Slashdot Mirror

-1 Ignorant about insurance companies

He's not talking about progressive politics, he's talking about the Progressive insurance company which is somewhat famous for their loud-mouthed "Flo" character on their TV commercials. That's why he mentioned "Flo" and capitalized "Progressive". The company has some kind of program they're pushing where they have a tracking device in their customers' cars which track their driving actions and then adjust their bills accordingly.

Is someone who briskly takes off from a light -- not doing burnouts or other kinds of hooning, -- automatically less safe than someone who rolls out at snails' pace?

Is someone who goes around a corner with some amount of G automatically less safe than those who take forever to negotiate the same corner?

Do you think insurance companies are a bunch of idiots who just make this shit up? No, they've done extensive studies of the correlations between particular driver behaviors and insurance costs, and guess what: these sorts of behaviors are strongly correlated with higher insurance costs. For example, they're twice as predictive as using points on your license.

Consider if your car had a black box, which it should. But in addition to collecting the data was transmitting that information continuously to the government for them to peruse any time they wanted.

Consider your car does a black box, but in addition to collecting the data was transmitting that information continuously to your auto insurance company for them to peruse any time they wanted.

...ever put in that car insurance fob into your auto's computer port? (e.g. Progressive's Snapshot, where they treat it as a cute little device that aggressively records everything your car is doing when you drive.

Very interesting... thanks for the link, I just signed up. I did find it interesting that my 2004 Durango is compatible with their device, but my 2013 LEAF is not.

...ever put in that car insurance fob into your auto's computer port? (e.g. Progressive's Snapshot, where they treat it as a cute little device that aggressively records everything your car is doing when you drive.) People (not corporations, *individuals*) go out of their way to use these stupid things, not fully realizing (or caring) that they're willingly allowing an insurance company to monitor everything they do.

But you know, it's okay because they get a discount and it's not the government doing it (*eyeroll*).

In all seriousness, if you want to whore yourself out for "discounts", I'd normally say that's your problem, not mine - but then I realize that the rest of us will get dinged for NOT opting-in, so damnit, stop that you idiots!

Remember that adage that 90% of car accidents happens 5 minutes away from the departure point or 5 minutes before the arrival point?

No, because that is nonsense. The actual* figure is 52% (not 90%) of accidents occur withing 5 miles (not five minutes). But that is not because driving within that radius is particularly dangerous, but simply because most driving occurs within that radius.

* This figure comes from a survey conducted by Progressive Insurance in 2002. Many articles attribute the study to the NHTSA, and often exaggerate the percentage, or the distance, or both.

Perhaps there would be incentives in form of reduced insurance premiums. (That would actually make perfect sense, insurance companies tend to give benefits to people exhibiting responsible behavior.)

"Reasonable" is subjective. For example, some people may find the idea of your insurance company goading you into willfully installing a tracking device as reasonable; many people, myself included, disagree.

I think you're suffering from a case of confirmation bias here.

OK. Enough of the FUD; I use Progressive and I got the 30% discount.

I drive, on average, 10-15 MPH above the posted speed limit. But I leave - minimally - 2 seconds of stopping time in front of me. I'm more likely to merge going 65mph in a 60mph than 55mph, unlike many other drivers - it vastly helps traffic flow when you merge going at the same ambient speed as other drivers. Definitely not a leadfoot. Just observant.

They track when you drive, and number of "hard" stops. I had the beeper go off ONCE - when I was cut off by a driver. People will have sudden stops - deer crossings, other drivers. One or two isn't an automatic penalty. I was with another driver, and he had THREE "beeps" while stopping. Reason is he tailgates during normal driving. If the car in front slams on the brakes, he does too. It just measures the delta D over delta T, and if the ratio is too large, it determines it was a "hard stop". Like I said - you are allotted a certain number of these based on normal driving procedures.

The other part of the discount comes from when you drive - I had a second job during second shift, and drove back during the "cautionary" zone more nearly 3 times a week. I still got full discount.

Before everybody goes SCREAMING about how they're getting reamed a new asshole because Insurance Company X will know if they've gone 1.5 mph over the posted limit, settle the fuck down.

How about this? What about a sensor in front of the car, measuring current speed and distance to car in front? If you spend 0-5% of the time within 2 second stopping distance, you get 0 discount; all the way up to 90-100% of the time getting a (max) discount. That's about what the Snapshot was measuring. Jesus Christ the sky is falling!!!

Relevant link from Progressive

Do you mean something like this?

Progressive is already using a feature like this in the U.S. It's just not a smart phone app. It's actually a little box you put in your car. It's called Snapshot. Not my kind of thing. There is just no way for the insurance company to know what is or is not going on around you when you're driving.

You are SO last year. Insurance companies don't need a black box. They already have little data recorders that they offer you a discount to install in your car.

http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot.aspx

Say Hi Flo.

It isn't a great leap until it goes the other way. Pay more unless you install "snapshot". In fact, that's exactly what is happening, it is just worded backwards.

Other companies do different things. I recall there being a company that gives young drivers a discount for installing a video/tattletale device so parents can monitor their driving habits, but I can't find it now.

I have a Progressive Snapshot device plugged into the ODB port on my wife's car. After a month of driving with it, they gave us a 30% discount (the largest discount under the program). My wife drives infrequently since she is unemployed, and apparently drives safely when she does drive. My coworker also has a Snapshot device and is saving 20%. The only downside is that it has a habit of draining batteries. We were carrying jumper cables for a while and couldn't figure out why the battery kept testing good but was always run down.

The snapshot device does NOT have a GPS. It takes ODB data only and tracks vehicle speed. Because it does not have a GPS, it doesn't really know if you are speeding. I would not have signed up for a GPS device.

For us, the discount adds up to almost $200 a year. $200 I don't have to spend on insurance is $200 I can do something else with. My only regret is that our other car is a 1989 and can't participate in the program since it has no ODB port. However, the insurance on that is so low anyway it doesn't matter that much.

uh.. it's also here in the states too..
http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot-common-questions.aspx

Progressive Insurance is busy flogging their "Snapshot" system, which is exactly that. They give you a tracking device, and you put it in your car, and if you are the "good" driver you say that you are you get a discount in your insurance. I'd love to see the TOS on that baby.

Why would they need to be secretive? All they have to do is just knock $5 off the cable bill and people would flock to it. I see Car insurance companies doing this kind of thing now. "Let us install this device in your car and you could save money!"

I predicted that most INSURANCE companies should or would have these to help get a better understanding of their customers driving habits 15 years ago

Like this?

It's not a 'black box', just logs your driving habits.

You know that insurance company with the big-haired woman named 'Flo'? They already have this as a teaser to get better rates. Here's what data they collect.

You know that insurance company with the big-haired woman named 'Flo'? They already have this as a teaser to get better rates. Here's what data they collect.

This was one thing that came to light when Toyota's very public troubles with unintentional acceleration surfaced last year. Yes, many vehicles have data recorders, but the kind of data collected is not standardized across makes, models, or model years. Furthermore, the quality and validity of the data is not assured (i.e., if the recorder says that the vehicle is traveling at 75 mph, how do we know that's true?), because the collection system hasn't been extensively tested and verified. Finally, the format of the data, and the electromechanical interface to access the data (i.e., what cable and software to use) is about as proprietary as they come. Think it was bad that every cell phone had to have their own unique wall wart with their own unique connector? That's nothing compared to automotive data recorders.

Personally, I think that this kind of data is invaluable: it leads to safer vehicles and provides critical answers to how and why an accident occurred. That might sound like it only benefits the government, law enforcement, insurance companies, and auto manufacturers, but consumers also benefit. If you are in an accident because some asshat was doing 80 mph, in the rain, without his headlights on, and was too distracted by his cellphone to hit the brakes before broadsiding you, a data recorder will help you stick it to him. Got rear ended, and think that the guy was riding your ass beforehand? A data recorder will show how long both your and his brakes were applied before impact. Think it was Toyota's fault that your corolla pegged 100 mph all on its own and ignored the brake? A proper data recorder would provide important proof one way or the other. But right now, because the technology is so scattershot, unverifiable, and open to interpretation, it is of only marginal use. In a court it's about as good as anecdote, rather than hard data. Having rules and open standards is the first step to improving this.

A proper data recorder, combined with an extensive testing and verification program, is a significant expense: one that a company isn't going to add to a vehicle unless mandated to do so. If we want this data to exist at all and be reliable (see above for why I think this is good), then a mandate and uniform standards is the way to make it happen. As for whose data it is exactly, and under what circumstances it can be accessed, that is a much more important debate to have. For while I am in favor of this information being available to all parties after an accident, I am not at all keen on letting Progressive Insurance install and monitor a tracking device in my car in order to get cheaper insurance rates.

I see...just like how communists now call themselves "progressive".

Since when are the commies selling car insurance?

Link didn't take, see this.

Doesn't matter to me, I am insured against all sorts of financial calamity. I also tend not to keep my money in the bank where it makes someone else money, so it's another thing I don't worry too much about.

I bet these guys are kicking themselves in the pants for not patenting...

remember those car insurance companies that used the sales pitch "we will give you our quote and of 3 other competitors" ? yea, it may get you attention, but ultimately, how likely are you to break even?

Well, considering the only company I can remember that did that was Progressive, then I'd say it worked.

*sigh*....hit "submit" instead of "preview".

The hyperlink is actually https://tripsense.progressive.com/, if you don't want to copy/paste the link.

