Slashdot Mirror


John Hancock Will Include Fitness Tracking In All Life Insurance Policies (venturebeat.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: John Hancock, one of the oldest and largest North American life insurers, will stop underwriting traditional life insurance and instead sell only interactive policies that track fitness and health data through wearable devices and smartphones, the company said on Wednesday. The move by the 156-year-old insurer, owned by Canada's Manulife Financial, marks a major shift for the company, which unveiled its first interactive life insurance policy in 2015. It is now applying the model across all of its life coverage. Policyholders score premium discounts for hitting exercise targets tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch and get gift cards for retail stores and other perks by logging their workouts and healthy food purchases in an app. In theory, everybody wins, as policyholders are incentivized to adopt healthy habits and insurance companies collect more premiums and pay less in claims if customers live longer.

295 comments

  1. And so it begins by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you.

    tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch
    Yeah, THAT will go over well with my employer. Specifically, no smart watches in the building. AT all, ever.

    1. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wonder when fitness analogues will become available for cheating these devices?
      Something resembling a watch winder with a rubber hand and IR led transmitter (pulse).

    2. Re:And so it begins by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, if you contact my new insurance broker start up company, you are guaranteed to always get the best price available from that company.

      All thanks to our revolutionary app available for all types of devices, you are guaranteed to always have the best fitness and health data available.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    3. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what? You're gonna die. No matter how you live your life.

      So you believe that since you're going to die anyway that you should live recklessly. Nice.

      How you live, quality vs. quantity, is your free choice to make.

      And the consequences are yours too. Stop whining and deal with it.

    4. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you.

      Why? This is what Americans actually want. They prefer having insurance companies over social health care systems. This is exactly what Americans want.

      The rest of us aren't so dumb

    5. Re:And so it begins by taustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I take responsibility for my life by refusing to use tracking devices that communicate with companies that show no evidence of being able to spelldata security, much less actually implement it.

      Particularly since, which the insurance company is bound by HIPPA laws, Fitbit is not.

      This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable.

    6. Re:And so it begins by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Why not charge those who engage in less healthy life styles more? If you think it actually makes no difference you are free to offer policies to those who would pay more at a reduced price. If John Hancock is wrong, they're leaving all kinds of money on the table by overcharging some of their customers. You could easily undercut them and make a tidy profit while doing so. Of course if they're not wrong . . .

      Insurance is really just legalized gambling. Much like the tracks, not all horses are a good return on investment. No one wants to bet on a loser and the only reason to do so is because the payout is so high. Even then it's probably green overriding sense, as the results seem to show that such betting doesn't pay.

      It's a free country. You're free to drink, smoke, fornicate, fight, and generally do as you please. The flip side of that is that it's also your responsibility to take care of yourself, because if someone else has to do it for you, how free are they? You can't reward good behavior without punishing bad behavior, and as far as human health goes, there's a whole lot of bad behavior.

    7. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "In theory, everybody wins"

      Well... except fat lazy people. They lose.

    8. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable."

      Hey... that made me think of something. Require fitness trackers to get a good credit score! Launch a machine learning model at that! (I'm sure they already have...)

    9. Re:And so it begins by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 2

      Thing is, it's none of my fucking business what you do in your PRIVATE life, and it's none of YOUR fucking business what I do in mine.

      I'm not willing to sacrifice my privacy, or yours, to maximize profits for Insurance companies. You think you're going to get LOWER rates from this?

      Oh you sweet summer child.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    10. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends if you consider insurance as a "socialized benefit" (kind of a weird way to reinterpret that term, but it seems to be what people think now when they hear "healthcare insurance")

      Insurance should be like an options contract. No reason not to have a fine-grained options contract where you have so many different variables involved. Good risk pools tend to allow healthier people to have incredible cheap insurance with very high payout rates when things go wrong. Bad risk pools tend to still win a little bit, just not as much. (If you force everyone to pay $300/mo on healthcare insurance, it gets really cheap if you're a very costly medical expense person. But even if you charge high risk people $3,000/mo instead, they still "win" when they have a medical necessity to get a $1,000,000 MRI/brain surgery/etc.)

    11. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So don't buy their product? Do you have a right to life insurance?

    12. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This will last indefintely and become the new norm because it saves the greedy fucks money and enables even more data collection. Even better it forces those who wish to avoid such invasions of their lives to submit to them under the threat of medical bankruptcy if they refuse. Always expect greedy fucks to throw you under the bus in the pursuit of more coin, which is inevitable.

      FTFY.

      If you think this won't last, I invite you to look at the shitstorm that Equifax went through after they were hacked.... they'll be begging us for mercy.... any day now...... /sarcasm

      Even if they do get hacked, it will be swept under the rug as SOP, and you'll just loose even more control of your life same as always. Only now if you refuse you won't be able to afford a doctor without leaving the country. To which everyone else in the US will say: "And nothing of value was lost." Because they are all a bunch of fat and stupid sheep. Welcome to the first days of hell, we've all earned it.

    13. Re:And so it begins by youngone · · Score: 1

      If you force everyone to pay $300/mo on healthcare insurance...

      Just out of interest, is that considered cheap health insurance in the US?

    14. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. Working for NASA. No unapproved electronics allowed on center (not even if they are turned off). Requests take weeks to process and are denied most of the time.

    15. Re:And so it begins by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Life Insurance has nothing to do with socialist health care systems. You have to be dead before you can collect. That isn't exactly health care.

    16. Re:And so it begins by dcollins · · Score: 1

      Maybe if there was universal health coverage like in any other modern country.

      But the fast-driving, red-meat eating dudes would likely rather drive themselves directly to the grave that have that, for some reason.

      "They bought their ticket, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash!" -- Airplane! (1980)

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    17. Re:And so it begins by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 0

      Life insurance has never made any sense to me.

      I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?

      Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?

    18. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No problem with being reckless if you enjoy it and don't put anyone else in danger. People pay for that all the time and call it exercise. Skiing, rock climbing, parasailing, etc.

    19. Re:And so it begins by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's very cheap. Employers tend to pay double that per employee.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    20. Re:And so it begins by arth1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Insurance is really just legalized gambling. Much like the tracks, not all horses are a good return on investment. No one wants to bet on a loser and the only reason to do so is because the payout is so high.

      While true, what the insurance companies do now is like increasing the betting cost on low ranked horses without increasing the payout. The end result is that no one will go the races any more.

      The more you track the customers and better predict their future, the less incentive there is for those customers to buy insurance. If the premiums could reflect your risk with 100% accuracy, you'd lose no matter what. The closer they get to accurate and farther from chaos, the more certain a loss will be, and the less incentive there is to participate.

    21. Re:And so it begins by omnichad · · Score: 1, Insightful

      3 years later...oh, actually eating red meat is good for you now. Here's a refund...just kidding. Just wait until you look at people's egg and butter/margarine consumption histories. Everything bad is good again and vice versa. Good old grains are currently the devil.

    22. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?

      She probably already does. Most wives think their husbands are worthless, after all.

    23. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its for your next of kin/your estate. if you are dead, your estate can collect, you can then give it to your NOK, charities, mistresses, pet dog, cat etc

    24. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People will just hook the shitbit up to a device that fakes the responses of a healthy person and walk out the door without it.

    25. Re:And so it begins by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      LOL, what is NASA afraid of? Someone using a phone to steal secrets on their decades-old space shuttle technology?

    26. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't take responsibility for your own life. You didn't start it ... and you won't end it. And nothing you do inbetween will beat the genetic influences ... or the cultural BLACK SWANS. So fuck-all Jackson ... go-on blojobbing Randish fantasy ... you gotta leaking brakeline also ... hahaha

    27. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Serious answer: life insurance is geared towards somebody who is a major provider for the family. The idea is that you're bringing in an income to support your family; if you die, the family no longer has that income, and hence could well hit hard times. Having life insurance provides a safety net, so that the rest of the family can continue on without having to worry about how to replace your income. (Think education, food, health, etc.)

      If you have children, it may well be worth the premium to know that they won't be hit with hard times if you aren't there. If you don't have children, it probably isn't worth so much. For me - single, no kids, no dependents to speak of - I haven't bothered taking out a life insurance policy; there's no point. If I had children, it might well be a different story.

      It might not make sense for your circumstances, and that's fine. But insurance is all about identifying and managing risk - pay a small amount on a regular basis, just in case you have a need for a much larger sum for some unexpected reason. If you can afford the hit of the larger sum, that small amount may not be worth it. If you can't, it may be.

    28. Re:And so it begins by youngone · · Score: 1

      Wow.

    29. Re:And so it begins by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Life insurance has never made any sense to me.

      I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?

      Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?

      I think you're being facetious, but my life insurance policy is not for me, it's so my wife won't have to dip into our retirement funds to pay the mortgage if I die. We have a decent retirement portfolio, so if I were worried about her killing me off for money, it doesn't take insurance for that.

      It's kind of the same reason I have an action-cam on my bike -- it's not really for me, it's so my wife can go after the guy that ran me down and hopefully get a good settlement.

    30. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In an EU country here, and paying more than $300 per month. With an extra flow of money from employer to tax man on top of that.

      Less visible that way, yet someone is always paying.

