Car manufacturers collect data about driving and sell it to insurance companies

[Fuller]

I read this article a while back, I recall that that when you sit in a Subaru as a driver or passenger they automatically consider that you accept their EULA (end user licensing agreement).

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

"Here's something you might not realize. The moment you sit in the passenger seat of a Subaru that uses connected services, you've consented to allow them to use -- and maybe even sell -- your personal information. According to their privacy policy, that means things like your name, location, "Audio recordings of Vehicle Occupants", and inferences they can draw about things like your "characteristics, predispositions, behavior, or attitudes."

The car can hear your conversations with your doctor. It knows your deepest, secret fears.

 

[Paul Lutes]

Yet another reason why I'm glad I'm in the twilight of my life .......

OK, maybe just the late afternoon.

 

[Tom K.]

Driving Dystopia: Automakers Are Selling Your Driving Data to Insurance Companies

A recent report from The New York Times has accused automakers of selling customer driving data to insurance firms. While this is something many drivers had already been made aware of since the implementation of connected vehicles, the outlet claims that the amount of data has ramped up to a...

www.thetruthaboutcars.com

 

[wiread]

Every bit of data about you anywhere should have to be opted into IMO.

and should be able to be opted out of. Cars have historically been about freedom and transportation. Sad to see them turn you into a commodity. And still make you pay for it.
I guess I’ll have new questions next time I buy a car.

 

[BMC]

As it says in the title

Perhaps you read about this. For example:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/technology/carmakers-driver-tracking-insurance.html

Essentially, many modern cars collect data about driving habits, and pass this data on to auto insurance companies who may use it to increase premiums. For example, if you often accelerate, brake sharply, or drive above the speed limit, your auto insurance might go up significantly.

On one hand, this could be an opportunity for safe drivers to lower their premiums (if insurance companies offer to lower premiums and not just raise them, which is unclear).

On the other hand, it raises all sorts of legal questions about consent and privacy.

For example, to link this to skiing, what if a car detected that a driver often stopped for several hours in the parking lot of ski resorts, and then the driver found that their health insurance premiums went way up? How would we feel about that?

I don't want to make this controversial, but what if a car detected that a driver often visited bars, and adjusted health insurance premiums accordingly? Or what if a car detected that a driver visited shooting ranges, or abortion clinics, and that driver found themselves targeted by particular political interest groups?

I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist, but I also cynical that if there is an opportunity to make money people will take that opportunity.

Please discuss.

It’s the future of insurance. Pricing to more completely reflect risk.

At least where I live though, the pricing will, on its face, only provide discounts for favourable behaviours, not increased rates for unfavourable ones. i’m talking here about wearables etc, abd giving insurers access to that data. Of course, as this discounting based on behaviours becomes mire ubiquitous, so the undiscounted base rate will need to go higher relative to where it is now, as it will increasingly capture bad risks.

Is this bad? Personally I’d prefer to keep my personal data private, so I wouldn’t do it. But many many people will. I’m not sure it’s “bad” or “good”. It kind of is what it is.

 

[wiread]

insurance is going to get more expensive for everyone. We’ll all get the regular increases regardless. One might get a discount compared to the guy that isn’t. But it will be what it was going to be regardless of industry spying.

 

[Tom K.]

Every bit of data about you anywhere should have to be opted into IMO.

+1,000!

 

[crosscountry]

Keep in mind, you’re getting these services for FREE (google map/navigation, email, etc). After all, it cost money for them to run the services. The only reason it’s free is because they got “paid” from the personal information they collected.

If EVERYTHING is opt in only, how much are you willing to pay for the services a la cart?

I suspect majority of people would still “opt in” for the free service. Most people really don’t have any idea of how much their personal information is worth - it’s worth a great deal for the businesses! And I mean legit businesses. They would pay, if only people know. But as it is, they got it for peanuts.

 

[cantunamunch]

I would think you need to release the mfg to share data without a court order. I could be wrong..

