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

Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 333 posts

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#21

Post by bloomingeek »

jprete wrote: post #5

The US doesn't just need laws about disclosure of these practices. It needs to mandate that this kind of corporate surveillance must be a clearly labeled opt-in and cannot be mandated by any contract.

Yes, but to me there's another important issue, with all the tracking tech in our vehicles, who actually owns them? We need to treat this similar to the "right to repair" issue! I paid my money, so I own the product. [IF] I own the vehicle it should be my right to say what software runs in the background.

Of course the company can say, "If you don't like our product, don't buy it." If I want to keep up with the latest safety upgrades to my vehicle to protect myself and all car companies have the same tracking software, my only option is to look for a "dumb" vehicle. This is blatantly unsafe and irresponsible. So, they're saying that my safety comes with a price other than the $40K I shelled out?

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#23

Post by max_ »

idiotsecant wrote: post #16
max_ wrote: post #11

The problem with such issues of data misuse is that people only provide 2 solutions. a) Go off grid. Don't use The tech that these cars make. The problem with this is that it is impractical for people that use see alot of value in using this tech. b) Pass more regulation. I am a Hayekian and I believe that regulation will not help with people that know the ins & outs of the regulation, also it's doesn't stop them. It…

Which specific regulation do you think has a history of not being impactful? I find that the devil is in the detail in this argument because most regulation us massively impactful and helpful and I find that the talking point that we need to get rid of it is generally loudest from those who would profit the most from not following those rules anymore.

GDPR for example has done nothing to protect people from this particular case of data misuse.

The problem with English law, is that you have to explicitly declare what is wrong a head of time. So we just end up with endless needs for regulation ls.

If we had legal systems like Hammurabi Codes, they work work way better.

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#24

Post by max_ »

floating-io wrote: post #17
Eisenstein wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do companies ignore regulations? Sure, some do. But saying 'they will just pay the fines' ignores the fact that we could make the fines existential, or punish board members by kicking them out of the industry. The answer to 'the regulation we haven't even tried won't work if we do it improperly' is 'let's do it, and do it properly'. I have no idea what homomorphic encryption is, but rarely do 'let's add more tech to…

Strangely enough, I know the answer to that, if memory is serving. Homomorphic encryption is where you can compute on the encrypted data without ever decrypting it. Logically, it sounds like a pipe dream to me, but apparently it's a thing.

Why is it a pipe dream I know companies that use it. And it serves their purposes well.

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#25

Post by Sayrus »

max_ wrote: post #11

The problem with such issues of data misuse is that people only provide 2 solutions. a) Go off grid. Don't use The tech that these cars make. The problem with this is that it is impractical for people that use see alot of value in using this tech. b) Pass more regulation. I am a Hayekian and I believe that regulation will not help with people that know the ins & outs of the regulation, also it's doesn't stop them. It…

If I am a corporation and I am willing to break regulations, how will you force me to use homomorphic encryption? Why should I pass on gathering data that I can resell?

The average buyer won't understand or care about it so there is no direct pressure from consumers. I think regulations is not optional (and homomorphic encryption may be mandated if viable?). Breaching regulations is often a "cost of doing business", but some recent regulations (such as GDPR) can actually create very large fines in many countries. So it seems that what may be needed is good enforcement and measured penalties. Another deterrent would be having penalties that are not money.

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#26

Post by jmward01 »

xnx wrote: post #15

As a safe driver, I like the idea of dangerous drivers paying more. There's no good reason the participants should not be aware they are under surveillance though. Sidenote: I wonder if they've considered close follow distance or frequent lane changes as a risk factor.

Spot enforcement with appropriate training and vehicle improvements is more than appropriate for numerous reasons: 1) Regression to the mean will happen with 100% enforcement/over-enforcement. The new standard for 'safe' will collapse to an unobtainable level which will not benefit society in the long run. 2) Safety is not my #1 concern. The number one cause of death on roads is being born. I value getting to my destination without being tracked more than the potential safety gains of strict monitoring. I believe in rational safety measures but "It's safer so we must do it" is an argument I no longer accept. I want to live a good life, not just a safe one. 3) We have seen time and time again that personal information collected by companies rarely benefits consumers and instead is always used to benefit companies. This is no different. I have negative trust in industry handling my data for my benefit.

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#27

Post by mycologos »

idiotsecant wrote: post #19
xnx wrote: post #15

As a safe driver, I like the idea of dangerous drivers paying more. There's no good reason the participants should not be aware they are under surveillance though. Sidenote: I wonder if they've considered close follow distance or frequent lane changes as a risk factor.

Its telling how you phrase this.

If it's so telling then tell us, enough with the dark innuendos!

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#28

Post by JumpCrisscross »

max_ wrote: post #11

The problem with such issues of data misuse is that people only provide 2 solutions. a) Go off grid. Don't use The tech that these cars make. The problem with this is that it is impractical for people that use see alot of value in using this tech. b) Pass more regulation. I am a Hayekian and I believe that regulation will not help with people that know the ins & outs of the regulation, also it's doesn't stop them. It…

> isn't talked much about is the promotion, and installation of homomorphic computing or homomorphic encryption

Sure, the car company will homomorphically encrypt your driving data when it sends it to its own servers.

You’re trying to solve a social problem with technology. That doesn’t work.

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#29

Post by JumpCrisscross »

max_ wrote: post #23
idiotsecant wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which specific regulation do you think has a history of not being impactful? I find that the devil is in the detail in this argument because most regulation us massively impactful and helpful and I find that the talking point that we need to get rid of it is generally loudest from those who would profit the most from not following those rules anymore.

GDPR for example has done nothing to protect people from this particular case of data misuse. The problem with English law, is that you have to explicitly declare what is wrong a head of time. So we just end up with endless needs for regulation ls. If we had legal systems like Hammurabi Codes, they work work way better.

> GDPR for example has done nothing to protect people from this particular case of data misuse

You’re using one badly-written law to discard a category.

Why not look at the FDA? When was the last time you were poisoned?

Re: Automakers are sharing consumers' driving behavior with insurance companies

#30

Post by ceejayoz »

max_ wrote: post #20
Eisenstein wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do companies ignore regulations? Sure, some do. But saying 'they will just pay the fines' ignores the fact that we could make the fines existential, or punish board members by kicking them out of the industry. The answer to 'the regulation we haven't even tried won't work if we do it improperly' is 'let's do it, and do it properly'. I have no idea what homomorphic encryption is, but rarely do 'let's add more tech to…

Homomophic encryption simply means that the data is encrypted in a way that the person working with it cannot use it arbitrarily. Here is an example, I would for instance use Google Maps for Navigation but Google or any other third party would have no idea where I am going. I used it in the first company I worked for and it works beautifully. A) and B) work but they are not as effective as homomophic encryption.

Barring regulation, why would car manufacturers currently profiting off the sale of this data spend extra money voluntarily implementing something that cuts off their revenue stream?
Post reply on HN