    31. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not life insurance, but you can dam well believe that Health Insurers are going to do this next

    32. Re:And so it begins by jroysdon · · Score: 1

      Most families are paying more than their rent/mortgage for health care in the US, unless their employer is chipping in a very large portion.

    33. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you plan to get married and have kids, you should get the life insurance now. 30-year term. Otherwise you may be less insurable or uninsurable when you actually start to want it.

    34. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go screw yourself with your private island!

      On the contrary, I plan to be able to retired in 2020. I told you creimertards how to do it but no, you were to smart to listen!

      I find AmazonTM the gretest thing since sliced bread and helps taking care of my health at retirement with the Amazon long tail revenue streams!

      All you need to do is find a website with a permissive TOS, say, Slashdot, create a Python script to scrape your own comments, sprinkle Amazon affiliate links in various posts, and then re-post past links whenever possible. You can even make video of yourself going to pick up AmazonTM parcel at the convenience store and post it on your youtube channel for more redundant revenue streams.

      They also have a wide supply, the best of latte and clif/power bars at the best cost, espicially if you make a friend buy them for you with your own affiliate link!

      Also, I still use my iPhone 6s and reduce my monthly bill from $80 to $50. As a phone and a video camera, the iPhone 6s isn't obsolete and I use it to make my videos on youtube. As a Sprint very special customer for 20+ years, Sprint will always give me a new iPhone for free if I decide to stop using the 6s as a phone in the next several years.

      I use PhotoShop daily!

      I have a hearing loss in one ear, so my audio will always be suspect. I use a Zoom H2 audio recorder with a pop filter 12" away from my mouth, Audacity to clean up and normalize the audio, and sync the audio to the video and apply a "voice enhancement" eq to the audio in the video editor.

      My PC has an eight-core processor and a Nvidia 1050 Ti 4GB video card. A minute of 1080p video renedered on the processor takes a minute. A minute of 1080p video renedered on the Nvidia card takes 10 seconds. I don't think an iPad has the same performance of my PC for renedering videos longer than a short clip.

      I can't imagine using Photoshop without a keyboard and mouse, or not being able to access my files from my file server. Video renedering on the iPad will probably suck donkey balls.

      Blackmagic also charges high prices for their gear as Apple does. Need an HDMI to USB3 capture device? Blackmagic is $300. Any generic company is $50.

      I take public transit. A local bus take me down the street to pick up the express bus, the express bus drops me off in Palo Alto, and a local bus take me down the street to my job. An hour each way. Driving through Palo Alto during rush hour is insane. Since I work in government I.T., I start work at 7:00AM.

      For a final project in Small Group Communications, my four Vietnamese classmates appointed me to do all the work and be the speaker because I was white. So I did all the work and spoke in front of the class. Our instructor, a black woman, gave me all their credit for the assignment and forced them to retake the class. They screamed "white privilige" all the way to administration and their complaint landed on deaf ears. They couldn't prove that they did anything to merit a grade and cheerleading from the back of the room doesn't count.

      The background file for my national security clearance got stolen by the Chinese a few years ago That contained a lot more information than the credit reports that Uncle Sam requested from all three bureaus.

      Bonus: get some silver coins, view recommendations on my special Youtube channel dedicated to the topic! They constitute a fail-safe insurance strategy for your retirement!

      --
      How to Pronounce The New Apple iPhone XR, XS & XS Max (September 2018)

    35. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Serious answer: life insurance is geared towards somebody who is a major provider for the family. The idea is that you're bringing in an income to support your family; if you die, the family no longer has that income, and hence could well hit hard times. Having life insurance provides a safety net, so that the rest of the family can continue on without having to worry about how to replace your income. (Think education, food, health, etc.)

      If you have children, it may well be worth the premium to know that they won't be hit with hard times if you aren't there.

      Then the best life insurance policy is forcing your family members to become self-reliant and hard times proof ASAP, and/or learn to make future-safe choices.
      I wrote this before, and I'll write it again: predicting future precisely may seem as a win for insurance companies but in fact it is their doom looming. Without sufficient uncertainty, paying for insurance is just wasting your money away. When it comes to the point that insurance company will insure me only if I don't really need insurance, then it will be the same point when it would be foolish of me to give them any money.

    36. Re: And so it begins by dnaumov · · Score: 1

      Donâ(TM)t worry, you will just pay more for not using the watch.

    37. Re:And so it begins by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Breaches are nothing, a temporary PR blip.

      Look at Equifax. Masses of extremely personal data leaked out, media blitz for a day or two, and they are still operating with a promise to do better next time.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    38. Re:And so it begins by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The idea is to protect your family from your untimely death. If you are killed in an accident they won't be unable to pay the mortgage.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    39. Re:And so it begins by rockmuelle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not sure about the OPs case, but if you work around gear that’s sensitive to RF noise, you don’t want everyone brining their own transmitter to work. Even without a radio, electronics can interfere with sensitive equipment.

    40. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you think banking and insurance companies not rule the country and can be brought to heels somehow?

      Are you dreaming or just avoiding criticism of the banking industry to not appear antisemitic?

    41. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and that doesn't include any deductible and/or co-insurance you have to pay directly to the doctor or facility/lab you visit or have services performed by

    42. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, and if you were disciplined enough, you may very well come out ahead by instead taking what you would have paid for the premium and instead put it into some sort of interest earning account (or even stuff a mattress).

      When they're getting that accurate at reflecting the risk, you know they're pulling in well more in premium charges than you'll see by any payout for sure, they've just reached the point where they've completely maximized that ratio

    43. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you.

      Actually I'm totally for that last one. Speed limits aren't suggestions. Bout time the assholes putting the rest of us in danger got their due.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    44. Re:And so it begins by registrations_suck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable."

      Um....yeah. Tell that to Equifax. Virtually no fucking penalties of any significance WHATSOEVER.

    45. Re:And so it begins by registrations_suck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Life insurance has never made any sense to me.

      I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?

      Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?

      With that kind of logic, she probably already does.

    46. Re:And so it begins by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      Then the best life insurance policy is forcing your family members to become self-reliant and hard times proof ASAP, and/or learn to make future-safe choices.

      I'll be sure to tell that to my 2 year old, after riding my motorcycle home from work.

    47. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn child labor laws.

    48. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fully agree. On the one hand i think people are kidding themselves that insurance arent already (or wont be soon) buying more information like this about them which is largely already available.

      Its startling to see a shift to underwriting policies with a"we own you" however. I wonder if the forwardness has more to do with widly rampant pricacy concerns. Such as the zuckerberg inquiery, eu laws etc.

      Maybe the announcement is more of a social experiment to guage how palletable public outrage will be.. lol. But in all seriousness.. this shit has been going on for years, its just becoming more normal/expected.

    49. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      time to code and start producing "healthy activity profiles" for 50$ you can get 10Y work of super healthy data.

    50. Re:And so it begins by Aaden42 · · Score: 2

      the insurance company is bound by HIPPA laws, Fitbit is not

      So that's an interesting question... Is it permissible for a HIPAA bound entity to require you to waive your rights by disclosing protected health information to a third party which isn't HIPAA bound?

      If my doctor said, "I'll only see you if you agree to let me post your weight and cholesterol numbers in a classified ad in the New York Times," I can't see that working out well for Doc. (I also make zero distinction between the security/privacy standards of Fitbit and publishing in a national newspaper. Functionally equivalent as far as I'm concerned.)

    51. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that people driving too slow are far more dangerous to the people around them than people who drive too fast, right? Also, I'm glad you have no where to go, but could you please pull over and let those of us who would like to drive the speed limit past? If it puts you slightly behind, you'll be able to make up the time by driving the speed limit.

    52. Re:And so it begins by Toad-san · · Score: 1

      It won't be hard to fake, to fool those devices either.

      https://ioshacker.com/how-to/f...

    53. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can be more low tech than that. Think of Homer Simpson and a plastic drinking bird.

    54. Re:And so it begins by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      The policies I have will pay out to me if I am severely crippled, up to 200% (Something like 50% per severed/paralyzed/otherwise unusable limb/eye/a few other things). The fact that a beneficiary will get 100% in the event of my untimely demise is a side benefit.

      While losing a literal arm or leg would suck, a ton of tax-free cash will make it suck less.

    55. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cripes dude, you focus way too much on Cremier, its frankly quite sad. Get out some, shave that neckbeard, take a shower and maybe get a girlfriend. Life is better-worth living than what you're currently doing.

    56. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's even worse is that the payout is linked to inflation. My parents purchased a policy for me when I started college that still exists today (20 years later). That policy was never increased in payments to reflect inflation, so that policy is effectively worthless. Last time I talked to the insurance company they recommended I increase what I pay five fold so that I don't end up with a negative balance in the event that I die. So they've been getting $45 a month for the past 20 years ($10,800) and my beneficiary won't ever see a dime of it unless I pay in $250 a month, and then MAYBE in 20 more years it'll be worth something.

      Life insurance really is just a scam. If I could go back I would've cashed it out pre-2008 when it was worth about $20k.

    57. Re:And so it begins by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Tell that to Equifax. Virtually no fucking penalties of any significance WHATSOEVER.

      https://yro.slashdot.org/story...

    58. Re:And so it begins by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

      I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?

