Prev: Unbelieveable!
Next: Snow means tow: City tows 100 cars
From: richard on 11 Feb 2010 12:46
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:44:42 -0800, Scott in SoCal wrote:

> Last time on misc.transport.road, Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com>
> said:
>
>>" Big Brother In The Back Seat: TripSense Records Your Ride"
>>http://goo.gl/mnaI
>
> No, and I never will. Privacy aspects aside, these programs are going
> to reward Sloth and punish "aggressive" drivers like me. The fact that
> I have had no accidents or tickets for 20+ years and the Sloth gets
> into fender-benders every 6 months won't matter; they'll see in the
> data that I occasionally use a throttle position of 100%, that I
> occasionally pull 1G turns, and occasionally exceed the (under-)posted
> speed limit, and my rates are *guaranteed* to be higher than the
> incompetent Sloth's. I have absolutely nothing to gain from such a
> horribly slanted program.
>
> http://electronicdesign.com/content.aspx?topic=big-brother-in-the-back-seat-tripsense-records-you&catpath=components
>
> Participants in the TripSense program initially receive a 5% discount
> for signing up. In subsequent policy periods, they receive the
> discount only if they choose to upload driving data to Progressive.
> Then they may get additional discounts of up to 20% based on how much,
> how fast, and when they drive. Drivers are rewarded for driving fewer
> miles, keeping speed below 75 mph, and staying off the roads at
> higher-risk times of day. The TripSensor must be installed 95% of the
> time to qualify for the discount.
>
> Once drivers have downloaded driving data, they can use the TripSense
> software on their PCs to calculate potential discounts. They can also
> go online and generate reports and compare their driving to other
> participants. Then, they can decide if they want to forward their data
> to Progressive.
>
> I can certainly see advantages, and I am curious to know my relative
> level of aggression compared to other drivers. As a parent of
> soon-to-be-driving teenagers, I especially can see the pros of a
> monitoring device. During my own teenage days, "aggressive
> acceleration" wasn't always correlated with appropriate on-ramp
> situations! (Progressive defines an aggressive acceleration/braking
> event as one in which the vehicle speeds or slows down more than 7 mph
> in one second. Currently, these events aren't part of the discount
> calculation. Progressive is analyzing this data to see how it is
> predictive of future accidents.)
>
> But are these discounts worth having your insurance company watching
> your every move? The Big Brother factor is ameliorated by the fact
> that the program is voluntary and that the upload of data is optional
> after review on the PC. Also, that "over the shoulder" feeling is
> touted as one of the program's advantages. Knowing that the data is
> being recorded will encourage safe driving, preventing accidents and
> rewarding cautious drivers.

And of course, you're doing this all in a 1958 Nash Rambler.
Or did you upgrade to a 1962 corvair convertible?
From: hancock4 on 11 Feb 2010 21:22
On Feb 11, 10:44 am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> No, and I never will. Privacy aspects aside, these programs are going
> to reward Sloth and punish "aggressive" drivers like me.


Previously on this newsgroup the issue of privacy came up, such as in
ease of so-called 'public' records may be access anywhere by anyone.
Nobody posted any objection and several posters were totally in favor
of easy public access to records.

Soon systems like the above will not be optional but mandatory. They
may simply order it to be include, or perhaps use a roundabout way by
jacking up your insurance rates really high unless you have it.

As stated here before, the real 'big brother' is the private sector.
From: Frito Pendejo on 11 Feb 2010 22:35
Richard Bullis wrote:

> And of course, you're doing this all in a 1958 Nash Rambler.
> Or did you upgrade to a 1962 corvair convertible?

The Nash nameplate was dropped after the 1957 model year, along with the
legendary Hudson marque, for the cornpone Rambler. In the 60s, when Roy
Abernethy became American Motors president, they phased out the Rambler
marque for the more sophisticated AMC. Unfortunately, the company couldn't
compete and was taken over by Renault and sold to Chrysler in 1987, who
quickly killed the nameplate. It was a sad end to an innovative company.
One of AMC's legacies was the 4.0 liter inline six that was used in Jeeps
until 2006. The engine is universally respected as being bulletproof.

So my point is, there was never a 1958 Nash Rambler.


From: richard on 12 Feb 2010 05:17
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:35:20 -0600, Frito Pendejo wrote:

> Richard Bullis wrote:
>
>> And of course, you're doing this all in a 1958 Nash Rambler.
>> Or did you upgrade to a 1962 corvair convertible?
>
> The Nash nameplate was dropped after the 1957 model year, along with the
> legendary Hudson marque, for the cornpone Rambler. In the 60s, when Roy
> Abernethy became American Motors president, they phased out the Rambler
> marque for the more sophisticated AMC. Unfortunately, the company couldn't
> compete and was taken over by Renault and sold to Chrysler in 1987, who
> quickly killed the nameplate. It was a sad end to an innovative company.
> One of AMC's legacies was the 4.0 liter inline six that was used in Jeeps
> until 2006. The engine is universally respected as being bulletproof.
>
> So my point is, there was never a 1958 Nash Rambler.

technically correct. However, it was commonly referred to as a "nash".
As in the 1958 song, "beep! beep!".
From: richard on 12 Feb 2010 05:19
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:22:24 -0800 (PST), hancock4(a)bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Feb 11, 10:44�am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> No, and I never will. Privacy aspects aside, these programs are going
>> to reward Sloth and punish "aggressive" drivers like me.
>
>
> Previously on this newsgroup the issue of privacy came up, such as in
> ease of so-called 'public' records may be access anywhere by anyone.
> Nobody posted any objection and several posters were totally in favor
> of easy public access to records.
>
> Soon systems like the above will not be optional but mandatory. They
> may simply order it to be include, or perhaps use a roundabout way by
> jacking up your insurance rates really high unless you have it.
>
> As stated here before, the real 'big brother' is the private sector.

Anything any government in the USA produces is public record.
As this "black box" is offered by a private business, those records can not
be so easily accessed.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Unbelieveable!
Next: Snow means tow: City tows 100 cars