Phone App That Watches Your Driving Habits Leads To Privacy Concerns 73
Toshito writes Desjardins Insurance has launched a smartphone app that tracks driver behaviour in return for the promise of substantial savings on car insurance. Two years ago, Desjardins began offering a telematic device that plugs into a vehicle's diagnostic port, to track acceleration, hard braking and the time of day you were driving, for instance. Now, there's no plug-in device required. With Desjardins's new Ajusto app, all you need is your smartphone. But this comes with great concerns over privacy, and problems have been reported where the device was logging data when the user was riding a bus instead of driving his own car.
Gosh, really? It's a privacy concern? (Score:5, Insightful)
No kidding. It's tracking you constantly when you're in your car, and in some cases, even when you're not. You've sold your personal data (your current location) for a tiny bit of lucre. Why people might think this ISN'T a walking, talking privacy breach of the first order is beyond me.
Re: (Score:1)
First it's optional, next thing you know, it's mandatory. Just like secure soot and anything related to treacherous computer.
Don your shock-collar, citizen. It's for your own good.
Re: (Score:2)
eh, secure boot.. typo.
What! Insecure soot? We must do something! Think of the children!
Re: (Score:2)
There is a situation where this sort of this is worth, and the base concept is sound (cheaper premiums to verifiably safer drivers).
You'd need a not for profit organisation to actually collect the data. The insurance industry should fund it but have no direct control over it. The organisation would then set out stringent privacy controls and only give the insurance companies a score and no real data.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a situation where this sort of this is worth, and the base concept is sound (cheaper premiums to verifiably safer drivers).
You'd need a not for profit organisation to actually collect the data. The insurance industry should fund it but have no direct control over it. The organisation would then set out stringent privacy controls and only give the insurance companies a score and no real data.
That sounds like asking for a non-profit (because they are not corruptible?) version of google.
Re: (Score:2)
what planet are you from?
this database would be bent over and f*cked from all sides, the gov't, the insurance industry and anybody else who could make a buck from accessing this data.
In particular, the gov't would need unfettered access to it, because they heard a terrorist once rode in a car. And also a child-molester.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, terrorists will ride anything.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd need a not for profit organisation to actually collect the data. The insurance industry should fund it but have no direct control over it. The organisation would then set out stringent privacy controls and only give the insurance companies a score and no real data.
Until the police want the information, or your in an accident and Marcus and Mack subpoena your data after a car accident. Those guys mean business!
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not sure what is exactly your point. If you have a cell phone, even a dumb phone, you are already being track at least by your phone company (which will give the data to the government if asked). Sorry, but you already lost your "privacy". So what is your point?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's just say I'd rather keep the problem scope as limited as possible rather than purposefully propagating it. This app is collecting personal data on an entirely different level, and it's being collected with the express purpose of being monetized.
Just because your car is at risk of being stolen just about anywhere doesn't mean you should park it on the street overnight in a crime-ridden neighborhood with a sign on it that ways "Please take me - I'm unlocked!"
Re: (Score:1)
On an entirely different level? Apart from data about the way I drive, they will have LESS data than what Google (I have an Android phone), my phone company and the government already have on me (they not only have access to my location, but they also have access to most of my communications). Talking about the government, they have also access to what I earn, the money I spend and in big part what I buy (for example when I buy something with my debit card or credit card), they have access to my medical rec
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a privacy breach if you willingly give away your privacy. That is the system working as intended.
It would all stop if we instituted some laws with severe built-in penalties for collecting this information and subsequently mishandling it. Not just for known breaches, but there should be fines just for poor practices.
Re: (Score:2)
Why people might think this ISN'T a walking, talking privacy breach of the first order is beyond me.
Because most people are stupid, that's why. They can't see past their own noses. They allow retail stores to track all their purchases in very personalized detail in return for a few pennies off what they buy. They're willing to have some corporation know where they are and what they're doing 24/7/365, just for a few dollars discount. They let some company have their biometric data because they like their shiny new wristband that tells them how many steps they took today, thinking that's going to make them
c'mon, /. saw this coming 6 years ago (Score:2)
You WILL comply. (Score:1)
As a hypothetical member of the insurance industry, I just wanted to point out that those of you who are concerned will be drowned out by those of you who want to save a buck and have nothing to hide.
This will start out as a voluntary discount, but as our competitors start to adopt the same strategy, we will save costs and demonstrate profitability to our shareholders by raising the cost of opting-out significantly, as will the industry as a whole, until it becomes enough of a financial burden that the few
How does this work? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
With how long my (probably typical) smartphone battery lasts, it wouldn't be too odd for it to be off while I'm driving sometimes. And with my aggressive cornering some days, that could be a good thing.
Re:How does this work? (Score:4, Funny)
What if you just have your phone turned off when you drive, or don't take it with you in the first place?
I'd imagine there might be an issue if you filed a claim and they looked at the data and said, "Hey, you weren't even in the car!"
"Of course I was! Look at this broken arm!"
"Not according to our data."
"Well, I turned off the phone..."
"Ah! That's against the policy--the phone must be on if you're in the car. We don't have to pay a cent! Whoo hoo!"
Re: (Score:3)
What if you just have your phone turned off when you drive, or don't take it with you in the first place? Maybe the insurance savings are even substantial enough that you can get a second phone and only take the phone with this app on short trips and drive on those trips very carefully. When you want to do your street racing, you bring the other phone.
Or if you are a bad driver, give your phone to Gramma for a while. You touch on something here, in that the ease with which this App can be defeated is so ridiculously easy that it is worthless.
Don't want to be tracked? (Score:2)
Don't sign up... Who doesn't understand this?
In this case there isn't any privacy concerns for me. I won't sign up, load or run the application.
Now it would be a totally different story if the point of the application was totally unrelated to where you are when and how you get there. It's these applications which many people don't realize are providing tracking information to others. Or, for instance the practice of retailers who track your phone down to the inch as you walk though their store, then tie
Re: (Score:3)
The hypothetical member of the insurance industry AC had it right.
Take my health insurance for example. I can't be charged extra for a pre-existing condition. But I don't qualify for the discount for not having the pre-existing condition. It starts with "discounts of up to $35 per month" available if you participate in the health screening (blood analysis, BMI etc.), so you participate. Then "oh, and by the way to qualify for the discount you have to answer the online survey (you guessed it, lots of mental
BMI is a joke don't let the GOP get back in power (Score:2)
BMI is a joke don't let the GOP get back in power or they will be able to use BMI to black list people.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't be charged extra for pre-existing conditions, but they can exclude medications from coverage to treat said pre-existing condition... Ask me how I know.
Isn't this standard? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't the 'app' development process to the point where you don't even consider shipping until you've built at least one egregious privacy issue into your product?
You're thinking of the gaming industry, like Zynga.
Re: (Score:2)
We could call it "Zuckerman's Law".
Illegal in all countries with Canadian citizens (Score:1)
And, yes, that includes the EU and US, under the International Data Treaties you signed.
Re: (Score:2)
well..
but hear this out. why should any country give a fuck about those treaties when it comes to canadian and american citizens when Canada and USA piss on those treaties daily, while mumbling something about cyyyberrwwwarrr?
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't performances copyrighted? (Score:1)
I was riding .... (Score:2)
Privacy and Safety (Score:1)
I'm sure /. is all familiar with, âoeThey that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.â âThose Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.â and it's tempting to apply it here.
However I would disagree. The act of operating a 2 ton vehicle at fatal velocities is not unlike the act of pointing a loaded gun at people in public, but promising not to shoot anyone. Now imagine that hundreds of millions of people do this, an
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't want anyone to care what you do with your vehicle, just choose a less dangerous vehicle. Like your feet, or a bike. Then no one will much care what you do, where you go, or how you operate it.
I grew up without vehicular transportation in a town with moderately good (for the US) public transportation, namely Santa Cruz, CA. And there was substantial social and economic penalty for not owning a vehicle. The opportunity cost alone is massive, and then there's the substantial time cost involved with using public transportation. You either have to live in the city center (which is expensive in dollars) or spend a lot of time waiting around for conveyances, which is expensive in terms of time. Bicycli
Pathetic savings for major loss in privacy (Score:3)
Is it just me, or is 25% off car insurance not worthwhile for all the loss of privacy? I would only consider something like this if the savings were reasonably related to actual risk. I have frequently avoided driving on days where there were major traffic issues, or arranged to work from home (or very close to home) in bad weather, so my risk went to zero on a day that could have been expensive for the insurer.
Currently though, I get a 40% discount from a major insurer just because of where I work, and further discounts for having home insurance with the same company. These have no bearing at all on the actual risk of a claim, but add up to a much bigger discount than this new program and its invasion of privacy.
Red pill please. (Score:3)
"Sorry Mr. Anderson, but our records show you going over 300 mph for nearly 4 hours. We are going to have to cancel your policy."
Re: (Score:2)
The altitude reading should be a keying factor there. In fact most GPS units refuse to work over like 15k feet on the assumption that it could be used as a bomb trigger or missile guidance (though I think the real reason is so that aviation GPS can be freaking expensive).
Re: (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C... [wikipedia.org]
I didn't determine the restrictions, we just live by them. If your GPS works, more power to you, but not all GPS are guaranteed to work.
Re: (Score:2)
Another point. I once drove onto the George Washington Bridge (double decker bridge in New York) and my GPS showed me going 1000M/H south along the river. GPS isn't terribly accurate all the time, and is easily defeated/attenuated by even water in the air.
Punished for other people's driving. (Score:4, Interesting)
But this comes with great concerns over privacy, and problems have been reported where the device was logging data when the user was riding a bus instead of driving his own car.
So is there some additional device in the car the phone app pairs with? Otherwise, how does the app know when you're driving your own car or simply a passenger in someone else's. This whole thing doesn't sound like it was thought out very well.
Arbitrary judgement of driving style (Score:2)
Is someone who briskly takes off from a light -- not doing burnouts or other kinds of hooning, -- automatically less safe than someone who rolls out at snails' pace?
Is someone who goes around a corner with some amount of G automatically less safe than those who take forever to negotiate the same corner?
At least it should catch those who wait until the last moment to brake when approaching a light or other traffic.
This app is going to penalize people that aren't in fact less safe, and it will utterly fail at
Re: (Score:2)
Is someone who briskly takes off from a light -- not doing burnouts or other kinds of hooning, -- automatically less safe than someone who rolls out at snails' pace?
Yes. You may confuse other drivers, and you are at greater risk of not seeing/not being seen by a cross traffic which fails to obey signals/signage.
Is someone who goes around a corner with some amount of G automatically less safe than those who take forever to negotiate the same corner?
Yes. In the case of equipment failure, or invisible patches of reduced traction on the pavement, you will slip farther out of your chosen line than someone who is pulling less Gs.
This app is going to penalize people that aren't in fact less safe,
But it will base that determination on actions which in fact are less safe.
No, it won't detect truly dangerous behavior
The behavior you want to dismiss as not being truly dangerous is truly dangerous. It is possibly not as danger
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with that is that this device and insurance in general doesn't factor in driver ability. Sure I brake harder and later than the general driving population and I corner like my car is on rails. But 1) I actually have a decent amount of race track experience where I actually AM controlling the car at the absolute limits, 2) I never come close to those limits on the street, 3) I maintain my car significantly better than the average vehicle on the road, 4) I have far better tires than the average ve
Re: (Score:2)
Braking harder and later puts you at risk if your braking is degraded for any reason.
The rest of that could easily be taken up by letting your insurance company know. However, you have to understand that idiot ricers also drive pimped out Miatas, and think they drive better, but generally don't.
Re: (Score:2)
My brake pads are also better than average, my brake fluid is changed several times a year (instead of never in the average vehicle). Braking hard consistently allows me to keep track of the condition of my brakes.
Insurance agents have no power, desire, or ability to adjust your rates. All they can do is input data into a computer. And they can only input data that the computer is programmed to receive. Sure there are plenty of people out there who think they can drive better than they can. That's why you s
Re: (Score:2)
So when the rubber portions of your brake lines burst from the constant overpressure?
Re: (Score:2)
Stainless steel braided lines installed in the last 1000 miles for the win? Do you think I replace the fluid and swap out the pads without checking the brake lines?
Re: (Score:2)
I am pointing out that which you still seem to fail to grasp. The insurance companies are right and you are wrong. The driving which you speak of IS dangerous driving. It may be that you haven't had it effect you YET, but that does not mean that it won't happen eventually. You can keep coming up with excuses as to why you are the exception, but you are just making shit up at this point. Your fancy braided brake line covers will not prevent a blow out of that part of the brake system. It will also not
Re: (Score:2)
I don't drive like I do on the track on the roads. On the track I try to drive to 80-90% of the limits of the car. On the road I keep it to under 50%. It just so happens that 50% of my limits (based on car, rubber, and brakes) are at the limit for the average car. I am also not saying that this should be an exception just for me. There are plenty of auto enthusiasts out there with far more driver training and experience than the average driver and none of it counts toward insurance.
My point is that insuranc
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with that is that this device and insurance in general doesn't factor in driver ability.
Not only can't they do that, but every driver's ability varies based on their brain chemistry, muscle fatigue, general health, what they had for lunch, how well-hydrated they are, whether they're wearing contacts or glasses, how well their HVAC is working... There's just no way for your insurance company to account for all of these factors even if they do stick a probe up your tailpipe, and perhaps another one in your exhaust. So what they're going to do is what they've done as long as they've been a thing
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with that is that this device and insurance in general doesn't factor in driver ability. Sure I brake harder and later than the general driving population and I corner like my car is on rails. But 1) I actually have a decent amount of race track experience where I actually AM controlling the car at the absolute limits, 2) I never come close to those limits on the street, 3) I maintain my car significantly better than the average vehicle on the road, 4) I have far better tires than the average vehicle on the road, and 5) I have a much lighter and easier to control car [Miata WOOHOO] than the average car on the road.
However none of my 5 points factor in on insurance. Why would I let them track me to see that my car brakes harder and corners faster than the average car if they won't factor in the driving abilities and vehicular factors that make me safer than the average driver?