      I'm married. My wife and I have two kids (8 & 10) and a mortgage on our house. Both my wife and I work full time.

      We have a life insurance plan.

      If I'm hit by a bus and killed this afternoon, the life insurance means my wife won't suffer financial hardship. She won't have to sell the house (she likely would without life insurance), she'll be able to afford a nanny to look after the kids while she's at work etc.

      If *both* my wife and I are killed driving home from the movies on a Saturday night, the life insurance means the kids are taken care of - Their guardians who now have to raise two additional kids won't suffer financial hardship.

      If you don't have dependants there's little point in life insurance, though.

    59. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      projecting

      sorry your pee-pee is so small

    60. Re:And so it begins by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      " Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you."

      Are you saying you shouldn't have to pay higher life insurance rates if you aren't fit, eat too much red meat, and drive to fast? For those of us who keep our bodies in shape, eat healthy, and don't take unnecessary risks; this will be a good thing and should ultimately provide better rates.

      Insurance companies already set rates based on age, weight, if you smoke, have some diseases, and other factors. This can just let insurance companies zero in on additional risk attributes that they didn't have visibility to before. At least the examples you provided are things you can control. That seem more fair than rates based on age, sex, or factors outside a person's control.

    61. Re:And so it begins by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I read a dystopia story like this once. Was a big win for the insurance companies and a big loss for everybody else. The main thing I remember about the story was the old man going shopping and being told there was nothing the store had that he was able to eat without increases in his premiums, and he could no longer afford an increase in his premium (the fitness tracker included both fiscal and physical fitness), and that he'd have to go into a medically induced coma for a week for a detox. After the detox, he got kidnapped by a subversive group that taught him yoga to reduce his stress level and caused his scores to go down.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    62. Re:And so it begins by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Bout time the assholes putting the rest of us in danger got their due.

      It's called a "ticket". It is not the job of the insurance companies to enforce traffic laws.

      If you support the ability of insurance companies to require OBDII data loggers and charge more for speeders, would you also support the ability of law enforcement to require the same devices so they could ticket everyone who speeds?

    63. Re: And so it begins by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      You can still get health care, but if you want "health insurance", which is basically a collection of shared resources for a few to collect from, then I suspect your fellow participants may want you to pay more to participate if you live a certain lifestyle.

      Why should others have to pay for YOUR risky choices. We all understand accidents happen, but if an individual likes to zip down mountains regularly in a squirrel suit, I'd hope they are paying a higher premium than those of us who don't.

    64. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speed is in this context a force multiplier. That is, it'll make a bad thing worse. The inattentiveness/distractedness of most drivers leads to the "bad things". I'm not disputing what you say, I just think it's more nuanced. Though if you're one of these folks that don't know what the inside lanes are for (passing), then well- I don't have anything nice to say.

    65. Re:And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine costs me about $90/month, with the rest of the $550 or so paid by my employer.

    66. Re: And so it begins by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      All good, until the government decides that certain lifestyles are 'protected classes' and can't be charged for their risks.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    67. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Yes. Because otherwise it's a game of favorites. Doesn't take a hard look to see that either.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    68. Re: And so it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your little motorbike gets in front of my truck, I'll squish you like the insect that you are. Enjoy paying your medical bills without insurance, fat boy.

    69. Re: And so it begins by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Why should others have to pay for YOUR risky choices.

      Because we have to pay for theirs. That's what the concept of a group is all about.

    70. Re: And so it begins by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      Big fucking deal! 2017 Revenue was $3.3B. A $6.2M penalty is not even the hair on a gnatâ(TM)s ass to them.

      What they should have gotten was the corporate death penalty. No fine. No bankruptcy. No sale to another company. Simply a liquidation of assets with the proceeds split between those whose data was stolen and non-management employees (6 month salary max).

    71. Re:And so it begins by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Since you didn't quote a SINGLE word of what you were saying "yes" to, I have to assume it was the question about police being allowed to monitor your driving activity 24/7 with a device attached to your car. I am simply flabbergasted that anyone here would support that kind of thing.

      Because otherwise it's a game of favorites.

      You mean police discretion over who they stop and if they give a ticket is a "game of favorites", and you think it is better for there to be no judgement or consideration of the situation involved? You show up for your regular Monday "dump the data collector" appointment and if it says for any reason that you were exceeding the speed limit you get a ticket?

      You realize that speed limits vary with location, so not only would the device need to record your speed, but your location. You're saying that it is ok with you if police do the equivalent of attaching a GPS to your car to track it 24/7. I'm ... wow.

    72. Re:And so it begins by youngone · · Score: 1

      Again. Wow.

    73. Re:And so it begins by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Correct. And again, it has nothing to do with health care.

    74. Re:And so it begins by jrmcferren · · Score: 1

      Looks like nobody read TFA. All new policies will come with the FEATURE, but you can choose to not use it please see this quote "Customers do not have to log their activities to get coverage even though their policies are packaged with the Vitality program."

      --
      sudo mod me up
    75. Re: And so it begins by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Life insurance on children is a scam. For 90% of us, a whole life or âoecash valueâ policy is also a bad deal.

    76. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      ...would you also support the ability of law enforcement to require the same devices so they could ticket everyone who speeds?

      Happy? And also yes to your paragraph after my game of favorites comment. I broke the rule, I get punished. So do you, so does everyone else. Is that not fair? Wahhhhhh

      I'm sorry you're "flabbergasted". Again. I have no issue with rules being enforced. People obviously can't be trusted to follow them, and they are put there for everyone's safety. We can start with first offenders.

      Do I agree to the abuse of such a system? No. I agree to punishing the assholes who put yours, mine and everyone else's lives in jeopardy on the roads every time they get behind the wheel.

      I understand such a device implies some hard technical problems. I'd be fine with traffic cameras just about everywhere instead, but regardless, I will always be for a push that punishes reckless drivers. Spin it into whatever conspiracy you want. I give about this many fucks. (See how much space I left there? Yeah I don't care at all.) If you learn to think in terms of not everything being a conspiracy, your life would vastly improve.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    77. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. Distracted driving is a huge problem. Much worse than speeding by magnitudes of order.
      For me it's more about the reckless disregard of rules and of others on the road some people seem to have.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    78. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      I've heard that argument a lot. But nobody's shown any study proving it. The danger is from the road raging impatient folks behind said slow driver.
      We all have somewhere to go. So let's all get there safely.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    79. Re:And so it begins by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Happy?

      About what? I've already assumed that's what you were replying to, so you're wasting time now.

      I'm sorry you're "flabbergasted". Again. I have no issue with rules being enforced.

      So you'd also be happy with weekly searches of your home to detect and punish any broken rules? The question is not whether rules are enforced, it's the surveillance necessary to catch every infraction AND the inflexibility of the punishment. "You went 26 MPH in a 25 MPH zone -- you get a ticket!" "But I was trying to avoid being hit by a guy coming up behind me who was speeding, and by going 26 for a few seconds I managed to avoid an accident." "Too bad, you broke the rules, you get punished!"

      "You went 35 in a 25. Here's your ticket!" "I was taking someone who was bleeding profusely to the emergency room, and doctors admitted that getting him there on time saved his life." "You went 35 in a 25, here's your ticket."

      What a great world you want. No judgment of when punishment is appropriate or leniency for conditions, just slavish dedication to the law.

      I understand such a device implies some hard technical problems.

      The technical problems are trivial. It is absolutely TRIVIAL to have a device that records your location and speed and to have that information dumped to law enforcement on a regular basis -- even real time if that is the goal. The issues are SOCIAL. I.e., your right to privacy. Your right to exist without the police monitoring your every action. To be secure in your person, papers, and property. That you think these are technical problems is simple flabbergasting.

      If you learn to think in terms of not everything being a conspiracy, your life would vastly improve.

      I don't know what conspiracy you think is being discussed here. I'm pointing out to you that to implement your desired punishment regime would demand 24/7 monitoring of everyone. That's not a conspiracy, that's a simple fact. You want to punish every violation of every rule, then you need to detect every violation of every rule, and to do that you need 24/7 monitoring of people. Simple. I'm sorry you don't seem to understand that, or don't care. Whichever. It's sad, either way.

    80. Re:And so it begins by p0larity · · Score: 1

      I'm married but we looked at it and it makes more sense for me to actually just keep saving money instead of get insurance that expires after a term.

      Insurance that you can roll over into a new policy after the term lapses isn't worth it either.

      It all turned out to be kind-of a loss for us. I usually keep saved at least enough to bury me and keep my wife able to live in our apartment while she seeks out work. It would be sad for her to have to go back to a job she hates if I'm gone, but that's not going to be solved by getting insurance anyway.

      So we play it safe and keep saving for a rainy day...

    81. Re:And so it begins by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      So you'd also be happy with weekly searches of your home to detect and punish any broken rules?

      You're blowing it out of proportion. What I do at home doesn't endanger anyone. When I'm in a metal cage going 100km/h, yes, there's danger to everyone around me. Sorry but I stopped reading there. You're shit at arguing.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    82. Re:And so it begins by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      I wonder when fitness analogues will become available for cheating these devices? Something resembling a watch winder with a rubber hand and IR led transmitter (pulse).

