Adult Content Warning

This community may contain adult content that is not suitable for minors. By closing this dialog box or continuing to navigate this site, you certify that you are 18 years of age and consent to view adult content.

Now THAT's Progressive

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Rush-O-Matic, Nov 8, 2011.

  1. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,309
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,136
    Progressive Insurance recently starting airing commecials promoting their Snapshot device.


    The idea is, you plug the device into your car's computer, which then tracks your driving habits. Progressive analyzes that data and decides whether or not you deserve a discount for being a good driver.
    It's described in this Wall Street Journal article.

    At the begin of the commercial, Flo tells us that this is "patented," but the article goes on to say
    >"With competitors looking to catch up, Progressive is already working on the next step in usage-based insurance. In a few years . . . the company may not need customers to install a device in their cars to participate in the program. The data could be gathered from a customer's cellphone instead."<

    I think in less than 15 years, either the insurance industry or the government (or both) will mandate one of these devices be installed in your vehicle order to have auto insurance.

    Focus: What do you think of this device? If you used it, do you think your rate would go up or down?
     
    #1 Rush-O-Matic, Nov 8, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 27, 2015
  2. DrFrylock

    DrFrylock
    Expand Collapse
    The White

    Reputation:
    23
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,580
    People will sign their lives away for a discount. This is insane.
     
  3. dixiebandit69

    dixiebandit69
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    827
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,190
    Location:
    The asshole of Texas
    GM has been recording customers' driving habits since the early '00s. I suspect that other manufacturers have been doing so as well.
    This is just one of the reasons why I enjoy driving an older vehicle.

    FOCUS: I would never want one of those devices on my car, even if my car insurance premiums were waived because of it. (And I'm a Progressive customer!)
    I drive more conservatively now than I ever have, but I don't like being watched in any way, shape, or form. If I were forced to install one of those things on my car, I would bypass it.
     
  4. Noland

    Noland
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    41
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,237
    Location:
    New Orleans
    I think in that time frame the insurance industry will lobby the government to an extent that the government will require this, or a similar device, be installed, by the automakers, in all new cars the cost of which will then be passed on to the consumer and the data forwarded to your insurer thus enabling them to have their cake and fuck you with it, too.
     
  5. Omegaham

    Omegaham
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    3
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Location:
    Oregon
    I see nothing wrong with this being done for businesses. Truck drivers? Why the hell not. Garbage trucks? If you think it'll make them safer drivers, go for it. School buses? Sure.

    Personal vehicles, on the other hand? Hell fucking no.
     
  6. Frank

    Frank
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    6
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,351
    Location:
    Connecticut
    This is great, I was really starting to think my privacy wasn't violated enough. To be honest, I have no problem with it now since it's voluntary. I also don't think it will be mandatory in the next 15 years, at least in terms of letting insurance companies adjust rates with it, government may want the info for themselves though. Think about who this negatively affects (other than drunk drivers) most: old people. Old people vote, good luck getting elected or staying in office while passing a law that raises insurance rates on old people.

    I mean, we've already passed laws to not discriminate against old people for shitty medical history, if anything, I wouldn't be surprised if laws are passed to level rates for shitty drivers, not allow the insurance companies to discriminate against them more.
     
  7. mad5427

    mad5427
    Expand Collapse
    Disturbed

    Reputation:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    I think it could go either way. It'll depend on which lobbyist from which side catches a senator getting a beej from the wrong place first. Or hell, which lobbying side provides the congressmen the most money or free bj's from the wrong places. It's all corrupt and one way or another the average American will be on the short end of the stick. Level rates potentially makes things more dangerous by not penalizing bad drivers and this device is too much invasion of privacy. Keep this shit pretty much where it is. You get in accidents, your rate goes up. You don't it goes down or stays the same.
     
  8. Popped Cherries

    Popped Cherries
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    143
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,713
    Location:
    NY
    I'd be interested to see what the actual metrics are to either give you a better rate or raise your rates.
    The biggest downside to this, even in the voluntary stage, the insurance company will have hard data on your driving habits. If they aren't on the plus side of whatever they consider "good", I doubt you will outlive that information being passed around from database to database.
     
  9. Aetius

    Aetius
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    775
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,469
    Relevant to this, the Supreme Court is hearing as we speak a case about whether it's legal for the Feds to attach a GPS tracking device to your car without a warrant.
     
  10. Crown Royal

    Crown Royal
    Expand Collapse
    Just call me Topher

    Reputation:
    951
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    22,737
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    There are probably a couple of people in this thread that will develop KIMaster Syndrome and decide to rail against the flow of this thread like a certain thread from a few days ago, but just like beating your kids this shit is wrong in a unanimous way. No, you are not watching Minority Report. This is your actual fucking life.

    On the other hand, what the fuck did you expect? An act of actual decency from a sector such as this? I did not even shrug my shoulders at the thought of the long, boney, reptillian fingers of insurance companies finding another way to ass-rape you and while we all say "How Hard, and may I have another?" And guess what? Nobody will do anything about this. Businesses can now use the Patriot Act.

    This should be done for professional drivers, while they drive (Cabs, buses and the like) and nothing else. This is just....WOW.
     
  11. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,309
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,136
    The way I understand insurance rates - life, home and auto only; health insurance is a different ball of wax - they base a lot of it on demographics and actuarial tables, combined with your personal history with the company. Every tool they can use to tweak the rates to get it right so their risk is lower, i.e. they don't pay you more than you pay them, helps them with their bottom line. This is another tool. So, to be competitive, other companies will eventually do it, until it's most doing it. So, you'll still have a choice (voluntary) in 10 years. It's just that not installing it will cost you several hundred dollars a year more.

    Most everybody I know already has this device in their car. It's called a mobile phone.
     
  12. Frank

    Frank
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    6
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,351
    Location:
    Connecticut
    This is very possible, and I could be wrong, but I'd figure someone with 10 years of good driving history won't be losing out on several hundreds of dollars a year. The companies are highly competitive, do you think that no one will try to give fair rates to people who see this as a violation of privacy? Like I said, I could be wrong, but I think as long as we keep legislature out of it, the people who don't want this crap will have an option to pay a fair price. Maybe not the best price, but a fair price, say $1,075/year instead of $1,000/year. Then again, I have no idea what these things cost so I don't know what type of spread they would need to justify it.
     
  13. Aetius

    Aetius
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    775
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,469
    Having read how a stingray (or the best guess at it anyway) I don't think it's as invasive or as effective as a dedicated GPS tracker attached to someone's car. In any event, shit's still fucked up.
     
  14. katokoch

    katokoch
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    477
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,631
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    I was wondering this too. I already don't like being tracked with my cell phone, so no way in hell would I opt into this car deal.
     
  15. The Village Idiot

    The Village Idiot
    Expand Collapse
    Porn Worthy, Bitches

    Reputation:
    274
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,267
    Location:
    Where angels never dare
    I keep waiting for Americans to get smarter or wake up.

    Given our complete acceptance of trading our privacy and civil liberties for the illusion of security, I can't imagine too many sheep (ahem, I mean, Americans) won't happily trade their privacy for some cold hard cash.
     
  16. katokoch

    katokoch
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    477
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,631
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    I just don't trust the government that much. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I am skeptical.

    The government is trustworthy with private information and has never gathered it in shady ways or abused it either, right?
     
  17. Thorgouge

    Thorgouge
    Expand Collapse
    Disturbed

    Reputation:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    287
    Those gay things means I can't speed and only fags obey the speed limit. Also, Flo is an ugly cunt.
     
  18. Frank

    Frank
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    6
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,351
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Yeah guys, and think about the efficiency of not having to have officers writing tickets, the government can just mail you speeding tickets every time you go over the speed limit! The officer doesn't have to waste time and you don't have to deal with the hassle of being pulled over.

    It'll be great, just like all those intersection cameras in New York, my friends who got tickets from those always rave about the efficiency.
     
  19. sartirious

    sartirious
    Expand Collapse
    Disturbed

    Reputation:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    TC, MN
    I was reading about a guy who has the same name as another guy on the No Fly List, and to assuage the authorities he started tweeting, facebooking, and documenting EVERYTHING he does. In realistic terms, there is a ridiculous amount of data available on him now - and the amount of effort it would take to sort through all of it and arrive at at legitimate conclusion just wouldn't be worth the effort.

    The effort wall is decreasing as Siri and the like are becoming more developed, but I still doubt that most of us will even be worth the effort of some government crony reading a paragraph synopsis on individual driving habits. For a practical matter, I would "opt in" given the proper financial incentive. I would also be willing to take a monthly physical and full blood panel if it meant that my health insurance company would be more convinced that I am leading a healthy life and working to improve my weight/blood pressure/whatever. Additionally, I would allow my power utility to install a usage meter in order for us both to better understand my energy consumption habits and adjust pricing accordingly. For the most part, I agree with 'sack and think that these are just smart business decisions that genuinely benefit those that are playing by the rules.

    If you disagree with this because you don't want to be caught breaking the rules; then it's the legislation that you are concerned about - not the policing methods.
     
  20. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,309
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,136
    Re: the bold in your quote. Trends like this that slowly crept their way into the health insurance have now been implemented. It wasn't health care that needed to be overhauled, it was health insurance. Yet, look what happened. It's coming, I can assure you.

    I'm 43. I have all the possible discounts I could have for being a good driver - no tickets in 10 years, no accidents - yet, a company I was shopping with for auto insurance wanted to run a credit history on me to see if they can give me a bigger discount. I have good credit, but I told them no thanks on principle. If I've been with you for over 10 years, and you're not already giving me the best discount, and I've never been late on a payment - pass.