From this study summary: [scienceser...ociety.com]
The belief that increasing skill would reduce crash rates has seemed to many too obvious to be worth investigating. Such a belief reinforces the view that driver education must increase safety, even in the face of so much evidence that it does not (Chapter 8). It is widely held by driving aficionados that high-skill drivers are inherently safe drivers.
This was examined directly by comparing the on-the-road driving records of unusually skilled drivers to the records of average drivers. The investigators obtained the names and addresses of national competition license holders from the Sports Car Club of America. They compared the on-the-road driving records of these license holders (referred to in their paper as racing drivers) in Florida, New York, and Texas, to comparison groups of drivers in the same states matched in such characteristics as gender and age.
The results of the study are summarized in Fig. 9-1, which displays the violation and crash rates for the racing drivers divided by the corresponding rates for the comparison drivers. If there were no differences between the groups of drivers, these ratios would all be close to one, whereas if the racing drivers had lower rates, the ratios would be less than one. What is found is that in all 12 combinations examined, the rates for the racing drivers exceeded those for the comparison drivers, in most cases by considerable amounts. Thus, on a per year basis, the racing drivers not only had substantially more violations, especially speeding violations, but also more crashes.
This is supported for me anecotally: I have several friends who spend a lot of time on the track, and are highly skilled drivers. They all drive like total assholes on the public roads.
Re: (Score:2)
This study has some interesting data, but more interesting is the conclusions they draw...
Within a year after the Federal Government ended any role in setting speed limits, 23 states raised their rural Interstate speed limits to 70 or 75 mph. Many studies showed that this increased fatalities. One study compared changes in the number of fatalities for the same distance of travel for states that increased their limits to states that kept their limits at the then prior limit of 65 mph. The states that increased speed limits to 70 mph experienced a 35% increase in fatality rate, and the states that increased speed limits to 75 mph a 38% increase.
This is not based on any reputable studies. Speed limits across the US have been going up and traffic fatalities by any measure are going down. There were all kinds of protests and news articles about how dangerous it was to increase Ohio's speed limit to 70mph a few years ago before it went into effect. It went up, fatalities have gone down (but not significantly), and now all of them are back again to protest proposa
Re: (Score:2)
You're welcome to your opinion, but I fail to see how taking off smartly from a light is going to confuse other drivers.
Are you thinking about me tearing off with smoke coming off my tires? No man. That's not at all what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about doing 50 in a 40, I'm not talking about being an obnoxious hoon. You seem to confuse brisk driving with mad, crazy driving.
The behavior I'm calling out is hazardous -- literally crawling out of a light, and doing 10 freaking miles per hours on a wi
Re: (Score:2)
You're welcome to your opinion, but I fail to see how taking off smartly from a light is going to confuse other drivers.
If you take off substantially ahead of the pack, then you're at risk of getting creamed by someone who isn't paying attention and comes from the side. Maybe you in particular are aware enough to not take off fast when some dildo is coming through from the side at speed, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Is someone who briskly takes off from a light -- not doing burnouts or other kinds of hooning, -- automatically less safe than someone who rolls out at snails' pace?
Is someone who goes around a corner with some amount of G automatically less safe than those who take forever to negotiate the same corner?
Do you think insurance companies are a bunch of idiots who just make this shit up? No, they've done extensive studies of the correlations between particular driver behaviors and insurance costs, and guess what: these sorts of behaviors are strongly correlated with higher insurance costs [progressive.com]. For example, they're twice as predictive as using points on your license.
Re: (Score:2)
Se we should all be mindless sheeple who accelerate so slowly you get passed by a scooter, and corner so peacefully that the keychain barely moves away form vertical?
The insurance industry is suggesting we all drive like scared 80 year olds?
I'd rather die or just give the fuck up and get a driverless car.
Re: (Score:2)
Se we should all be mindless sheeple who accelerate so slowly you get passed by a scooter, and corner so peacefully that the keychain barely moves away form vertical?
The insurance industry is suggesting we all drive like scared 80 year olds?
I'd rather die or just give the fuck up and get a driverless car.
Fine with me, as long as you don't whinge about other people getting lower insurance rates.
Nice! (Score:2)
Just for registering a burner phone I never take with me when I'm driving, I can get cheaper insurance?
It Isn't Privacy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could care less about the privacy, I get upset that they record the data that is easy to get rather than data that is actually related to safe driving. Sure braking force and cornering acceleration are things an accelerometer can easily and reliably measure data, but they have nothing to do with safe driving... These things don't record the things that are dangerous such as not using headlights and blinkers, weaving through traffic, tailgating, running red lights, driving down the wrong side of the road,
Re: (Score:2)
According to the supreme court, there is an expectation of privacy, which is why putting a GPS tracker on your car requires a warrant.