> Another big problem is lack of transparency: we don't always know what they're tracking. And thats where it gets messy and infringes on personal freedoms: if

> Another big problem is lack of transparency: we don't always know what they're tracking. And thats where it gets messy and infringes on personal freedoms: if you're required to purchase a risk-adjusted product but you don't know what risk factors you're being judged on, how do you know you're not being discriminated against unfairly? How do you know there's no mistakes? How do you know the person you sold your car to isn't accidentally affecting your rates because the insurance company's data broker never got the transfer-of-sale? How do you know the insurance companies aren't colluding and deciding you're on the wrong side of a Red Line they drew on some map? With credit scores, there's been a long fight to get a half-assed kinda-free basically-complete credit report so you could at least see what you're being judged on. Where's the "credit report" my insurance company is making choices on so I can at least try to correct inaccuracies? I get insurance companies make decisions based on information, and better information is just market efficiencies at work. It gets real messy real quick when the information affects something you're often required to purchase and you have no recourse. Go ahead, get the market efficiencies from better information, but if you're being forced to participate, the government forcing your participation should also force the other side to present the information that judges you.