1. If your a progressive customer call up your agent and complain, tell them you won't be doing any further business with the company.
2. If your not a progressive customer use their contact form and let them know what you think.

I've been using Squeak for a number of projects and general areas for 4-5 years now. For me, Squeak is many things- it's my scripting language, my prototyping language, my implementation language (occasionally with a C library when I need the speed), my desktop environment for both my desktop and my PDA. VAST would have a hard time filling all of these needs.

I've used VAST before, and don't get me wrong, it's a really nice product- a rock solid Smalltalk that does a good job fitting in with apps written in other languages the OS supports. I used VAST interning a Progressive Insurance, where it's used for a couple really neat in-house apps. VAST is a really mature development system for web apps, prototyping and final implementation of desktop apps. I've used it in conjunction with the GemStone/S Object Database, which was a lot of fun.

For groups, VAST or VWNC along with ENVY/Developer simply can't be beat- by Squeak or any other development environment/language. It's the slickest way for a group, big to small, to develop an application with relative efficiency. Like CVS, but snazzier. :)

But for me, it's way too big. I imagine the license is more restrictive as well. It also supports fewer platforms than does Squeak, or even VisualWorks (which also has a non-commercial version for download).

I hadn't considered the idea of using a credit check to test a new hire, but it does make a lot of sense. I heard somewhere else that an auto insurance company, Progressive, uses their clients' credit as a good indicator of future risk. They claimed that it was a better predictor of future accident claims than someone's previous driving record.

If that is true, then I can certainly understand how a credit rating may be a decent indicator of a potential employee's reliability. I doubt it would be the only factor in deciding to hire someone, but if you had two otherwise equal candidates, where one has an excellent credit rating, but the other consistently misses bill payments, racks up huge credit card bills, etc., wouldn't that be a relevant point of discrimination? What if you were hiring someone to be a project manager? Wouldn't personal finance habits be a good indicator of how well they can manage a $200,000 account? Not always, but... put yourself in the employer's shoes.

As for privacy, remember, this is your employer - they will already have your SSN on file, they know your salary, how many medical claims you make against your medical plan, probably even what prescription medications you're taking. They know how much tax you pay, they can see what type of car you drive; they have your address, home phone number, spouse's name, dependents' names, how much you're contributing to your retirement savings, and a whole lot more if they put any effort into looking. Why is it that you're afraid of a credit check?

I always thought I was paranoid, but I wouldn't hesitate to give my employer permission to do a credit check, probably because I expect it would be spotless, and it might give me an edge over another candidate.

But I digress....

As part of the test, Progressive also patented the algorithms to turn such black box data into insurance rates. Prog isn't the type of company that would license that tech (I am a pricing actuary at a competitor.

A little gossip from some folks I talked to a Progressive, BTW: Although the GPS data was predictive enough to let them consider doing away with other seemingly intrusive underwriting analysis, the thing that was really predictive was the whether a person was willing to let a black box be installed in their vehicles. All other things being equal, people who were willing to be monitored had fewer accidents than people who weren't.

I second that one! I interned at a Smalltalk shop and we had a copy of a that book. It was interesting to read, and it helped to see it in a couple real languages (Smalltalk, Common Lisp) and I do agree, alot is lost just seeing it all in C++. It just wasn't written with C++ in mind.

I am one of those soon-to-be (ok, well, at least another 2 years) graduates (in IS&T and Biology), and am interested in doing scientific research. I just got offered a undergrad research position at the NRRI analyzing plant population and hydrology data. I see this as my dream job.

As interesting and exciting as this work is, there's a huge difference between acedemic scientific research such as this and the world of business: money. I'm making a little over half of what I would make if I returned to where I interned last summer. My other possibility for this coming summer was to make even more than half of what I'm going to making this summer. I mean, $20/hr is a lot of money to be making in the summer for a college kid, and I am not surprised that many college kids opt for this type of experience (and later job, where the gap can become even larger), being raised to be good capitalist money-grubbers.

So, I suppose I'm saying, if you want to get good CS people for research, start getting them as interns, make them care about what their researching, get them to love it- to those that are worth your time, this would be infinately more important than simply more salary.

Yeah, I used to work at Progessive.

Driver:
Total driving time in minutes by each driver of insured vehicle;
number of minutes driving in high/low risk locations (high/low accident areas);
number of minutes of driving at high/low risk times (rush hour or Sunday afternoon);
safe driving behavior,
using seat belts,
use of turn signals,
observance of speed limits, and
observance of traffic control devices;
number of sudden braking situations; and
number of sudden acceleration situations.
Vehicle:
Location vehicle is parked at night (in garage, in driveway, on street);
and location vehicle is parked at work (high theft locations, etc.).

It will be interesting since this IS happening today.