RE: Citroen fits insurance black boxes
Discussion
Ah I see. I fully agree that excellent observation and anticipation can negate most hard braking. I'm talking about 'emergency' braking. Even with the most finely-honed observational skills, and superb anticipation, sometimes the random can happen. If having a box fitted made someone hesitate for a moment longer than a person without one (the nice person with the box fitted mentioned that it made them think twice about braking hard, or something like that), then that would be 'a bad thing'.
We have black boxes in our landrovers. I was navigating a huge hill, engaged low range and off i went.. Ended up pretty high in the rev range and got to the top of the hill - Got called in by the master driver and told i was being charged for "Recklessly ragging a land rover on exercise" - I proceeded to explain to him that his pissy little box can record all it wants, but when there is a major hill in front of me and my 3/4 ton trailer, low range is the weapon of choice and at the end it was a balls out attempt to get to where i was needed. I didn't get charged. But what's to say that an insurance company will admit defeat to superior logic and reality? Nil. Terrible idea - Driving standards are where it's at. I spent 6yrs in Germany driving the autobahns and through proper snow. Here, people can't even check their mirrors at 70mph (as i found out the other day when someone joined the motorway and pulled straight out into L3, oblivious from the comfort of their BMW that my RS was sat alongside them in L3 at 70mph finishing an overtake on the car in L2) or through 5mm snow without crashing.
I asked a new guy at work to change a wheel on a landrover. He asked me how? I asked if he'd been taught it on any driving courses including B+E and it resulted in a flat out NO. Basics like that need to be taught as well as firmer reinforcement of driving standards, like not driving from motorway junctions directly to L3 without using mirrors or signals.
I asked a new guy at work to change a wheel on a landrover. He asked me how? I asked if he'd been taught it on any driving courses including B+E and it resulted in a flat out NO. Basics like that need to be taught as well as firmer reinforcement of driving standards, like not driving from motorway junctions directly to L3 without using mirrors or signals.
Next, compulsory tracking implants in your back teeth, for your safety and security and ease of processing in airports. You know it makes sense.
How about introducing a proper driving test? So much of the trouble starts because we deem people competent to drive after a few stage-managed low speed manoeuvres in a 30mph zone in suburbia. Night driving, motorway driving and driving on slippery surfaces is not taught at all. Also, get like the bikers and have staged access to more powerful vehicles, etc. If this was my only choice as a kid - perpetual nannying or walking, I'd walk or buy a scooter. I see a great future for software engineers who can hack into these poxy things.
How about introducing a proper driving test? So much of the trouble starts because we deem people competent to drive after a few stage-managed low speed manoeuvres in a 30mph zone in suburbia. Night driving, motorway driving and driving on slippery surfaces is not taught at all. Also, get like the bikers and have staged access to more powerful vehicles, etc. If this was my only choice as a kid - perpetual nannying or walking, I'd walk or buy a scooter. I see a great future for software engineers who can hack into these poxy things.
I dont see how this will help young drivers if they already have to have 2 years no claims? I'm 19 and have 1 year no claim and a non fault accident and it just cost me £900 to renew for my 1.6 saxo vtr. Thats hardly expensive considering a saxo definitely isnt the cheapest car i could own for insurance!!
Thin end of the wedge indeed. - If these things are forced upon us, I'm moving to a country that doesn't delight in this sort of thing. - Being a computer engineer and dealing in security, I've already had about enough and I can't stand this s
thole as it is. At least it'll give me an excuse to move somewhere where the Sun shines for more than five minutes.TwigtheWonderkid said:
Kawasicki said:
I think the idea of being constantly monitored is terrible, I hate Citroen for this. I love the risk of driving on the open road, I don't want my life to be safe, safe is boring.
Good for you, so long as you don't hit me coming the other way when you're doing the macho tt routine. If there was no risk, I would find life very dull.
Oh yeah, no need for name calling.
Kawasicki said:
The risk of me hitting you is very low, I'm extremely focused on monitoring both present and potential risks, what's macho about that? My 6 year old daughter is getting pretty adept at risk assessment, I wouldn't call her macho either.
If there was no risk, I would find life very dull.
Oh yeah, no need for name calling.
If there was no risk, I would find life very dull.
Oh yeah, no need for name calling.
