6 ms·

Yet another reason not to buy a Tesla, or any car which does this. Do we really want these kind of scores to determine our insurance rates, outcomes in the cas

by yumraj 5y ago

Yet another reason not to buy a Tesla, or any car which does this. Do we really want these kind of scores to determine our insurance rates, outcomes in the case of an accident and so on? Insurance is obvious, but I won't be surprised if in the case of an accident arguments are made using such a score to determine who was at fault. OTOH, I wonder if this is a precursor to Tesla launching its own car insurance program.

badrchoubai 5y ago
It looks like they're already rolling their own insurance program out: https://www.tesla.com/insurance https://www.tesla.com/insurance | https://www.tesla.com/support/insurance https://www.tesla.com/support/insurance, currently limited to California.
- yumraj 5y ago
  1) Given Tesla's track record in blaming FSD related accidents on drivers, does one really want them to be the insurance company where their and a driver's incentives are obviously mismatched. 2) One of the issues, once the technical issues related to FSD are resolved, is insurance. So, will/does Tesla's insurance have a clause that says that in cases where FSD is at fault, Tesla is the liable party?
owly 5y ago
Tesla is not alone on this. Other manufacturers are starting to enable similar levels of tracking, often automatically opted in and you have to go through several steps to opt out. In a few years, the only option with be not to drive or buy a classic car.
- yumraj 5y ago
  Do you have more information on which all manufacturers are doing this? It'd be very useful information in making a purchase decision.
laegooose 5y ago
Can you please explain in more details why do you think this is bad? Right now, both careful drivers and aggressive drivers pay the same amount for insurance, which means that careful subsidize aggressive ones. Tesla scoring separates those groups and promotes more safer on the roads.
- lupire 5y ago
  As a aggressive driver, my freedom is infringed by this program.
- yumraj 5y ago
  Please see my reply to sibling, @danhak's comment, above.
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  That's not true, aggressive drivers' insurance trends upwards and careful drivers' insurance trend downwards. I have no problem with systems like this but making it always-on and non-optional is insane... The score isn't even geographically adjusted, they posted the formula right there. Good luck my fellow New Yorkers who have to deal with 100x the pedestrians and random obstructions the average driver has to... Hard turning is punished so good luck if you're like me and enjoy going on curvy roads where you can easily experience .4gs of lateral force at the speed limit... Our insurance already has ways to model this stuff in much smarter ways. People in New York pay more for insurance without insurance companies needing every single vehicle's data because driver age and historical data exist... Their comparable programs are opt-in and often can only reduce your rate (I know my old Volt would only share your score if it'd result in an insurance deduction)
danhak 5y ago
> Do we really want these kind of scores to determine our insurance rates, outcomes in the case of an accident and so on? Why wouldn’t I? Seems much more fair than criteria such as age, education and marital status that are currently used to determine rates.
- yumraj 5y ago
  Few points: 1) Assuming you're in the US - Progressive has been offering this for years. Obviously not everyone is enrolled with Progressive, nor do I know how many of Progressive's customers are enrolled in it. But, if you think that it's good, you may want to look into it, again assuming you're in the US. 2) Everyone who drives extremely carefully, say the medical equivalent of young-healthy person, would want to enroll. However, rest of the people won't. Insurance companies want to balance their high-risk with low-risk customers, which is where I think it'll run into issues. 3) The issue comes when your insurance provider has access to detailed data. Say there was an accident where your insurance company would normally pay. But now, they will be able to dig into data and find some clause that they will use to deny your claim and find you at fault. And, therein lies the problem for everyone and not just bad, or less than excellent, drivers.
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    > which is where I think it'll run into issues. Like what? Genuinely curious.
  - mint2 5y ago
    > The issue comes when your insurance provider has access to detailed data. Say there was an accident where your insurance company would normally pay. But now, they will be able to dig into data and find some clause that they will use to deny your claim and find you at fault. Buy comp and coll coverage and they won’t deny, they’ll duke it out with the other party’s carrier to put you not at fault if reasonable evidence shows that
- mns 5y ago
  Do you really want some out of touch rich developers and researchers that never interact with most of the real world determining various things that can ruin your life?
mint2 5y ago
Nah, we should just keep charging people insurance rates based on their credit score because that’s more fair… and not use something that actually is more tied to driving and doesn’t arbitrarily penalize all poor people
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  What a fair reply! Acting like by protesting intrusive always-on driver monitoring... you are automatically defending the use of credit scores to adjust rates! No one could possibly be against both... Not at all a straw-man argument of any sort!
  - mint2 5y ago
    Always on driving risk monitoring to price a product that is always on when driving seems fair. And it’s much more likely to lead to improved driving behavior than charging all 25 year olds more. Or all people with low credit scores more. What are you going to price on if it’s not directly measuring how one drives? A blanket flat makes no sense.
    - BoorishBears 5y ago
      > A blanket flat makes no sense. What do you think rates are based on now? Either this is another straw-man in the making or you genuinely think they were only based on credit scores? It's not even allowed to be a factor in some states, and it's not allowed to be the only factor in many more... - Driver age, home zip code, car driven, miles driven per year, accident history? Do none of those tell anyone anything? Always-on driver monitoring that's not even adjusted to geography... so someone in midtown Manhattan dodging jaywalking tourists has FCW compared on the same scale as someone on 10 miles from their nearest neighbor in the middle of Wyoming... you think that's more fair?
      - mint2 5y ago
        I specifically called out age in a way that shows it’s unfair, and then one of your example of “fairer than actual driving monitoring” was age?! And mr Wyoming in your example thinks it’s fair he’s higher for driving more miles than city man? (Assuming we aren’t pricing different based on location bc your comment made that assumption) and how does one verify miles driven? Best way is oem vehicle integration like you object to. Home zip code is pretty discriminatory despite being allowed and also kinda unreliable. Accident history is okay but not perfect because fault can be hard to attribute. Some Speeding Tickets can be gotten out of or erased, and out of state ones are hard to locate No, all those are very imperfect proxies for driving behavior that are often discriminatory against poor people and minorities. It’s better to monitor ACTUAL driving behavior than penalize minorities because cops target them for tickets. Or poor people who drive okay but don’t have 800 credit so they get charged more. If only there was some way to monitor actual driving instead of these problematic proxies…
panick21 5y ago
This is optional and opt in, not sure what your problem is. Tesla will use it for their own insurance but if you don't have that or want FSD Beta you want have to activate this. > OTOH, I wonder if this is a precursor to Tesla launching its own car insurance program. They had this for a while.

by yumraj 5y ago

badrchoubai 5y ago

It looks like they're already rolling their own insurance program out: https://www.tesla.com/insurance https://www.tesla.com/insurance | https://www.tesla.com/support/insurance https://www.tesla.com/support/insurance, currently limited to California.

yumraj 5y ago
1) Given Tesla's track record in blaming FSD related accidents on drivers, does one really want them to be the insurance company where their and a driver's incentives are obviously mismatched. 2) One of the issues, once the technical issues related to FSD are resolved, is insurance. So, will/does Tesla's insurance have a clause that says that in cases where FSD is at fault, Tesla is the liable party?

owly 5y ago

Tesla is not alone on this. Other manufacturers are starting to enable similar levels of tracking, often automatically opted in and you have to go through several steps to opt out. In a few years, the only option with be not to drive or buy a classic car.

yumraj 5y ago
Do you have more information on which all manufacturers are doing this? It'd be very useful information in making a purchase decision.

laegooose 5y ago

Can you please explain in more details why do you think this is bad? Right now, both careful drivers and aggressive drivers pay the same amount for insurance, which means that careful subsidize aggressive ones. Tesla scoring separates those groups and promotes more safer on the roads.

lupire 5y ago
As a aggressive driver, my freedom is infringed by this program.
yumraj 5y ago
Please see my reply to sibling, @danhak's comment, above.
BoorishBears 5y ago
That's not true, aggressive drivers' insurance trends upwards and careful drivers' insurance trend downwards. I have no problem with systems like this but making it always-on and non-optional is insane... The score isn't even geographically adjusted, they posted the formula right there. Good luck my fellow New Yorkers who have to deal with 100x the pedestrians and random obstructions the average driver has to... Hard turning is punished so good luck if you're like me and enjoy going on curvy roads where you can easily experience .4gs of lateral force at the speed limit... Our insurance already has ways to model this stuff in much smarter ways. People in New York pay more for insurance without insurance companies needing every single vehicle's data because driver age and historical data exist... Their comparable programs are opt-in and often can only reduce your rate (I know my old Volt would only share your score if it'd result in an insurance deduction)

danhak 5y ago

> Do we really want these kind of scores to determine our insurance rates, outcomes in the case of an accident and so on? Why wouldn’t I? Seems much more fair than criteria such as age, education and marital status that are currently used to determine rates.

yumraj 5y ago
Few points: 1) Assuming you're in the US - Progressive has been offering this for years. Obviously not everyone is enrolled with Progressive, nor do I know how many of Progressive's customers are enrolled in it. But, if you think that it's good, you may want to look into it, again assuming you're in the US. 2) Everyone who drives extremely carefully, say the medical equivalent of young-healthy person, would want to enroll. However, rest of the people won't. Insurance companies want to balance their high-risk with low-risk customers, which is where I think it'll run into issues. 3) The issue comes when your insurance provider has access to detailed data. Say there was an accident where your insurance company would normally pay. But now, they will be able to dig into data and find some clause that they will use to deny your claim and find you at fault. And, therein lies the problem for everyone and not just bad, or less than excellent, drivers.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  > which is where I think it'll run into issues. Like what? Genuinely curious.
- mint2 5y ago
  > The issue comes when your insurance provider has access to detailed data. Say there was an accident where your insurance company would normally pay. But now, they will be able to dig into data and find some clause that they will use to deny your claim and find you at fault. Buy comp and coll coverage and they won’t deny, they’ll duke it out with the other party’s carrier to put you not at fault if reasonable evidence shows that
mns 5y ago
Do you really want some out of touch rich developers and researchers that never interact with most of the real world determining various things that can ruin your life?

mint2 5y ago

Nah, we should just keep charging people insurance rates based on their credit score because that’s more fair… and not use something that actually is more tied to driving and doesn’t arbitrarily penalize all poor people

BoorishBears 5y ago
What a fair reply! Acting like by protesting intrusive always-on driver monitoring... you are automatically defending the use of credit scores to adjust rates! No one could possibly be against both... Not at all a straw-man argument of any sort!
- mint2 5y ago
  Always on driving risk monitoring to price a product that is always on when driving seems fair. And it’s much more likely to lead to improved driving behavior than charging all 25 year olds more. Or all people with low credit scores more. What are you going to price on if it’s not directly measuring how one drives? A blanket flat makes no sense.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    > A blanket flat makes no sense. What do you think rates are based on now? Either this is another straw-man in the making or you genuinely think they were only based on credit scores? It's not even allowed to be a factor in some states, and it's not allowed to be the only factor in many more... - Driver age, home zip code, car driven, miles driven per year, accident history? Do none of those tell anyone anything? Always-on driver monitoring that's not even adjusted to geography... so someone in midtown Manhattan dodging jaywalking tourists has FCW compared on the same scale as someone on 10 miles from their nearest neighbor in the middle of Wyoming... you think that's more fair?
    - mint2 5y ago
      I specifically called out age in a way that shows it’s unfair, and then one of your example of “fairer than actual driving monitoring” was age?! And mr Wyoming in your example thinks it’s fair he’s higher for driving more miles than city man? (Assuming we aren’t pricing different based on location bc your comment made that assumption) and how does one verify miles driven? Best way is oem vehicle integration like you object to. Home zip code is pretty discriminatory despite being allowed and also kinda unreliable. Accident history is okay but not perfect because fault can be hard to attribute. Some Speeding Tickets can be gotten out of or erased, and out of state ones are hard to locate No, all those are very imperfect proxies for driving behavior that are often discriminatory against poor people and minorities. It’s better to monitor ACTUAL driving behavior than penalize minorities because cops target them for tickets. Or poor people who drive okay but don’t have 800 credit so they get charged more. If only there was some way to monitor actual driving instead of these problematic proxies…

panick21 5y ago

This is optional and opt in, not sure what your problem is. Tesla will use it for their own insurance but if you don't have that or want FSD Beta you want have to activate this. > OTOH, I wonder if this is a precursor to Tesla launching its own car insurance program. They had this for a while.