We all know it's only matter of time... Bigbrother
Discussion
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/01/10/1348222/for...
Aside from the obvious manufacturer in question, march of tech and gps tracking, I often wonder when the governmental powers that be will start to consider the use of the data to spoil further our fun. Will be sad day when it happens.
Aside from the obvious manufacturer in question, march of tech and gps tracking, I often wonder when the governmental powers that be will start to consider the use of the data to spoil further our fun. Will be sad day when it happens.
Ari said:
Double plus un good comrade.
LoonR1 said:
IanMorewood said:
They (some) already try by offering a discounted insurance price if you agree to a tracking box, won't be long until it's the norm.
It will. And here's the most interesting point. Go to wikipedia (Yeah I know), and search for list of countries by traffic related deaths, we are pretty much the lowest by a long way. The figures come from our already overpaid over paranoid public services who seem determined to tell us that the road is the most dangerous part of our country.
Clivey said:
Really? I can imagine that governments would love to mandate this stuff and that insurance companies could easily use the data to void claims / policies whenever they can find an excuse.
I'm sure you can. I can imagine a world where I nail Miss World every night. Explain how a government in a market society can exercise control over privately owned companies to do their bidding.
Also, what does an insurer gain by not paying out legitimate claims? Other than zero customers.
ant leigh said:
Iirc it's by a process of passing laws and regulations.
Most of which are seriously outdated and or not observed. We add laws and regulations on top of what we already have, like a thick coat of varnish on a window frame. we should strip it back and realise that laws must be relevant to our current situation. Otherwise nothing will move much like the window.Incidentally if you want to get all tinfoil hat about it.. why would the government bother with explicit black boxes and suchlike when they (or rather the Police, etc) can already track people's locations via triangulation of mobile phones that practically everyone carries with them anyway?
They'd have far more success working with companies to embed this sort of thing into tech organically so people don't even realise the downside of having GPS in their pockets because they enjoy being able to post on Facebook where they are, use Google Maps for navigation etc.
They'd have far more success working with companies to embed this sort of thing into tech organically so people don't even realise the downside of having GPS in their pockets because they enjoy being able to post on Facebook where they are, use Google Maps for navigation etc.
LoonR1 said:
Explain how a government in a market society can exercise control over privately owned companies to do their bidding.
Really? You mean like how they don't force car manufacturers to sell us "eco" cars or force Internet Service Providers to block access to certain websites?
Anyway, I meant GPS "black boxes" in general (for road pricing, ISA & automatic enforcement etc.); not necessarily insurance company provided ones. - If they were mandated by the authorities and fitted as standard to new cars, the insurance companies wouldn't have to do any "bidding" but would be able to take advantage of the data.
LoonR1 said:
Also, what does an insurer gain by not paying out legitimate claims? Other than zero customers.
Hey, we're talking conspiracy theories, Big Brother and tin foil hats here…I'm just trying to imagine possible nightmare scenarios. Imagining a "worst case" (from the PH'er point of view) scenario, in the future, insurance companies would all add clauses that state if the driver's speeding, powersliding etc. their insurance will be void and thus be able to avoid paying out* if data proved that the driver was hooning (in the same way they can currently void a claim if they've been given false info).
* of course they'd still have to cover any losses incurred by third parties.
The only things worse than that from an enthusiast's point of view are self-driving cars…or the bus.
IanMorewood said:
They (some) already try by offering a discounted insurance price if you agree to a tracking box, won't be long until it's the norm.
How long will it bethen? It's been about 8 yrs since NU (now Aviva) first introduced black box insurance, and it's still very much a niche market for specific circumstances ( mainly young drivers, in high risk areas).So how long is not long? Given that it's been going 8 yrs already.
I believe what he's saying is that in a free market economy the companies that would force draconian measures on its customers would find their customers deserting them for others that didn't, and there would be no shortage of "specialist" insurers eager to pick up the trade.
Nothing short of legislation forcing all insurers to play by the same rules would change that, and even legislation that has a purpose may not have an obvious or predictable effect - e.g. the rule stopping gender being used as risk criteria. Insurers will do whatever they do to work around it and still remain in competition with eachother in their respective markets.
And as far as "eco" cars go, the government may encourage greener driving through CO2 levys on road tax, etc, but ultimately if people didn't want these cars then they wouldn't sell, and manufacturers wouldn't make them. Market forces at work again.