If we currently manage to enjoy ourselves without wiping-out half the population, nothing would change just because those who can't concentrate for long enough to put their lights on when it gets dark demonise it. The problem is that they now have the tools to reduce us to their standards (and the law won't stop them / doesn't value freedom or privacy). As is often said; you can't argue with these idiots. - They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Personally, I think we need a genuine "doomsday" moment to enforce natural selection and rid us of these leeches.
trashbat said:
Captain Muppet said:
Such as? Also how are you going to measure them?
Genuinely interested.
Is that not the very subject of the thread?Genuinely interested.
I suggested that it might one day become a mix of telematics and video.
So the box flags up an incident of high cornering G and then video then gets shown to a person to judge it? That's not measuring driving standards, that's just filtering for incidents that an experienced driver can then make an expert judgement on.
I was hoping you'd thought of a way to measure observation and being predictable, which are the two things that really help if you never want to crash or be crashed in to.
Captain Muppet said:
Oh.
So the box flags up an incident of high cornering G and then video then gets shown to a person to judge it? That's not measuring driving standards, that's just filtering for incidents that an experienced driver can then make an expert judgement on.
I was hoping you'd thought of a way to measure observation and being predictable, which are the two things that really help if you never want to crash or be crashed in to.
No, automated video analysis - go back a page or two to see the detail. I'm not necessarily saying it's feasible today.So the box flags up an incident of high cornering G and then video then gets shown to a person to judge it? That's not measuring driving standards, that's just filtering for incidents that an experienced driver can then make an expert judgement on.
I was hoping you'd thought of a way to measure observation and being predictable, which are the two things that really help if you never want to crash or be crashed in to.
You will never (?) be able to explicitly identify observation, which is largely a mental process, but you can determine the physical ways in which it manifests itself.
Life in ten years is going to be very boring, we're becoming like robots
1. No smoking in a pub
2. Trackers on works vans etc
3. Monitored telephone calls
4. Black box in your car
5. Speed cameras and 20mph limits
6. Those smart cars that record your driving, local council enforcement
It wont take long until you have a camera above your desk at work and a satellite in the sky to record everyones movements to and from your house etc and thermal imaging which records you in your house "for your safety"
There will come a time when everyone has an ankle tag "for your safety".
The other thing will be breathalysed before going into a pub, bar etc and also upon buying a drink or leaving the premises. If for example you have too much wine with dinner you will be fined.
I dont smoke or drink but its now got beyond a joke.
With technology getting better and the government needing more and more money they will keep inventing more ways to get you.
1. No smoking in a pub
2. Trackers on works vans etc
3. Monitored telephone calls
4. Black box in your car
5. Speed cameras and 20mph limits
6. Those smart cars that record your driving, local council enforcement
It wont take long until you have a camera above your desk at work and a satellite in the sky to record everyones movements to and from your house etc and thermal imaging which records you in your house "for your safety"
There will come a time when everyone has an ankle tag "for your safety".
The other thing will be breathalysed before going into a pub, bar etc and also upon buying a drink or leaving the premises. If for example you have too much wine with dinner you will be fined.
I dont smoke or drink but its now got beyond a joke.
With technology getting better and the government needing more and more money they will keep inventing more ways to get you.
trashbat said:
et's assume the perfect measuring device for a moment.
Is this kind of driving safer than the norm? If it is, then why would it go up? If it isn't, then what's the problem?
Well the norm in my area seems to be 40mph regardless of speedlimit and hazards, looking rounnd at the kids to stop them arguing in the back and sipping coffee whilst writing a text message.Is this kind of driving safer than the norm? If it is, then why would it go up? If it isn't, then what's the problem?
Personally, I'd argue that in many cases enthusiastic driving, in appropriate circumstances (time, location, conditions etc), and with a driver who is driving within their own limitations, then it can be safer, or at least no more dangerous than the 'norm'.
The mistake here is believing that the box monitors 'saftey'. It doesnt. It monitors a set of parameters which if your driving falls into those parameters the insurance company has decided it will give you 'discounts' for.
Discounts being the operative word - there is no obligation for the insurance company to maintain such discounts, or keep the parameters the same, it will simply become a tool for driving the most profitability for the company.
Previous said:
Well the norm in my area seems to be 40mph regardless of speedlimit and hazards, looking rounnd at the kids to stop them arguing in the back and sipping coffee whilst writing a text message.
Personally, I'd argue that in many cases enthusiastic driving, in appropriate circumstances (time, location, conditions etc), and with a driver who is driving within their own limitations, then it can be safer, or at least no more dangerous than the 'norm'.