      I'm guessing it will take 3 to 15 hours for cheat devices to show up on Amazon.

    83. Re: And so it begins by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      "That's what the concept of a group is all about."

      Generally, you get to pick the group you are in. Most insurers specifically do not insure or pay out for certain lifestyle choices. They have exclusions or upcharge for people who skydive, fly airplanes, ride motorcycles, etc. They helps minimize payouts and lets everyone else have cheaper rates.

  2. Nice slippery slope you got there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Government mandates here we come!

    1. Re:Nice slippery slope you got there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is wrong thread, Ivan.

  3. Fat shaming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    About time!

  4. Just another way of controlling you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just another way of controlling you.

  5. Works for now by budsetr · · Score: 2

    but if the public gets smart and demands that their data requires reimbursement for its use...

    1. Re: Works for now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or gets smart and stops just giving their data away up front. Stop using Google, FB, Twitter, and [insert free whatever here].

    2. Re:Works for now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the only valid argument for universal basic income.

  6. Everybody wins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're so confident that everybody wins from this then they could make the system voluntary. Let people who don't mind the tracking benefit from the lower premiums (plus the costs for managing this system). Let those that care pay higher premiums reflecting the reduced information available to the insurance company (plus the costs of maintaining the non-tracking system).

    If everybody wins, people will gradually fully migrate to the superior tracking system and the older system can be retired at the appropriate time (and in a way which does not violate any individual contract with existing customers).

    If some customers prefer the privacy then the insurance company benefits from not driving them away to competitors.

    1. Re: Everybody wins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly how it will work.

      People who think they will benefit from the policy can buy from John Hancock.

      Everyone else can buy from somewhere else.

    2. Re: Everybody wins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone else can buy from somewhere else.

      For now.

    3. Re:Everybody wins? by PPH · · Score: 1

      they could make the system voluntary

      Sounds like they are. Just buy your life insurance elsewhere.

      I don't know how they will handle existing fixed premium contracts. If you have one, you are probably good until it's term (if any) is up.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Everybody wins? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Let those that care pay higher premiums reflecting the reduced information available to the insurance company

      Nah....it will reflect the worst case scenario because you obviously have something to hide. Just like spoliation of evidence in a court case. You will get the highest possible premiums, not an average.

    5. Re: Everybody wins? by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      You're also free not to buy at all.

  7. I just don't know about this by OutOnARock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its like the auto insurance companies wanting to monitor everything I do in my car.

    These should be things that one has to "opt-in" for.

    I don't want the "discount" for being on an electronic leash......

    There is just something about this that rubs me the wrong way.

    1. Re:I just don't know about this by balsy2001 · · Score: 1

      You are opting in when you select them as your provider and sign the contract.

      --
      GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    2. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes but it is illegal to driver without insurance, so the government forces me to have insurance and the car insurance companies monitor my driving, which is something that the government — in the U.S.A. at least — isn't allowed to do.

    3. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Btw, I've never caused an accident, I've been driving longer now than I haven't been. I still appreciate that all of the idiots that rearend me frequently, while on their phones, have it. Kind of playing devils advocate.

    4. Re:I just don't know about this by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 2

      If it's employer provided/subsidized, you have no realistic option.

      It should be ILLEGAL for them to have that as a compulsory term.

      Full stop.

      Try that shit in Europe and see how long it works for you.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    5. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're already in the lowest risk pool for auto insurance (by age/driving habits/lack of accidents), technically it's a bad idea to put one of those spy devices in your car. They're only going to make your insurance premiums cost more, not less. (I guess it could be a good thing if you're in a high risk pool that has high premiums by default, like a teen driver.)

    6. Re:I just don't know about this by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Not if your state requires auto insurance and they all begin adopting this, should make an interesting case for SCOTUS.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    7. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Australia the Insurance companies have a new trick: Deny payouts at all costs. Make stuff up, blame the user, twist the law.
      It costs a lot to challenge a insurance companies rulings - when they hide your other options such as regulator complaints and appeals process.
      Making it conditional on a bracelet is another excuse or delay generator.

      Dead people being charged for financial advice, and upon getting 'caught' saying said dead person may apply for a statutory refund!
      Using variable definitions of heart attack - whatever pays the least or nothing.

      What life insurance companies are not saying is that medical intervention is REDUCING their risk as life longevity gets longer - and when people do get sick, they usually die in their last year at the enter hospital phase. Blood septicemia and blue legs are good indicators. The opposite is true for medical insurance who pay for such interventions. This could change IF they used medical tourism for non urgent cases. Life expectancy tables indicate 88 years for a male alive today(some variance).

      I expect the biggest low risk client all own their houses outright, and higher risk trailer trash and high crime/poor suburbs.

    8. Re:I just don't know about this by cas2000 · · Score: 0

      > In Australia the Insurance companies have a new trick: Deny payouts at all costs. Make stuff up, blame the user, twist the law.

      Why do you think this is a new trick? This isn't new in Australia or anywhere else.

      life insurance is a scam. always has been, always will be.

    9. Re:I just don't know about this by tepples · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, it's not illegal to move to an area where you can commute without driving. No vehicle means no need for insurance.

    10. Re:I just don't know about this by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      It's interesting because in Canada there's already provincial legislation that makes this illegal. My guess is that they're going to try going the federal route(that there's no legislation covering all canadians) when this is challenged in court stating that the provinces are unable to regulate it, the courts of course already have already set precedent in other issues similar to this. The insurance industry was slapped over similar attempts with cars and driving habits a few years ago.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    11. Re:I just don't know about this by jroysdon · · Score: 0

      Not really. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Sure, freedom of travel is a right, but not by whatever means you want - think about trains, planes, etc., which all have restrictions.

    12. Re: I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they don't make it mandatory for all policies. You simply don't get the free 99% discount for using it if you don't.

      It like not voting for the candidate you dislike for vague and generally false rumors, despite the opponent being an absolute monster based on his own words from his own book.

      Perfectly legal and no possible harm could come from it.

    13. Re:I just don't know about this by anon208 · · Score: 0

      Where do you recommend, like move to Spain or what?

    14. Re: I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet America you have all the rights you can afford to litigate for in Federal court. Which is to say, workers have no rights.

    15. Re:I just don't know about this by houghi · · Score: 2

      When it comes to comapnies, I really try to figure out when opt-in is a good idea.
      Even Googles search engine should be opt-in instead of the robot.txt opt out.

      Sure, it would suck as many people would be forgetting to opt-in and those pages would not be found, yet still better than the need to opt-out.

      It should be my responsability to be included, not my responsability NOT to be included.

      On a more related note, a friend of mine (we live in Belgium, Europe) told me and an other friend who worked at an insurance company once he needed to have his health checked every six months, because his life insurance was asking for it.

      We where laughing so hard, i peed a little, because, except for the initial check (and even that depends heavily on the situation) they are not allowed to do that and won't do that if they want to keep doing business.
      And throwing me out, because I suddenly have cancer because of eating too fat is not a reason to throw me out (as long as I did not lie on my application).

      I would LOVE a insurance company in Belgium asking for this to be able to trace their customers 24/7. Taxes would go down as the insurance companies would pay billions in extra taxes (called fines)

      "What about a camera in the car to prove you are innocent?" In Germany there was a case where somebody tried this and got fined, as the privacy of the general public was more impoortant that the innocence of an individual. (Could not find the Slashdot article about it. Sorry)

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    16. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, yet it's funny how I keep paying the same premium even with no accidents (even not my fault ones) or moving violations.

      Never understood that one as I've more than paid for whatever accident I may have... yet... I'm still paying the same prices. If only they'd work on the algorithms for those situations (and WITHOUT a fee! For those who DO have "vanishing deductibles" or "accident forgiveness", check your policy statements.. with most companies you're paying an extra fee for those things)

    17. Re:I just don't know about this by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      Yes but it is illegal to driver without insurance...

      No it isn't - in some states.

    18. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I encourage everybody to cheat this system like crazy because it is fairly fucking evil.

      Think out the box. Sign up, then put "Your" watch on your 7 year old nephew who constantly runs in circles any time he is not in school. Now "you" are an exercise maniac. He only rides a bus to school at slow speeds, so no problem there. I'm sure all the food stuff can be fudged similarly.

      If you don't have a 7 year old nephew, just strap your second/spare watch on some moving machine... a low speed ceiling fan or something that will trick it into looking like exercise. Leave it at home 90% of the time so they don't see you driving fast or too much.

    19. Re:I just don't know about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I trust you'll be subsidizing the increase in housing costs to make this practical out of your own bank account? Ass.

    20. Re:I just don't know about this by Sniper98G · · Score: 1

      "The insurer will begin converting existing life insurance policies to Vitality in 2019, it said."

      Or if they just decided to unilaterally change the terms of your agreement.

    21. Re:I just don't know about this by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 1

      I'd be more inclined to participate in this life insurance model or auto insurance model IF it actually made a difference to my premiums. And I mean an effective difference, not just 5% off.

      I've consciously made a decision to work out frequently and eat healthy. All things being equal, I am less prone to getting diseases related to obesity. Cancer etc. doesn't run into my family so of the unhealthy things I can avoid, I do. As a result, I am less likely to need to make a claim and therefore my premium should be lower

      Same for my auto insurance. I drive within the limits, have never been in an accident, don't brake or accelerate hard, put on winter tires when it's winter etc. Shouldn't that put me in a lower risk category vs. someone who is the same age, drives the same car, lives in the same postal code but drives like a lunatic?

      If my auto insurance company wanted to put an OBDII monitor in my car, say for 50% less premium, I'd be all over it.

      It's not for everyone, there will be some for whom the monetary benefit doesn't outweigh the privacy concern and that's OK. However, I lead a boring life :) Sometimes I'll check my Google map history and it's basically the same pattern for days and days..

    22. Re:I just don't know about this by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      NYC? Chicago? DC? Paris? London? Any city with a decent mass transit infrastructure would do.

    23. Re:I just don't know about this by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      In most places you can put up a bond and insurance is not required. See: https://www.dmv.org/insurance/...

    24. Re:I just don't know about this by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The main cause of accidents is 'not paying attention' rather than 'driving fast'. OBD2 monitors can't tell if your paying attention or doing needle point on your steering wheel while doing 65 down the freeway (I've seen it).

      Driving slow like an 80 year old can't get you a 50% discount.

      I drive like a fucking maniac, but focus when I do. Decades, no tickets, no accidents. Super cheap insurance rates.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:I just don't know about this by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 1

      I think if you drive like a self-professed effing maniac, the danger isn't you to yourself, it's you to other road users. You may not have had any accidents, but you probably leave a trail of destruction in your path as people get out of your way?

      At the very least, you've probably freaked someone out pretty good. My philosophy when driving is more along the lines of "make everyones life around me just a little bit easier"

  8. Only one problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people get their health insurance through their employers and thus would have to go well out of their way to get a policy from these guys.

    1. Re:Only one problem by balsy2001 · · Score: 1

      This is about life insurance policies not health care policies. Many people carry life policies outside of work.

      --
      GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    2. Re:Only one problem by InvalidsYnc · · Score: 1

      My life insurance policies are through my employer. Guess you haven't worked for the right place yet. Many large companies include life insurance (among others) as a part of their benefit packages.

  9. Sounds like a big hassle by avandesande · · Score: 1

    I would rather die...

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:Sounds like a big hassle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its life insurance, dieing is how you collect.

  10. Premiums for spyware? by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    So they're basically saying, you will be paying your life insurance premium and they get to spy on everything you do basically.

    Sounds recipe for making it easier for insurance companies to deny claims and nothing more.

    And if you're a good little insured person, they'll give you swag. Seriously? Like the same types of swag we used to get from Marlboro miles? No thanks.

    1. Re:Premiums for spyware? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Sounds recipe for making it easier for insurance companies to deny claims and nothing more.

      If you have a heart attack and die, the fitness tracker should report that incident correctly. And they'll have to pay. What they will do in the meantime is to jack up your monthly premiums should you not keep up with your fitness goals. Or spend too much time in bars or awake late at night.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Premiums for spyware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Worse, they can now sell a very comprehensive data set on you, for much more than the discount you traded for.

      As a bonus, when you decide you've had enough and cancel, it's a guarantee that data will be peddled other companies, who will then jack your premiums or refuse to insure you based on any indication of liability. Conveniently provided by your fitness data blob, that you traded for some stationary and a beach towel.

    3. Re:Premiums for spyware? by aquacrayfish · · Score: 1

      I actually think of this as a way to make people pay for externalized costs. Like the coal industry. You want to consistently be a part of bad practices? Now it's time to pay for it. Eating large quantities of fats and red meats should force people to be on a higher plan.

      Granted, I don't think people's best interests are at the heart of this monitoring idea, but I think that's the best way to get lower premiums. If our diets were better our health care bills would be drastically reduced over time.

    4. Re:Premiums for spyware? by PPH · · Score: 1

      I don't think people's best interests are at the heart of this monitoring idea

      If it motivates people to get off their fat asses and exercise in return for a lower premium, it serves the interests of both the insurance company and the client to not drop dead too soon.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    5. Re:Premiums for spyware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should eating large quantities of fats and red meats force people on to higher premium plans? Do you have irrefutable scientific evidence supporting this claim? If you actually took any time learning about nutrition you'd find out that almost nothing is known for sure. It falls in to an area very much like drugs. What's good for one person may be neutral for another and may actually be harmful for another, what's bad for most people may actually be good for some. If you have an iron deficiency, that red meat will be great for you. I read about an individual who was unable to create fat of her own, so she needed a high fat diet simply to stay alive. Body chemistry is a bitch and it's different for everybody.

    6. Re:Premiums for spyware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you actually took any time learning about nutrition you'd find out that almost nothing is known for sure.

      Except that eating a pantload of red meat, fats, and sugars WILL kill you faster.

    7. Re:Premiums for spyware? by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      Do you actually believe "eating large quantities of fats and red meats" may not be unhealthy? I'm pretty sure there are plenty of studies showing the consumption of "large quantities of fats" will eventually clog arteries and cause negative effects including heart attacks. Sure, not everyone will have a heat attack, but there is a consistent trend, and that's what insurance companies use to evaluate premiums.

      And for your person "who was unable to create fat of her own", I suspect that wasn't her only malady. She likely has multiple medical issues and it would not likely be smart to provide her a life insurance policy at the same rate as a "healthy" person.

  11. Progressive Snapshot Hacks by DatbeDank · · Score: 1

    I read a story about a guy who hacked his Progressive car tracker thing so it would transmit when not plugged into his car.

    Here's the reddit story: https://www.reddit.com/r/hacki...

    Looking forward to the creative hacks people will come up with for these forced insurance trackers.

    1. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by PPH · · Score: 1

      Just don't get in a wreck with the dongle at home. Or that patch cord attached.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      What are they gonna do. Raise your rate?

    3. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by linuxguy · · Score: 1

      > What are they gonna do. Raise your rate?

      You wish. They'll refuse to cover the cost of the damages if they found out you were cheating them.

    4. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Probably, deny your claim.

    5. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      That's a legal quagmire that they'll have to work out with both the other party and yourself. They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you. Cheaper that way.

    6. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by omnichad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you

      Yeah...that won't work for the life insurance ones. Everyone gets dropped after the first claim.

    7. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every - and I mean [b]every[/b] - insurance policy has a clause that states something along the lines of, "If we rely upon your information to issue this policy, and later find out that you have been dishonest, your cover under this policy is void."

      There's no legal quagmire. If they can show that you have been dishonest, especially if you have been dishonest in a way that increases the insurance company's risk, you get nothing out of them - and good luck getting that overturned in court. Especially if you think you'll get more back than you'll pay in legal costs.

    8. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by jroysdon · · Score: 1

      Sounds like insurance fraud, which is a crime. Don't collect $200, go straight to jail.

    9. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      Looking forward to the creative hacks people will come up with for these forced insurance trackers.

      Well, this explains why I saw a guy jogging this morning with about twenty fitness tracking devices on his arms and legs.

      I thought he was probably a student in the sports medicine program at the local university.

      But I guess he was just outsourcing fitness training for a lot of folks who would rather pay him to wear their devices, than to jog themselves.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you

      Yeah...that won't work for the life insurance ones. Everyone drops before their first claim.

      FTFY

    11. Re: Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My friend spent years as a very successful litigator, representing patients in disputes with health insurers. He would beg to differ. If you can get to a jury trial you will find insurance companies are completely distrusted and disliked by the average citizen.

    12. Re: Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet America everything is a crime! Toss 'em in the Gulag!

    13. Re: Progressive Snapshot Hacks by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      In Soviet America everything is a crime!

      You've confused America with Europe.

    14. Re: Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's quite true. In America, everyone is by default a felon. That is by design, so that you can be arrested and thrown in prison for the rest of your life if you ever step out of line or buck the wealthy overlords. They often will readily admit to it.

    15. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by deadwill69 · · Score: 1

      This is only during the probationary period. Some states may vary, but most it becomes permanent and non-revocable after 2 years. Period. Only way to lose it then is to fail to make payments or do one of the handful of stated items that will void the insurance. i.e. skydiving, commission of a felony

    16. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      3 felonies/day. Every goddamn one of us.

      Accept it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    17. Re: Progressive Snapshot Hacks by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      LOL, you think that's different in Europe?

      It's worse, they aren't scofflaws, like Americans, and still commit 3 felonies/day without knowing it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    18. Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They won't play your claim.

  12. My fat body wrote a Fitbit bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that mimics me working out all day.
    Bring on the discount!

  13. Enjoy your $50 amazon card we gave you by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    As you're healing up from that $8k torn ACL you got trying to earn it. And does anyone really believe this?

    "Tingle said, as Vitality policyholders worldwide live 13 to 21 years longer than the rest of the insured population."

    1. Re:Enjoy your $50 amazon card we gave you by taustin · · Score: 1

      "Tingle said, as Vitality policyholders worldwide live 13 to 21 years longer than the rest of the insured population."

      With no attempt to distinguish between cause and effect. I suspect that people who use such devices live healthier lives anyway, since the primary motivation for these devices seems to be bragging rights.

    2. Re:Enjoy your $50 amazon card we gave you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bring up an interesting point. Some of the bullshit myths that somehow remain in the health industry is really setting up a scene just like in Idiocracy.

      Like, eggs are bad. Cholesterol is bad. Red meat is bad. What we are seeing, because of these beliefs, protein deficiency, hormonal deficiency, and rampant B12 deficiency that causes other serious health problems in the middle age and elderly. We sell them shots and supplements instead. $$$.

      Salt is bad. We reduce the amount of iodine in our diet which increases our risks of cancer and reduces cognitive functions of the brain. Also, if someone has high bp, reducing sodium completely almost never fixes the problem.

      Lifting weights is bad because you may hurt yourself. We run instead which does little to combat mobility issues that develop as we age. It also doesn't help with bone density loss when we age. We also ensure some medical company makes a bang on artificial joints as we wear out our good ones doing needless exercise.

  14. No free lunch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Policyholders score premium discounts for hitting exercise targets tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch and get gift cards for retail stores and other perks by logging their workouts and healthy food purchases in an app.

    Somebody pays for those, and it certainly isn't the company.

    If you are the one paying extra, why give John Hancock your money?

    People will end up paying more, then given some of it back as gift cards.

    1. Re:No free lunch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um.

      Apple Watch is free with Vitality if you do enough exercise each month over 24 months.

  15. F##k That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah john, you can go f$$k yourself.

  16. Denied. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately we won't be paying out this life insurance policy, the deceased didn't wasn't wearing their Fitbit when the plane crashed.

  17. useless data sources by sweet+reason · · Score: 5, Funny

    a friend of mine mentioned that when he wears his fitbit on his right hand and plays his ukulele, his recorded activity level goes through the roof. so getting those insurance discounts while sitting on your couch will be easy. ditto for posted food choices. when the company figures that out their next move will be to become big brother.

    --
    Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. -- A.E.
    1. Re:useless data sources by balbeir · · Score: 1

      I hear they also work well when attached to ceiling fans.

    2. Re:useless data sources by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You call listening to a ukulele easy?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:useless data sources by Sir+Lurkalot · · Score: 1

      Coworker was leaving his Fitbit on a vibrating air conditoning duct while at work.

      Put a lot of miles on...

    4. Re:useless data sources by Entrope · · Score: 5, Funny

      This comment is much funnier if I take "plays his ukelele" as a euphemism.

    5. Re:useless data sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who says he didn't mean it as a euphemism?

    6. Re:useless data sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "furiously plays his ukelele to completion"

    7. Re:useless data sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had the same basic thought. If you eat chips fast enough, your fitbit will think you're jogging.

    8. Re:useless data sources by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      I also like to play my ukulele.

    9. Re:useless data sources by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      What about putting it on the arm that... you know... you do yourself with?
      Now THERE'S a situation where everybody wins!

      --
      I tend to rant.
    10. Re:useless data sources by iampiti · · Score: 1

      Discovered the same thing one day my step count was huge and realised the device had counted my guitar playing as steps.
      Now I take the device off before playing

    11. Re:useless data sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for this tidbit. Time to swap wrists when I go play with my tech death band. 220 bpm trill riffs for forty minutes at a time oughta count for a TON of "steps."

  18. Different combination by onyxruby · · Score: 1

    How about a different idea? How about all health insurance policies including some life insurance?

    1. Re:Different combination by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      How about, no?

    2. Re:Different combination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm single, I have no dependents who need cared for in the event of my untimely death. I have enough money around to put my affairs in order in the event of my untimely death. Why the hell on gods green earth would I need life insurance? Though I disagree with it, at least I can understand the argument of requiring people to carry health insurance. I absolutely cannot understand any argument that would require everybody to carry life insurance.

      *Note, this is based on the current legal set up where everyone is legally required to carry health insurance and as such would make life insurance compulsory.

  19. More f'ing data aggregation... by Carcass666 · · Score: 1

    It sucks that they are going to pry into what I do, when I do it. It sucks worse that they will sell this information, and not invest in the data governance and security required to protect that information.

    1. Re:More f'ing data aggregation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sucks that they are going to pry into what I do, when I do it. It sucks worse that they will sell this information, and not invest in the data governance and security required to protect that information.

      * All the data governance and security in the world won't protect your data from the most dangerous third party: the government.
      * Wouldn't Apple and FitBit be the more obvious companies to buy the data from?

    2. Re:More f'ing data aggregation... by shilly · · Score: 1

      No point asking Apple for the data. They don't have access to it. The user gives permission, not Apple. They designed it that way.

  20. No. Fuck them. by TigerPlish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The sad part is people will be ok with this. Fuck them, too.

    What is this, a space mission where our vitals must be constantly monitored?

    No tattle dongles on my car, no smart watch on my wrist. If the insurer balks, Iâ(TM)ll take my shit elsewhere. If my employer balks, Iâ(TM)ll look for. New job.

    Fuck 5em, fuck 5em, fuck them, and may the inbred spawns of bacteria that came up with this idea and all ideas like it have an interesting life. I wish them a very interesting, quite educational life.

    Good thing I have more years behind me than in front of me, if this is the direction the world is going I have no interest in partaking.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    1. Re:No. Fuck them. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The sad part is people will be ok with this.

      America in general will be okay with this. You have litigated your way into this corner. The entire country is run on the basis of passing blame and impact to a 3rd party. Whether it be insurance agencies, or private entities subcontracted to gain information to reduce risk.

      One of the reasons you're here is due to a lack of dependence on the government to look after you. Instead you turn to the private sector. I used to quip about how America lives and dies on the backs of insurance companies (mostly about the fact that your entire safety is dependent on UL) but I had no idea how right I was.

      It would make perfect sense too that insurance companies get obesity rates under control rather than government intervention.

  21. There's bad news and more bad news by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

    The bad news is your life insurance premium just went up.

    More bad news is that the more it increased, the more likely actuaries and statisticians and people who study this kind of thing think it is that you might die soon.

    I have a Mi Band 2, but the data is only for me...lol, I'm not that naive. I just assume Xiaomi is counting the steps I take and the hours I sleep and even my heartbeat. I refused to grant the app access to my contacts and location and got over it.

    I probably wouldn't be comfortable sharing it with my insurance company though. I haven't given in to pressure from my auto insurer to transmit data to them either even though I'm sure I almost never do anything that would look bad. Seriously, I'm a slow and lazy driver these days and I almost never have to brake hard. I still don't want them monitoring me.

    I'm impressed at the accuracy of my fitness tracker, but I also see that very often it is horribly wrong. The heart rate is often way off and even ignoring the obvious outliers it only gives you a general idea of whether or not your heart is faster or slower than it normally is.

    It sometimes thinks I'm sleeping when clearly I am walking around. Perhaps it thinks I'm sleep-walking. I'm very skeptical of whatever science is in their algorithms so that's probably why I'm so impressed with how accurate it actually is despite its faults.

    Other fitness trackers are probably even more accurate, but how much more? And what value do they actually give you? I still consider mine an interesting gadget rather than something I should take too seriously.

    1. Re:There's bad news and more bad news by iampiti · · Score: 1

      The Mi band isn't terribly accurate. The step counting might be but the heart beat counting it is not: I usally use the Mi Fit app to track my heart beat rate in real time when I'm on the treadmill and the Mi readings are sometimes very close to those of the treadmill but sometimes it just gives nonsense values. Also, I've noticed it can guess pretty accurately when I fall sleep but sometimes when I wake up it still thinks I'm sleeping.
      The more expensive devices are probably a bit more accurate but I wouldn't trust their readings too much.
      It's too bad because continuous monitoring might actually be able to detect anomalies that indicate disease.

  22. boiling the frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't have a pedometer? Rate hike.

    Don't have a car tracker? Rate hike.

    Don't have a Civilian Safety Monitor in your house? Rate hike.

  23. How much will the added stress decrease one's life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many people will get stressed out having to log all their meals and such and actually die sooner as a result? This is way too intrusive. Yes, I understand the business model revolves around the customer living longer than average so that they pay more in than goes out, but life insurance companies have managed to turn a nice profit for decades without invading people's lives to this degree.

  24. Put the tracker on your dog by ugen · · Score: 1

    Put the tracker on your dog (or a small child). That will log so much exercise the insurance would be free.

    1. Re:Put the tracker on your dog by linuxguy · · Score: 1

      I know you meant it as a joke. But before anybody gets any funny ideas, if the insurance company finds out you were cheating, and if I were them, I wouldn't even tell you that I know. I'd be happy to let you keeping paying the premiums. It is when you or your family comes to collect, I'd claim fraud on your part.

    2. Re:Put the tracker on your dog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As difficult as it is to get the insurance companies to actually PAY when it is time to do so, I have zero issues with playing this game with them.
      If I have to strap the fit-bit on the damn cat, so be it.

      They're going to find they can't just cherry-pick the healthy folks so they never have to pay out. Much like Obama-Care bullshit, none of the healthy folks signed up because it's a waste of money for them. . . . . they're healthy. Guess where that leaves the insurance company ?

      The only reason they are switching to this model is another means to keep from paying you what they owe when the times comes.