Nothing short of legislation forcing all insurers to play by the same rules would change that, and even legislation that has a purpose may not have an obvious or predictable effect - e.g. the rule stopping gender being used as risk criteria. Insurers will do whatever they do to work around it and still remain in competition with eachother in their respective markets.
And as far as "eco" cars go, the government may encourage greener driving through CO2 levys on road tax, etc, but ultimately if people didn't want these cars then they wouldn't sell, and manufacturers wouldn't make them. Market forces at work again.
Edited by Durzel on Sunday 12th January 01:08
Clivey said:
Hey, we're talking conspiracy theories, Big Brother and tin foil hats here…I'm just trying to imagine possible nightmare scenarios.
Imagining a "worst case" (from the PH'er point of view) scenario, in the future, insurance companies would all add clauses that state if the driver's speeding, powersliding etc. their insurance will be void and thus be able to avoid paying out* if data proved that the driver was hooning (in the same way they can currently void a claim if they've been given false info).
* of course they'd still have to cover any losses incurred by third parties.
The only things worse than that from an enthusiast's point of view are self-driving cars…or the bus.
False info? An insurer has declined a claim based on false info. Please do tell, I'm very keen to read about this, as it's normally the insurer receiving the false info that leads to a claim being repudiated. Imagining a "worst case" (from the PH'er point of view) scenario, in the future, insurance companies would all add clauses that state if the driver's speeding, powersliding etc. their insurance will be void and thus be able to avoid paying out* if data proved that the driver was hooning (in the same way they can currently void a claim if they've been given false info).
* of course they'd still have to cover any losses incurred by third parties.
The only things worse than that from an enthusiast's point of view are self-driving cars…or the bus.
Oh and for clarity, if black boxes become widespread the t eh market is dictating that. However, I'll be there with my niche broker / underwriter offering non black box cover. It'll make me a nice little wedge.
Durzel said:
I believe what he's saying is that in a free market economy the companies that would force draconian measures on its customers would find their customers deserting them for others that didn't, and there would be no shortage of "specialist" insurers eager to pick up the trade.
I understand the point but if all of the major players did it, it would be considered "normal", just as increased energy prices, insurance renewals and fuel prices are accepted by Joe Average. Consider this: My ISP has been forced by the government to block access to certain file-sharing websites for anti-piracy reasons. If I decided I didn't like that, I could change supplier but the reality is that they're all doing the same thing.Durzel said:
And as far as "eco" cars go, the government may encourage greener driving through CO2 levys on road tax, etc, but ultimately if people didn't want these cars then they wouldn't sell, and manufacturers wouldn't make them. Market forces at work again.
To give an example; the 6-cylinder petrol engine has been all but eradicated from everyday cars now; everyone's driving dreary 2.0-litre diesels…more-or-less forced into them by taxation (including that which makes-up most of the price of fuel). Fuel prices have increased by over a third in the last decade; if that carries on, choices will be effectively narrowed to even more eco-conscious appliances.I mean; in the '80s and '90s, diesels were for sad old gits with beige trousers and the first questions you were asked about your new car were about how fast it would go and what size engine it had. Now we're dressing diesels up with bodykits (M-Sport, S-Line etc.) and the first question is "what do you get to the gallon?"
Both the Americans (through CAFE) and the EU already give car manufacturers average fleet CO2 / economy targets, hence abominations like the Aston-Martin Cygnet. It's hardly a stretch of the imagination to predict that increasingly tough emissions legislation will kill-off performance internal combustion-engined cars.
I'm reminding myself of a quote from 'Gone in 60 Seconds':
"By the time you get out, asshole, there won't even be cars. We'll all be cruising around in your little, vroom, spaceships. That's gonna suck."
LoonR1 said:
False info? An insurer has declined a claim based on false info. Please do tell, I'm very keen to read about this, as it's normally the insurer receiving the false info that leads to a claim being repudiated.
As in undeclared modifications invalidating insurance.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-1171729...
LoonR1 said:
Oh and for clarity, if black boxes become widespread the t eh market is dictating that. However, I'll be there with my niche broker / underwriter offering non black box cover. It'll make me a nice little wedge.
As I said, I just had my tin foil hat on imagining "worst case scenarios". There's no need for you to take everything personally - we just have to wind you up and watch you go... 
It's already happened lots of manufacturers ECU's record data about speed and GPS positioning just because they haven 't yet sold that Data doesn't mean that they won't. If you look at the WAZE app for I phone sat nav , it is dependant on real time info from other users but it's better for it ,Googles Connected Cars will take it a step further. BB is watching but, it's useful info
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff