hence ability to use the public road system, couldn't happen to a more appropriate person. This would take less than 1% of drivers off the road, but would increase road safety by orders of magnitude. Most people are responsible drivers on the road, but there's a very small number that seem to think the 'rules of the road' are there to be broken. They account for many thousands of fatalities yearly.
There is a time and a place to 'pick the fight' on privacy, this is not one of them. The public road system is a public resource, with zero expectation of privacy, and a very large expectation of responsibility. Data recorders are a good way to enforce that responsibility, because one look at accident statistics will confirm, there are way to many drivers on the road that just dont understand the concept of responsibility.
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:2)
I don't see how you assume that driving well below posted speed limits and impeeding the flow of traffic would not be detected by this device (plus it is illegal to do so in most places.)
Also, accidents involving cars going 25 mph usually result in a lot less damage to property and people t
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:4, Funny)
It's a hazard, because to get around a car, you have to always switch a lane. If I'm in the right hand lane, and I'm going 30 MPH faster than another car, it's dangerous to have to change lanes to get around him. If drivers here in the states would just ignore the rules about staying in the right hand lane except to pass, then when I overtake a slow driver on the right, 50% of the time I wouldn't have to change a lane at all.
Our highways would be much safer with less lane changing, and we can only accomplish that by making drivers in the US comfortable with driving continuously in the left hand lane. God knows they never do that now.
But can they resist the scrooge urge? (Score:5, Insightful)
" 2005 "I'm sorry, the black box says you were doing 60 in a 55 zone"
2006 I'm sorry, the black box says you violated the TandC that said you would not drive for more than 2.5 hours without a 30 minute rest break"
2007 "I'm sorry, the black-box says you were doing 55.0001 in a 55 zone. Haha!"
Viz, "acceptable" behaviour would be socially engineered.
Xix.
Re:If it can be used to truly identify the idiots. (Score:2)
_Sure_, it won't be mandatory (Score:4, Insightful)
At least not the ones who will be able to afford the extra $1,000 or so every six months that will be eventually charged to drivers who don't get the "discount" for turning over the data.
Lots of commas (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Lots of commas (Score:3, Funny)
*crunch crunch crunch*
*chop chop chop*
*sniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiff*
I can stop anytime I want.
Give em and inch, they'll take a mile (Score:4, Insightful)
"The key thing for us regarding the privacy aspect is the program is completely voluntary. It's not imposed on anybody," he said.
Ha... How much longer will it take before it becomes compulsory?
Regardless, this is still not as bad as Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA), where we could one day see full control of speed on our vehicles:
ISA info [leeds.ac.uk]
As a 21 year old male who loves cars and driving, the future looks bleak.
Re:Give em and inch, they'll take a mile (Score:2)
Then how long before some asshat hacks the wireless transmitters and sets a road's "speed limit" to 15? With mandatory ISA, that would make for quite a few pissed off drivers.
Christ. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is that a troll?
Also, if there was a microchip in my tongue that raised our medical insurance rates when ate a burrito, we'd also be healthier. Or perhaps some sort of camera system in the kitchen that the insurance companies could randomly monitor to verify our mandatory meal plans.
Now whoa, i'm not saying that you HAVE to put the microchip in your tongue, i'm just saying that you don't qualify for the $4000/year TongueChip(tm) discount unless you do it. Also, in completely unrelated news, trial lawyers have forced us to raise your insurance rates by exactly $4000\year.
Precisely (Score:3)
Want to see The Future? Go to the UK, where radar cameras are just about EVERYWHERE.
Top Gear, a BBC motoring show(I highly recommend watching it, it's great fun even for non-motorheads) has been having a field day with them.
They pointed out that:
OBD-II Port (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OBD-II Port (Score:2)
How does it know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How does it know... (Score:3, Informative)
No "penalties"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, when they do their modelling for the next year, they'll take into account the predicted number of "safe" drivers and "risky" drivers. Given their desired profit levels and the discounts for safe drivers, they'll just adjust rates accordingly for everyone else. Guess which way rates will go to compensate for the discounts?
I'm not saying this is a bad thing (hey, it's capitalism), but to phrase it as "no penalty" for bad drivers (and good drivers who refuse to enter the program) is a bit of a misnomer.
Re:No "penalties"? (Score:2)
My friend has one already. (Score:2, Informative)
It also gets annoying though, he can't accelerate too quickly otherwise the box makes this clicking noise warning you that you are going too fast. If he goes over 65mph, or breaks too hard, it will beep and record it; his parents can take the box out and see how he drives. We've looked all over the car and we still can't find that damn
You'll all have to do this now (Score:3, Interesting)
I've posted this to a forum I run for actuaries - the mathematical types who price insurance. I won't post a link as I'd rather not have the fame. But it will be interesting to see what they have to say
However, in the article, Charles Samuelson makes a point that is well known when it comes to pricing insurance. Progressive is basically selecting the cream of the crop for their clients. That means more money for them (less claims probably), and less for other insurance companies. So the other insurance companies are forced to start underwriting for this as well. Pretty soon, you're screwed because all the insurance companies have to take it into account to remain competitive.
Think that's only a vague thing? At one point nobody priced life insurance by whether or not you smoked. In fact, it was probably only about 30 years ago they started doing that. Now of course, they have two sets of prices - those that smoke and those that don't.
In short, you'd better get used to the idea of having black boxes installed in your car, and having it taken into account on your insurance. It's profitable for the insurance companies, so it's coming to a policy near you.
Re:You'll all have to do this now (Score:3, Insightful)
It may not have anything to do with driving. But you're making a common statistical mistake - confusing causation and correlation. Causation is just like it sounds, A causes B. Correlation means when you find B, you find A - even if A doesn't cause B.
A perfect example of this is credit rating. Doesn't effect your driving does it? Well, apparenlty people with poor credit ratings tend to have poorer driving records. So insurance companies would love to be able to price your auto insurance by looking
You've already got one... (Score:5, Informative)
So far as I know, it only holds data for a short time, but if you are involved in an accident, the data can (and has been) [www.cbc.ca] accessed by law enforcement.
something to think about?
Awesome... (Score:5, Insightful)
The black box will think she's the perfect driver.
Good for them, bad for us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, that's good for the insurance company, as they charge more for higher risk areas (or drivers). But it's bad for the pool, i.e. us.
It will be encouraged, it will be used, it will create profit and reduce "losses" (i.e. compensation), and it will spread like wildfire until it is effectively or actually mandatory.
In addition, how many minutes do you figure it will be before "recorded speed and GPS data" becomes "remotely reported speed and GPS data" becomes "transmitted directly to the nearest CHP car," without, of course, the context that a police officer observing the scene would see. Just numbers.
You know, swerving and accelerating to avoid an accident becomes a speeding ticket. Running a red light to avoid an accident could cost you your license. Running a broken red light at 4am with no traffic could do the same. No one will care about your story, the computer shows just what you did. Heck, it probably won't even require (allow) a court appearance.
I'm getting tired of even debating these points, which is why the bad guys always seem to win. They have an inexhaustible drive to control everyone else all the time that keeps them awake at night. They never seem to run out of energy and they never seem to run out of recruits.
And its always the same argument, over and over, every time. You can win the argument ("know your customer" banking laws) and while you're sleeping off the effort they pass the same damned thing again.
The utility argument is a loss, you can justify ANY incursion for that one. Mandatory diet and exercise, 24-hour monitoring, there can be no dividing line from the POV of utility.
The "license" argument isn't an argument for monitoring, it's an argument against public roads.
Just remember, those of you who think it can't hurt you, when it's your turn, the rest of us sure as heck aren't going to speak up for you.
the worse of two (Score:3, Interesting)
problem with mandated insurance (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll let one into my car when... (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously - if the corporate nanny state insists on penalising me for driving then they can just as well DRIVE THE DAMN CAR FOR ME.
In which case, it might as well be a bus, because that's as fast as I'll be getting across town.
I drive like a complete nutcase, but I NEVER have had an accident, nor have I ever caused an accident. I get speeding tickets about once every three - four years. The difference is: I get there fast, if not first.
I pay VERY close attention when I am driving. I don't zone out listening to Rush Fartbag. I don't twitch myself into a state of road rage - I just look ahead, find the empty lanes, and go for it.
My nemeses are middle aged asian women who invariably drive a big Lexus. It's not racist or sexist - it's just that they weren't raised in a car culture - they were raised in a bicycle culture and slapped into submission. Consequently, they're petrified behind the wheel. Perfectly nice decent people, but TOTALLY in the way on the road. The black box will, of course, give them good ratings while they clog up the highways.
I wonder how these black boxes will go over in Italy...
RS
Lots of data, but still not enough (Score:5, Insightful)
However, how can it identify the person who is speeding through traffic, whipping in and out of different lanes and driving right up on other cars (very dangerous on a crowded freeway, and very common here in LA) versus the person who is speeding along in a single lane of a winding road with no other traffic within sight?
In other words, without proximity data (as is, your proximity to other cars) -- and let's be honest, even with that data -- it's always going to come down to a judgement call based on less than perfect knowledge of the circumstances.
Or maybe I'm full of crap. It's hard to tell some days.
Re:Lots of data, but still not enough (Score:3, Interesting)
And that's exactly why only a human, either an eyewitness or an expert, may be allowed as a witness against you; and you must be allowed to defend yourself in proper legal manner. That's how it is today - the police officer is a trained specialist, but if you disagree you can take the dispute to the court and argue there.
A primitive computer may not be allowed to be a witness against you. If some
Re:No thanks. (Score:3, Insightful)
perhaps that's how they got old?
cheers,
Erick
www.brainglass.com
feed your brain!
Re:No thanks. (Score:3, Insightful)
The second two I can understand. But why the fuck would anyone in their right mind ever tailgate? It's a) dangerous, b) annoying, and c) doesn't get you there any faster. So what's the point?
Re:No thanks. (Score:3)
Re:No thanks. (Score:4, Insightful)