The mistake here is believing that the box monitors 'saftey'. It doesnt. It monitors a set of parameters which if your driving falls into those parameters the insurance company has decided it will give you 'discounts' for.
Those parameters presumably come about from assessment of risk. They might not, of course: they might be an assessment of how much the policyholder gives a sPersonally, I'd argue that in many cases enthusiastic driving, in appropriate circumstances (time, location, conditions etc), and with a driver who is driving within their own limitations, then it can be safer, or at least no more dangerous than the 'norm'.
The mistake here is believing that the box monitors 'saftey'. It doesnt. It monitors a set of parameters which if your driving falls into those parameters the insurance company has decided it will give you 'discounts' for.
t about massive premiums, but let's assume they are at least mostly linked to your chances of stacking your car into something fleshy or expensive.If the enthusiast driving patterns produce fewer, lesser claims than the 40mph everywhere driving patterns, then why shouldn't your premium come down?
Of course this relies on the device having enough data and intelligence to differentiate between let's say a police Class 1 (not in an emergency) driver and some freshly passed idiot going for it in a Corsa, but I did say it was perfect...
trashbat said:
Of course this relies on the device having enough data and intelligence to differentiate between let's say a police Class 1 (not in an emergency) driver and some freshly passed idiot going for it in a Corsa, but I did say it was perfect...
The device doesn't understand the difference in context, but the insurer does, which is why they are being mostly offered to certain classes of driver. I'd be comfortable about sitting in the passenger seat while a police class 1 made full use of a fast car's performance down a country road. An 18 year old new driver - somewhat less so. 
meggysaurus said:
I have a black box fitted to my car and it brought my insurance down from £2.5k last year to £875 I'm paying now! You really do see the benefits of it because it does teach you to drive carefully and adapt your driving style and also get a discount every 3 months, I do get the itch to floor it but knowing that box is monitoring stops me doing that, my biggest gripe about it is that the box doesn't see what I see. For example, I was driving along at 30mph in a residential area when some berk comes running out of nowhere and made me slam my brakes on and I got an amber light on my driving feedback. The same goes when that dhead in an audi decided to cut me up and made me brake harsh. There are pro's and cons to this system and a few kinks that need worked out but other than that its not too bad. Some insurance companies who do this sort of thing impose curfews or mileage restrictions but the people I've been with don't do that.
Well - you knew the amber would come on - You could have just ran the berk over - if you had a camera proving it was his fault you could have avoided a claim and not had the amber light, saving you more money.head in an audi decided to cut me up and made me brake harsh. There are pro's and cons to this system and a few kinks that need worked out but other than that its not too bad. Some insurance companies who do this sort of thing impose curfews or mileage restrictions but the people I've been with don't do that.On a slightly more serious note, I wonder if this would casue hesitiation in drivers performing emergency stops, especially those who have only ever driven with these devices?
I can see the perceived benefits of a monitoring system, being able to change premiums according to "risk" is something that looks entirely reasonable.
Unfortunately, I also see that my understanding of "risk" and output from dumb black box that measures simple inputs like speed and G with no context are not compatible.
As has been said before (and will again no doubt) if I am driving slowly down a residential street paying particular attention to parked vehicles and being ready to stop at a moments notice when the child I was prepared for jumps out from behind the transit and I perform the emergency stop so I don't kill them, that would be logged as sudden braking and earmarked as "risk" when in fact the opposite happened. If alternatively, I sped down the same road juggling a coffee and a phone and ended up brushing against the kid "from nowhere" that I didn't expect or see then that wouldn't be logged as "risk".
Also, being a petrolhead I like to take to the track occasionally, how would that be logged? Would I get an immediate insurance cancellation as the computer says No?
Unfortunately, I also see that my understanding of "risk" and output from dumb black box that measures simple inputs like speed and G with no context are not compatible.
As has been said before (and will again no doubt) if I am driving slowly down a residential street paying particular attention to parked vehicles and being ready to stop at a moments notice when the child I was prepared for jumps out from behind the transit and I perform the emergency stop so I don't kill them, that would be logged as sudden braking and earmarked as "risk" when in fact the opposite happened. If alternatively, I sped down the same road juggling a coffee and a phone and ended up brushing against the kid "from nowhere" that I didn't expect or see then that wouldn't be logged as "risk".
Also, being a petrolhead I like to take to the track occasionally, how would that be logged? Would I get an immediate insurance cancellation as the computer says No?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff