3 ms·

> Tesla Insurance is a kind of small moat. Only idiots buy black-box based car insurance (whether Tesla or any other). I mean, come on, insurance companies ar

> Tesla Insurance is a kind of small moat. Only idiots buy black-box based car insurance (whether Tesla or any other). I mean, come on, insurance companies are already renowned for slippery policy wordings and the desire to get out of paying-out. Do you seriously think an insurance company having access to your driving data is really being done for your benefit ? I would be willing to bet its so that Mr Risk Adjustor at the insurance company can say "computer AI algorithm says it thinks you were driving 'aggressively' that morning". And once "computer says no" you'll have a hell of a time trying to fight it.

justrealist 3y ago
> Do you seriously think an insurance company having access to your driving data is really being done for your benefit ? Well yes, there's marginal value for both you and Tesla in excluding aggressive drivers from the program. Some company with worse telemetry eats the cost of the accidents from those drivers. It's fine to argue that this is a privacy tradeoff you don't think should be legal but there's pretty obviously value to be had for both insurance and customer.
ajross 3y ago
> Only idiots buy black-box based car insurance Monitored policies are almost always significantly cheaper. That's why people buy them. I won't engage on who the "idiot" is in that analysis except to say that Adam Smith probably has an opinion. The reason this works is that it forces the consumers to self-partition into those who think they drive safely and those who know they don't. That doesn't correlate perfectly with actual safety, but it's clear that it's a good proxy signal. Insurance companies may be renowned for "slippery policy wordings", but they're even better known for doing good statistics.
- gleenn 3y ago
  Anecdata but my mother opted for the sensor tracking on her phone through her insurance company while driving and she saw almost zero cost savings.
3pt14159 3y ago
Um, no? Why would a source of signal that has aligned incentives for all three major parties (individual, manufacturer, and insurance company) not be selected for by the market? It's not as if people are buying meteor insurance here. Automotive accidents are frequent enough to where if a policy provider fails to cover damage that really is in-policy they'll be sued, regulated, and shamed. Even more so, since Tesla has a financial incentive to ensure that these benefits really do accrue to the driver.
zerohp 3y ago
> And once "computer says no" you'll have a hell of a time trying to fight it. Cars have been equipped with event data recorders that capture information moments before the crash for at least 20 years. It is part of the air bag controller. Insurance companies have equipment to read that data and use it against customers all the time. You don't need a Tesla or other black box insurance to get cheated.
- gleenn 3y ago
  Having a little accelerometer data that is probably a mild hassle to extract is far different than an always-on, internet-enabled, sensor-filled computer that literally has a camera pointing at your face.

justrealist 3y ago

> Do you seriously think an insurance company having access to your driving data is really being done for your benefit ? Well yes, there's marginal value for both you and Tesla in excluding aggressive drivers from the program. Some company with worse telemetry eats the cost of the accidents from those drivers. It's fine to argue that this is a privacy tradeoff you don't think should be legal but there's pretty obviously value to be had for both insurance and customer.

ajross 3y ago

> Only idiots buy black-box based car insurance Monitored policies are almost always significantly cheaper. That's why people buy them. I won't engage on who the "idiot" is in that analysis except to say that Adam Smith probably has an opinion. The reason this works is that it forces the consumers to self-partition into those who think they drive safely and those who know they don't. That doesn't correlate perfectly with actual safety, but it's clear that it's a good proxy signal. Insurance companies may be renowned for "slippery policy wordings", but they're even better known for doing good statistics.

gleenn 3y ago
Anecdata but my mother opted for the sensor tracking on her phone through her insurance company while driving and she saw almost zero cost savings.

3pt14159 3y ago

Um, no? Why would a source of signal that has aligned incentives for all three major parties (individual, manufacturer, and insurance company) not be selected for by the market? It's not as if people are buying meteor insurance here. Automotive accidents are frequent enough to where if a policy provider fails to cover damage that really is in-policy they'll be sued, regulated, and shamed. Even more so, since Tesla has a financial incentive to ensure that these benefits really do accrue to the driver.

zerohp 3y ago

> And once "computer says no" you'll have a hell of a time trying to fight it. Cars have been equipped with event data recorders that capture information moments before the crash for at least 20 years. It is part of the air bag controller. Insurance companies have equipment to read that data and use it against customers all the time. You don't need a Tesla or other black box insurance to get cheated.

gleenn 3y ago
Having a little accelerometer data that is probably a mild hassle to extract is far different than an always-on, internet-enabled, sensor-filled computer that literally has a camera pointing at your face.