    3. Re:Put the tracker on your dog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they would lose their license to operate, at worst (each company is licensed by the state), or at least lose a tremendous lawsuit. Offering a service in bad faith (no intent to fulfill, but continuing to accept an ongoing payment) is a clear violation of contract law their behalf. Continuing to accept payment shows an acceptance of the modified terms of the agreement.

    4. Re:Put the tracker on your dog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how exactly do they plan on proving it? Or you can run it through the dryer.

  25. my John Hancock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well they will not be getting my John Hancock

  26. It starts with rewards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gift cards, discounts etc but then it shifts to punishment-only for non-compliers. You HAVE to wear a device. You HAVE to let them peer into the intimacies of your life.

    How about we retaliate with mandatory random drug and alcohol testing for all corporate officers and all members of all boards of public and private corporations, both?

    Let's throw politicians in there too.

    In fact, why should politicians have any private conversations at all, ever ? Record everything and have it available for review in case malfeasance is alleged at some future time in point.

    You see what they do with their privacy now, right? You see the detrimental effects it has on our nation, right? So let's record their every utterance, movement, email, telephone call, text and fart for as long as they're in office and five years after they retire.

    Sacrifices have to be made. We ask our soldiers to sacrifice their lives. What I am proposing is the least they can do to ensure good government and transparent governance.

    The time has come to put politicians and the elite in their place.

    The price for lying to your shareholders or your constituents has to be raised too, because obviously what we have now is not deterring them in the least. New rule : you lie, you die. No exceptions no excuses. Al we have to establish is the fact that you lied. Then you're marched out immediately and shot. No judicial review, no appeals.

    We need to bring the powerful to their knees before they have us on ours forever.

  27. You have two choices by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    1. Live a healthy lifestyle.
    2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.

    What is up with all the griefers?

    1. Re:You have two choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Live a healthy lifestyle.
      2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.

      What is up with all the griefers?

      It's the idea that having to wear a tracking device everywhere could become the norm.
      I won't even carry my phone unless I'm working.

    2. Re:You have two choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Living a healthy lifestyle isn't enough. You also need to track it. I'm healthy enough but taking the time to track all if this is a pain in the butt. I know because my employer is pushing this stuff on us and I hate it. I know that not everyone feels that way but I have enough other things on my mind to remember to track calories or number of steps or make sure my fitbit is charged or open some app and punch in information.
      2. Not buying life insurance from this company isn't enough. Give it another 10 years and all of them will be doing this.

      That's what's up with all the griefers.

    3. Re: You have two choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How longuntil the spotting is compulsory?

      The slippery slope isn't a fallacy. When i was born, the SSN want mandatory and wasn't an ID. Now you can't avoid one and it is your federal ID number and you must user it to buy anying over $5K, anything online, and for damn near everything else.

    4. Re:You have two choices by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      You really went with "you don't need privacy if you have nothing to hide?"

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:You have two choices by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.

      Companies that don't differentiate based on fitness trackers will have to increase the premiums because of the influx of unhealthier people. This will then also affect all the people who can't wear a fitness tracker for legitimate reasons.

  28. An example of stupid by judoguy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is so dumb. A tracker would show me as terribly inactive because I can't wear one when I work out. I train and compete in judo and bjj. Hard training, fantastic exercise but you can't wear a damn bracelet or sensor while doing this.

    A fitness tracker, like the stupid BMI calculation, would show me as layabout. Every actual measure of my health shows me to be in great health. I'm 65 and compete successfully at a world level in judo and bjj for my age. This is the classic case of how vs what. Look at the actual thing to be measured, not a poorly defined process that tries to look at how something MIGHT be measured. .

    --
    Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    1. Re:An example of stupid by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      This is so dumb. A tracker would show me as terribly inactive because...

      It's only dumb if a financial majority of the insurer's customers are similar to you.

    2. Re:An example of stupid by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      In the bell curve, you are likely to fall in the beyond 3rd std deviation range (99.7% r not like you); why would a company base its financial decisions on what is convenient to such a tiny fraction of its user-base?

    3. Re:An example of stupid by houghi · · Score: 1

      Hey. You are on /. That means you have some technical knowledge. Just hack the thing and let it send semi-random data that might be interpreted as being a very healthy person.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:An example of stupid by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Look at the actual thing to be measured, not a poorly defined process that tries to look at how something MIGHT be measured. .

      While I am against what they are doing, I'm curious how you would suggest they actually measure your fitness, if not by any of the doable measures.

  29. Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their 401K is garbage as well with ridiculous fees and a shitty portal .

  30. Another torpedo into our personal information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big brother.. unwilling to take the risk that I only use band-aids without neosporin... decides that this reckless behavior will require me to pay more for my premium! Does this sound stupid? Why is this different?

    How much further.. seriously.. will it take before they start up-charging for the time where your mandatory bodily measurement device is taken off so the battery can go back to full?

    No fate but what we make.

  31. Their interests actually align with yours by FeelGood314 · · Score: 1

    Why all the negative comments. The insurance company doesn't want to pay out and neither do you. It's insurance. You hope you don't need it but you get it just in case. If your insurance company wants to give you incentives to live longer that seems like a good thing. Yes they are sharing your information when they try and get incentives for you to do things but 99% of the people not on slashdot give all that information away for free.

    1. Re:Their interests actually align with yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why all the negative comments. The insurance company doesn't want to pay out and neither do you. It's insurance. You hope you don't need it but you get it just in case.

      The insurance company is behaving unethically. They are trying to avoid what is called "adverse selection", aka gaming the system, aka cheating.

      Nobody likes a cheater.

      Just having to carry around the telemetry devices will be a serious problem.

      Further, your information will be sold. Either directly by the company, or by employees who act outside of official authorization, or by third party hackers. Lots of bad things will happen to lots of people as a result. It's already happening.

      For example, health information will inevitably be used to deny health insurance claims. Insurance companies already have an extremely bad track record in this area, with all kinds of unethical practices to try to avoid paying claims. Look up the phrase "Delay,Deny,Defend", With more information, the problem will only get worse - they look for ANY excuse they can find and more information means more opportunities to find an excuse - they ignore anything unfavourable to their cause so things that work for you don't help you unless you have money for lawyers. Talk to a lawyer that specializes in this area if you don't understand this.

      This will also make it difficult for many poor and middle class people to get insurance. Instead of being shielded by being part of a very large group of average people with average problems distributed on the usual bell curve, a large group of those people will be selected against by the monitoring devices (we're already seeing this with health insurance, it's been going on for a long time).

      That will destroy some people's lives - more people that are primary providers will be dying without life insurance that means their families will be destitute - and it means the rest of us have to spend more on welfare. Don't think for a moment that this won't affect you negatively - unless you happen to be rich (in which case anything that improves profits, however unethical or illegal or harmful to society will improve your bottom line, the only thing that matters to the average sociopath).

      Health information will also be used to discriminate against people. Giving how many companies are routinely doing inappropriate stuff (unethical and arguably illegal) with the H1B visa matters, you shouldn't doubt that equally bad abuse will happen when they start getting this information.

      Any of the popular textbooks on insurance will discuss this issue at more length if you want more details.

      Insurance is already a luxury that protects the rich better than anybody - the very same people who need it least.

      Let's not make it even harder to get, you just end up concentrating more wealth in the 1% - and in the long run, that hurts everybody.

      Unequal distribution of wealth is healthy for a society, up to a point - but when it gets excessive, that create extremely serious problems (as the USA has been discovering, at least for those that pay attention - there are numerous economic papers on this topic if you don't understand it).

      Individual health data should be a private matter between individuals, their family, and their health care provider, not something to be exploited by corporations. Indeed, rights to this effect can be asserted as arising under the 9th and 10th Amendments, making this an illegal policy.

  32. another corporate conspiracy ? by swell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Back around 1950 a major insurance company with an excellent reputation and very low premium rates set stringent requirements for its customers. Agents would fill in the forms with the usual information for clients; age, address, some medical background, etc. But potential clients had to qualify for the insurance policy. Like any company; older people would pay more for life insurance. People with accidents would pay more for auto insurance. But unlike other companies, many medium risk clients were simply not allowed to buy from this insurance company. At any price. And all approved clients got low premiums and were happy.

    But they went beyond that. Agents had a secret checklist for every potential client. Things you might never guess could disqualify you for the money saving policy. One item that has stuck in my memory all this time is this: any potential client who enters the agent's office wearing boots is automatically disqualified.

    Actuaries must have determined risk factors far beyond the norm. Perhaps they consulted psychologists and did unusual surveys to come up with odd criteria. Nevertheless, insurance companies take risks and need to protect themselves. If you want cheap insurance from a reliable company, expect to prove that you are worthy.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:another corporate conspiracy ? by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      One item that has stuck in my memory all this time is this: any potential client who enters the agent's office wearing boots is automatically disqualified.

      Did they close in the winter?

    2. Re:another corporate conspiracy ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An Insurance company serves no purpose without that risk being present. In fact, As far as life insurance goes, it's a 100% guarantee of a payout.

      An insurance company that goes out of it's way to try to avoid a payout like this stops being an insurance company, and starts being an economic tyrant. One can only hope people have enough sense to avoid this insurer and ensure that their revenue plummets.

    3. Re:another corporate conspiracy ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The presence of winter is obviously a disqualifying condition.

