5 ms·

I was part of a project to measure reaction times in a primitive driving simulator. Accelerator, brake, steering wheel from a gaming setup. You drove down a str

I was part of a project to measure reaction times in a primitive driving simulator. Accelerator, brake, steering wheel from a gaming setup. You drove down a straight road, some roadside scenery went by. Every so often you went through a gate. The gate would sometimes close just as you got there. Measured whether you hit the brake in time. Simple, a little challenging. The idea was, for drivers to self-measure if they were still able to drive safely. Tried to pitch it to an insurance company that rhymes with Slate Charm. They acted like it was poison. They didn't want to even appear to be trying to select out older customers. The legal trouble they'd have, discriminating according to age (or even appearing to try) would have brought a landslide down on them.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
Could be a market for BMVs since they're responsible for license renewal. And they already test eye sight.
MontyCarloHall 5y ago
Huh, if they can legally justify explicitly discriminating based on sex and age (younger men generally pay more than younger women, while older women generally pay more than older men) I’m surprised they couldn’t figure out a way to discriminate based on age alone. Edit: here [0] is a breakdown of car insurance costs, stratified by age/sex. Young people pay by far the most, with premiums steadily declining until age 50 and then rising again. So I’m not sure what their objection might have been, since they already do charge old people more (presumably at a level accurately reflecting their relative risk). [0] https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-auto-insurance-costs https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-auto-insurance-...
- scottlamb 5y ago
  Worse: couldn't figure out a way to "discriminate" based on a bona fide measure of driving ability that (I imagine) only loosely correlates with age. But age discrimination laws/enforcement are seemingly one-way, and the elderly vote and sue, so...
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  In the US, it is legal (in a hiring context) to discriminate against young people, but not against old people. For better or for worse, it's not parallel.
  - drewg123 5y ago
    Old people are much more politically active than young people.. So everything tends to favor them.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Of course they discriminate on age. They don't want to make it clear to the people they are doing it to.
  - MontyCarloHall 5y ago
    > They don't want to make it clear to the people Wouldn’t a driving sim be the exact opposite of that? “To make our premiums accurately reflect your driving habits and avoid lumping you into crude demographics like the other insurers, we offer all our customers an opportunity to take a spin in our driving sim and get a truly personalized rate reflecting your excellent driving habits.”
    - maxerickson 5y ago
      But most people wouldn't get a rate based on excellent driving habits, they'd get a rate based on their actual performance.
    - pc86 5y ago
      That's the exact argument they make for those drive tracking apps, isn't it? I don't think many people are buying that one, either.
      - maroonblazer 5y ago
        Why wouldn't they? If I can prove I'm a better driver than the average Joe/Jane, and pay a lower premium as a consequence, why wouldn't I?
        prepend 5y ago
        There’s very little upside - 5% discount for good driving- and lots of downside - 50% premium for bad driving.
        mwint 5y ago
        I looked into getting one of those once, figuring I’m a safe driver and therefore would only benefit from it. What I found on the Internet were (self selected, admittedly) stories of the presence of the device making your driving less safe. Since it’s basically an accelerometer, sometimes it’s “safer” to take a curve fast than to brake for it. Or fly through a yellow rather than stop at it. I have no doubt there’s correlation between those devices’ scores and accident proclivity; but I’m confident my driving is safe as-is and would rather let premiums go down after accident-free miles than on the say-so of a nanny device. So I bought a dashcam instead, hopefully to avoid being ruled 50/50 at fault if someone hits me.
gowld 5y ago
How long ago was this? Now, insurance companies put trackers in cars and adjust rates based on actual speeding and braking.
- thatcat 5y ago
  That doesn't test reaction speed or driving skill. A slow elderly driver who is inattentive/has poor vision and pulls out in front of people would receive lower rates than someone who drives with traffic, but maintains proper following distance and is forced to brake quickly to avoid the inattentive elderly man who just pulled out in front of them.
- JoeAltmaier 5y ago
  Wow I suppose its been a few years. 2010?
thatcat 5y ago
Sounds like they don't want to base cost on actual driving ability so that they can keep using the models that make it seem like 7 years of increased rates are justified when it's pretty well known that reaction time peaks early in life - many professional F1 drivers go pro before age 20. Therefore, your program would call attention to the fact that young drivers with no accidents who are competent are heavily overpaying and they weren't interested because it would prove that they are discriminating against the young.
- x3n0ph3n3 5y ago
  Reaction times aren't everything when it comes to driving. You also have to factor in tendency to speed, tail-gate, drive drunk, or other dangerous driving habits. There may be correlation between those habits and age.
  - thatcat 5y ago
    Sure, that is the justification used to continue basing prices off statistical modeling instead of individual testing.
    - x3n0ph3n3 5y ago
      Of course it is! What do you think actuaries do? Insurance is entirely about sharing risks across groups of people.
  - iaw 5y ago
    After someone turns 30 (according to AAA [0]) their likelihood of entering an accident decreases until they reach ~70 years old. [0] https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuries-deaths-relation-driver-age-united-states-2014-2015/ https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuri...
    - thatcat 5y ago
      The variance overlaps from age 20-59 so you can't statistically differentiate anything conclusive about the difference between those groups. An alternative conclusion is that retired people (65+) don't drive as much and are able to avoid rush hour / high risk times to drive. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm
hmsshagatsea 5y ago
What’s the argument against this exactly? Your doctor measures your healthiness and if you try to get insured, it’s priced accordingly. Older driver feel like they’re being discriminated against? Just take a simulation like this and prove your reflexes are within their defined spectrum of acceptability.
- xsmasher 5y ago
  The argument is the AARP is a powerful lobby that you must not cross.

paulryanrogers 5y ago

Could be a market for BMVs since they're responsible for license renewal. And they already test eye sight.

MontyCarloHall 5y ago

Huh, if they can legally justify explicitly discriminating based on sex and age (younger men generally pay more than younger women, while older women generally pay more than older men) I’m surprised they couldn’t figure out a way to discriminate based on age alone. Edit: here [0] is a breakdown of car insurance costs, stratified by age/sex. Young people pay by far the most, with premiums steadily declining until age 50 and then rising again. So I’m not sure what their objection might have been, since they already do charge old people more (presumably at a level accurately reflecting their relative risk). [0] https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-auto-insurance-costs https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-auto-insurance-...

scottlamb 5y ago
Worse: couldn't figure out a way to "discriminate" based on a bona fide measure of driving ability that (I imagine) only loosely correlates with age. But age discrimination laws/enforcement are seemingly one-way, and the elderly vote and sue, so...
bpodgursky 5y ago
In the US, it is legal (in a hiring context) to discriminate against young people, but not against old people. For better or for worse, it's not parallel.
- drewg123 5y ago
  Old people are much more politically active than young people.. So everything tends to favor them.
maxerickson 5y ago
Of course they discriminate on age. They don't want to make it clear to the people they are doing it to.
- MontyCarloHall 5y ago
  > They don't want to make it clear to the people Wouldn’t a driving sim be the exact opposite of that? “To make our premiums accurately reflect your driving habits and avoid lumping you into crude demographics like the other insurers, we offer all our customers an opportunity to take a spin in our driving sim and get a truly personalized rate reflecting your excellent driving habits.”
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    But most people wouldn't get a rate based on excellent driving habits, they'd get a rate based on their actual performance.
  - pc86 5y ago
    That's the exact argument they make for those drive tracking apps, isn't it? I don't think many people are buying that one, either.
    - maroonblazer 5y ago
      Why wouldn't they? If I can prove I'm a better driver than the average Joe/Jane, and pay a lower premium as a consequence, why wouldn't I?
      - prepend 5y ago
        There’s very little upside - 5% discount for good driving- and lots of downside - 50% premium for bad driving.
        mwint 5y ago
        I looked into getting one of those once, figuring I’m a safe driver and therefore would only benefit from it. What I found on the Internet were (self selected, admittedly) stories of the presence of the device making your driving less safe. Since it’s basically an accelerometer, sometimes it’s “safer” to take a curve fast than to brake for it. Or fly through a yellow rather than stop at it. I have no doubt there’s correlation between those devices’ scores and accident proclivity; but I’m confident my driving is safe as-is and would rather let premiums go down after accident-free miles than on the say-so of a nanny device. So I bought a dashcam instead, hopefully to avoid being ruled 50/50 at fault if someone hits me.

gowld 5y ago

How long ago was this? Now, insurance companies put trackers in cars and adjust rates based on actual speeding and braking.

thatcat 5y ago
That doesn't test reaction speed or driving skill. A slow elderly driver who is inattentive/has poor vision and pulls out in front of people would receive lower rates than someone who drives with traffic, but maintains proper following distance and is forced to brake quickly to avoid the inattentive elderly man who just pulled out in front of them.
JoeAltmaier 5y ago
Wow I suppose its been a few years. 2010?

thatcat 5y ago

Sounds like they don't want to base cost on actual driving ability so that they can keep using the models that make it seem like 7 years of increased rates are justified when it's pretty well known that reaction time peaks early in life - many professional F1 drivers go pro before age 20. Therefore, your program would call attention to the fact that young drivers with no accidents who are competent are heavily overpaying and they weren't interested because it would prove that they are discriminating against the young.

x3n0ph3n3 5y ago
Reaction times aren't everything when it comes to driving. You also have to factor in tendency to speed, tail-gate, drive drunk, or other dangerous driving habits. There may be correlation between those habits and age.
- thatcat 5y ago
  Sure, that is the justification used to continue basing prices off statistical modeling instead of individual testing.
  - x3n0ph3n3 5y ago
    Of course it is! What do you think actuaries do? Insurance is entirely about sharing risks across groups of people.
- iaw 5y ago
  After someone turns 30 (according to AAA [0]) their likelihood of entering an accident decreases until they reach ~70 years old. [0] https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuries-deaths-relation-driver-age-united-states-2014-2015/ https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuri...
  - thatcat 5y ago
    The variance overlaps from age 20-59 so you can't statistically differentiate anything conclusive about the difference between those groups. An alternative conclusion is that retired people (65+) don't drive as much and are able to avoid rush hour / high risk times to drive. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm

hmsshagatsea 5y ago

What’s the argument against this exactly? Your doctor measures your healthiness and if you try to get insured, it’s priced accordingly. Older driver feel like they’re being discriminated against? Just take a simulation like this and prove your reflexes are within their defined spectrum of acceptability.

xsmasher 5y ago
The argument is the AARP is a powerful lobby that you must not cross.