Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 195 posts

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#121

Post by burkaman »

throw5959 wrote: post #52
ziddoap wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to post this investigation by Mozilla's "Privacy Not Included" whenever car privacy comes up, because it is actually horrendous. https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare-on-... > Mozilla’s latest edition of Privacy Not Included reveals how 25 major car brands collect and share deeply personal data, including sexual activity, facial expressions, and genetic and health information

Huh, how? Why would someone have a vehicle with someone else's internet connected camera inside?

I don't think it occurs to the average person that when you buy a vehicle, some parts of it might still be "someone else's".

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#122

Post by diogocp »

Scoundreller wrote: post #79
orangecat wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because the utility of money isn't linear. It often makes sense to pay a bit more than $1000 to mitigate a 1% chance of losing $100k.

If insurance pricing is perfect, they’ll charge you $100k+ if you’re going to have a $100k claim.

That's not how insurance works.

You buy insurance if there is an uncertain outcome, e.g. a 1% probability of having a $100k claim. In which case you can expect to be charged around 1% of $100k (plus admin costs and whatnot).

Perfect information means you know the exact probability of the event happening. It doesn't mean that you know with certainty whether an event will happen or not. That would require a crystal ball or a time machine.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#123

Post by gruez »

josephcsible wrote: post #82
bradleybuda wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The insurance companies are betting their margins on this. If they are wrong, they will fail in the marketplace.

Since having insurance is mandatory, if they all charge too much, they won't fail.

> if they all charge too much, they won't fail.

What prevents one company from defecting and taking all the market share?

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#124

Post by gruez »

teeray wrote: post #93
wbl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like it when unsafe drivers pay the costs of the way they endanger all of us.

We all do. However, the false premise here is that this data is able to reliably classify drivers into "safe" and "unsafe". If you brake hard, you might save a pedestrian's life. If you don't brake at all, you will kill them. This data lacks context for driver actions to reliably perform that classification. Also, it is also not subject to any kind of appeal where you can bring such other context and facts to bear on…

By that logic should we stop having red light and speed cameras? After all, it's not hard to come up with plausible sounding reasons why you might be forced to speed or run a red light.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#125

Post by s1artibartfast »

caminante wrote: post #94
dghlsakjg wrote: post #14

This is your friendly reminder that the insurance industry does not generally make money on underwriting. In other words they are losing money on insuring you. Typically the costs of the insurance side of the business are greater than their revenue from premiums. This typically means that insurance actually is a good deal on net. They make their money on investing the float. They can only do that if they attract prem…

Generally agree about InsuranceCos, but I don't think your claim is true about profitability of core insurance operations. Their combined ratios (insurance payouts + expenses / premiums collected) are closely tracked by investors and if they're creeping up to 100% without a systemic reason that affects all InsuranceCos, they get a lot of scrutiny. Here's just one lens [0] for home insurance going back to 2004 (~20 ye…

did you mean [(insurance payouts + expenses) / premiums collected] ?

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#126

Post by gruez »

Scoundreller wrote: post #13
wbl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like it when unsafe drivers pay the costs of the way they endanger all of us.

Once insurance companies can charge perfect premiums, there will be no point in buying insurance at all.

That sounds... fine? If the prediction algorithm really is perfect, and it predicts my next trip is going to result in a fender bender, I'm certainly going to take uber or public transit. Even if it ends up costing an extra $50 or 2 hours of my time, that's still better than paying for hundreds/thousands of dollars worth of repairs.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#127

Post by gruez »

likeabatterycar wrote: post #42
wbl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like it when unsafe drivers pay the costs of the way they endanger all of us.

'Unsafe' is a subjective label often applied haphazardly. I find people quick to label others as 'unsafe' tend to behave in unsafe ways of their own on the road, such as parking themselves in the left lane at or below the speed limit and refusing to move over.

>'Unsafe' is a subjective label often applied haphazardly.

Insurance companies have actuaries to classify risk. They're not asking armchair drivers on hacker news to determine what is dangerous or not.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#128

Post by eric-hu »

dingnuts wrote: post #118
lotsofpulp wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s true, as long as the footage is saved to a device that is not tamper-able.

[flagged]

While I align with your views on this matter, talking to people this way is how you drive them to entrench in the opposite view.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#129

Post by nyrikki »

nemomarx wrote: post #57
nyrikki wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the inference they have isn't reliable enough to predict anything except with broad groups. Swerving to avoid road debris or hard braking to avoid a deer as examples of what have cost commercial drivers jobs. Look at the CDL world for a view into this. I have 30 years of clean driving records BTW, so not trying to justify risky driving BTW

I guess you could argue that driving near deer at all is still more risk of accidents and damage to the car than a driver who never goes out of their suburb?

Your missing the point.

When your kid runs in the road. Do you want the to avoid an accident, or do you want to optimize for them just turning enough so they don't lose their insurance.

When traffic ahead of you makes an emergency stop, do you want the person behind you at a safe distance to error on stopping earlier or do you want to add an incentive to just stop right before your bumper?

There is a reason emergency braking is a popular feature. Humans tend to no apply brakes early or hard enough, even when no distracted.

Otherwise safe drivers are punished also because it isn't a reliable metric, so the actuaries know that they can't tell crash avoidance from risky behavior.

If you know about training fleets and semis, you can see these new drivers taking risks that they should not be taking.

Give it a decade and a lot lost or shattered lives and I would guess these will either abandoned or not supported by the reinsurance industry. Possibly just being another source of income to the companies to sell to data brokers.

Re: Allstate used GasBuddy and other apps to track driving behavior: lawsuit

#130

Post by stackedinserter »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #68
throw5959 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, how? Why would someone have a vehicle with someone else's internet connected camera inside?

Why would society not mandate cameras to make sure the operators of thousands of kilograms of metal at high speeds are paying attention to the road instead of their phone? And to be able to punish them if they are not. Assuming pedestrian and children’s safety is a priority.

For the same reason you don't wear remotely controlled collar on your neck that paralyzes you in case you're doing something dangerous.
Post reply on HN