I posted about this when Tesla announced they would offer their own insurance. Funny how no one believed me then either.

 

[cantunamunch]

Drive legally, problem solved.

Yeh, not likely.

One of the absolute certain things that's coming is road surface awareness. As in real time road surface traction maps. It's actually pretty trivial - the cars track it anyway for ABS and traction control and stabilisation to work.

All of us who storm chase, who drive in windy, icing, snowing, pelting conditions are likely to get our premiums jacked just because we drive in that.

And don't even get me started on how wrong car radars can be. I mean the Honda one gets set off by heavy fog for crying out loud.

 

[James]

And don't even get me started on how wrong car radars can be. I mean the Honda one gets set off by heavy fog for crying out loud.

What does it do?

 

[scott43]

I remember a thing where cops could point a radar gun at a tree and whistle and it would show 120mph on the gun..

 

[cantunamunch]

What does it do?

Sets off the BRAKE NOW alert.

It's also bad about the little yellow/black visibility plates that Maryland put at the end of median fences. These:

Maybe it thinks it's a pedestrian? Anyway, it will reliably go off if you're in the left lanes of such roads, especially on noticeable grades.

EDIT: did I mention that, if you put your arm around the seat and look out the back window to back up it diminishes your driver alertness score to less than 70%? I.e, the driver is downrated for not completely relying on the camera?

 

[scott43]

I mean, I'm fully aware they're gathering crap tons of data on you I'm just surprised they can share to third parties without consent. I suppose there is implied consent in the terms and conditions of use that nobody reads. If there is no consent I thought that would be open to large litigious penalty in the US. In Canada people would just shrug and crack another beer...

 

[cantunamunch]

I mean, I'm fully aware they're gathering crap tons of data on you I'm just surprised they can share to third parties without consent. I suppose there is implied consent in the terms and conditions of use that nobody reads. If there is no consent I thought that would be open to large litigious penalty in the US. In Canada people would just shrug and crack another beer...

In the US people just shrug and click OK when pairing their phones to their cars -> presto consent.

My point is that the software's evaluation of actual functional legal driving is sh*t, and the only ones remotely likely to not get premiums jacked are the ones who either don't use their vehicles or those who drive like potato.

 

[cantunamunch]

EV or no EV?

How about some fun from Toyota? They’re working on “manual“ trans ev sports car. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a44211128/toyota-prototype-ev-sports-car-manual-transmission/ Older Lexus ev video, clunk master!

www.skitalk.com

 

[scott43]

In the US people just shrug and click OK when pairing their phones to their cars -> presto consent.

My point is that the software's evaluation of actual functional legal driving is sh*t, and the only ones remotely likely to not get premiums jacked are the ones who either don't use their vehicles or those who drive like potato.

Yes I feel that the view of the data is not very good. And certainly nobody is going to assess the actual reality of those driving data. No win for the consumer.
Incidentally an insurance company here asked if I would like to have my driving recorded for ten days in an attempt to use that as a proxy for my driving habits. For 10% savings I declined. I presume everyone drivers like a saint fit those ten days so one event could blow up the rate. No win.

 

[Jersey Skier]

Yeh, not likely.

One of the absolute certain things that's coming is road surface awareness. As in real time road surface traction maps. It's actually pretty trivial - the cars track it anyway for ABS and traction control and stabilisation to work.

All of us who storm chase, who drive in windy, icing, snowing, pelting conditions are likely to get our premiums jacked just because we drive in that.

And don't even get me started on how wrong car radars can be. I mean the Honda one gets set off by heavy fog for crying out loud.

I thought you were going to mention how every Honda and Acura set off my radar detector. Makes it pretty useless these days.

 

[cantunamunch]

I thought you were going to mention how every Honda and Acura set off my radar detector. Makes it pretty useless these days.

That too.

Of course, as I drive to DC and VA, anyone who complains is confessing to the illegal

 

[altabrig]

All the collecting, cleaning, analyzing and packaging of data is only done in the interest of better serving the customer.