  33. Gimmick by fropenn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is really just a gimmick by the insurance company to make you think you are getting a better rate. The risk of death - especially for younger people - is really quite low. Even though exercise reduces that risk, it's hard to believe that it would make a meaningful difference in insurance rates (particularly because you don't really need life insurance when you are old). But, it gets them lot of attention and its customers think they are getting a great deal because they are into fitness.

    1. Re:Gimmick by sad_ · · Score: 1

      you are correct! and i'm betting the real benefit for THEM comes from the fact that they get paid by the firms sending you gift cards, perks and healthy food (all those things are just ads in disguise)

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    2. Re:Gimmick by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      A good point. I was just thinking, there must be something else going on here. The discounts can't be very big since the whole point of insurance is that non-claimants pay the premiums to cover the less numerous claimants. If you keep lowering premiums for the lower risk categories, where does the money to pay out claims come from?

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    3. Re:Gimmick by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      The discounts can't be very big since the whole point of insurance is that non-claimants pay the premiums to cover the less numerous claimants. If you keep lowering premiums for the lower risk categories, where does the money to pay out claims come from?

      Low-risk customers subsidizing high-risk customers is not how insurance is supposed to work. If you have lower risks then you should be paying lower premiums. Now it is true, in hindsight, that the premiums paid by non-claimants cover the costs incurred by claimants, but this should average out so that each customer's expected future cost (the cost if the risk is realized multiplied by the probability that the risk will be realized) at any given point in time is in line with the premiums. Otherwise, given a chance, the overpaying low-risk customers will switch to an insurer offering them a better deal (or self-insure) and the original insurer will be forced to either raise rates to suite the higher expected cost of the customers they have left or else go out of business. Unless the government intervenes to prevent low-risk customers from leaving, of course—but at that point what you have is no longer insurance but rather an awkwardly structured welfare program, funded through artificially high premiums on low-risk individuals in place of taxes.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    4. Re:Gimmick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think the discounts lower the rates? My health insurance at a former job had one of these scams running. They jacked up everyone's rates and then offered discounts for fitness tracking that almost made up the difference. If you jumped through enough hoops, you only got a slight increase. Otherwise, your rates went through the roof. I imagine the life insurance scam is along those lines - pay a lot more or only pay a little more if you strap on this anal probe. Same thing either way.

  34. The solution: NEGROTRACKER - Outsourced fitness tr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SO your health plan requires you to wear a fitness thing? Not anymore
    At NEGROTRACKER we outsource your daily fitness to a pool of low-cost, hyperactive negroes.

    Our stacking technology straps dozens of fitness trackers to a single nigro, for maximum fitness concurrency.

    Outsource all your fitness-tracking needs with a truly innovative and progressive company today.

  35. Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    What if you don't want to be so obviously tracked and monitored by some goddamned corporation, even more so than most people already are?
    What if you don't have or want a smartphone? I don't and refuse to have one and I'm far from alone in that.
    This has got to be one of the stupidest things I've heard lately. Won't last.

    1. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 2

      *Old man yells at cloud.*

      --
      I tend to rant.
    2. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Screw you. Are you saying everyone should LIKE having an insurance company track their every move? Or are you just being an asshole to be an asshole? Either way step off.

    3. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice reference.

    4. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      I'm saying you're overreacting. Go for a walk or something.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    5. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1
      In other words: You're either a shill for companies that want to do shit like this, or you're a nearsighted myopian and/or in denial about the consequences of setting a precedent like this; which is it?

      Or maybe you're one of these guys:

      "I have nothing to hide, therefore I have nothing to fear! Only people with things to hide want privacy!"

      ..or this guy:
      "My life (and yours) isn't interesting enough for anyone to care about; you shouldn't be worried about anyone 'tracking' or 'surveilling' you, you're not worth the bother!"

      So are you one of those? If you are then you are sadly mistaken and/or in denial.

      "We're already being tracked everywhere and there is nothing we can do about it so why bother even trying or worrying about it? After all we don't have a choice in the matter."

      If you're that guy then I got news for you: You are a coward. Stop being a coward and stand up for your rights.

    6. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Old man yells at internet troll."

      (I agree with you, by the way... just couldn't resist the low-hanging-fruit.)

    7. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he is saying the world is passing you by. You, like me are the minority in this case that cares about being tracked. Eventually we both have to admit that the world will move in this direction without us because of the younger generations apathy towards privacy and the much older generations (the ones in charge of these companies) obsessive greed for more revenue.

    8. Re:Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you fight for what you believe. Stop pointing fingers and name calling. Try taking action instead if this shit means so much to you. Shouting at people trolling you on the internet is not taking action.

      I don't believe in any of that stuff. I don't believe people will stand up against this, nor do I care. I want nothing to do with it and will continue to do so from humble abode out in the woods. And you, Mr. Conspiracy, are not welcome on my lawn.

      Get over yourself, seriously.
      Signed,
      Me.

      --
      I tend to rant.
  36. In theory, everybody wins, by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    > In theory, everybody wins,

    Except those who have been paying their life-insurance premiums for 30 years and are forced onto these "New & Improved" spyware policies which immediately classify them as a high risk and void their policy.

    Which is probably EXACTLY what this change is designed to do - dump all the boomers who have been dumb enough to pay for life insurance for decades now that they're getting to the age where 90% of them will be dead within 10 years.

    1. Re:In theory, everybody wins, by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing they cannot just get rid of existing policies like that. My guess is that only new policies can have this limitation applied. Or, there will be some fun class action lawsuits coming up./p.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re: In theory, everybody wins, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are half right. It is illegal to cancel a person's policy because of those reasons. On the other hand, if you have ten thousand people in class xyz123 policy, you are allowed to cancel that class of policy entirely without penalty. You can also then offer all of them the chance to join policy group xyz123b, which coincidentally is the same policy but excludes, say, hemocromiatosis coverage, thus avoiding the million dollar a year treatment cost that one if your policy holder's newborn babies got screened with.

      Or even just offer what amounts to the original policy with a new name to everyone except that loser with the sick kid. They'll be selling their house to keep their kid alive a few more months, so they won't be able afford to fund a lawyer through the years long discover process through dozens of shell groups and misplaced documents.

  37. Term life is for your kids' college fund by tepples · · Score: 1

    So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?

    The pitch I've seen most often from AIG's kinetic-typography-driven TV commercials is that life insurance allows your children to complete their education at a trade school or four-year university despite your untimely death.

  38. New math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do these two things go together?

    1. "policyholders are incentivized to adopt healthy habits"
    2. "and inurance companies collect more premiums and pay less in claims"

    #1 should mean pay less in premiums right? But #2 says the opposite. The only party incentivized here is corporate profit for... The electronics vendor.

  39. In the not so distant future by sjames · · Score: 2

    Talking fitness trackers mandatory for life of health insurance. No mute button. But it will provide very helpful advice. Obey or pay more than you make for a premium. For example:

    Jim, you are not exercising enough. Cotton picking is great exercise. We have provided a field ready to harvest. Instructions are uploaded to your Phon.

    Now, pick that cotton Jim.......more........more.......pick faster.......come on! Put your back into it BOYYY!!!

    1. Re:In the not so distant future by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      *Dig that hole. Forget the sun.*
      *When at last the work is done, don't sit down, it's time to dig another one.*

      --
      I tend to rant.
  40. If a large, well established company is doing this by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    then the rest of the industry is probably going to follow suit soon.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  41. Time to level the field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insurance companies have, for decades, insisted that things like "pre-existing conditions" are unfair because insurance is essentially a bet, and those things violate the mutual unknowns of any bet, making the bet unfair. The reason insurance works is that you, the customer, are betting things will go badly and you'll get a payoff whereas the insurer is betting things will go well and they'll not have to pay out. This seems upside-down, but it works because it's in YOUR self interest to take care of yourself and your stuff and in doing so you are actively working to avoid collecting on your policy (you're trying not to die and collect on life insurance, not to have an accident and collect on cra insurance, not to have your house burn down, etc).

    Here's the thing though: For decades, insurers have been rigging the game buy doing statistical studies of the people they insure, putting people into "risk pools" (even though all their customers are really in ONE pool called "our customers") and otherwise having an edge over their customers in the bet. Now in the internet age they are spying even more and now demanding proof you are behaving and even modifying your life to improve THEIR side of the bet. The only fair response is to require them to cover all pre-existing conditions and PROVE that THEY are being responsible and have all the capital to pay-out as needed and that they actually ARE paying out fairly etc. For every edge they gain in the bet, their customers need to be given a matching edge of some sort - anything else is a government-assisted (since government regulates them and decides who can and cannot be in that marketplace) abuse.

  42. Elaborate: Healthy Food Purchases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live on fast food. I eat out all the time. I'd bet my life savings I'm healthier than over 90% of my several hundred coworkers.

    Additionally, I'm allergic to common "healthy" foods: avocado, fish, beans

    So kindly, eat a dick.

  43. why not blood tests by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not start requiring blood tests and periodic physicals, it's only slightly more intrusive than recording everything you do and everywhere you go.

  44. Don't buy life insurance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.

    Even better. Don't buy a life insurance at all. It is the most worthless insurance ever. Put the money you would pay to the insurance company on your savings account. That is a much better deal. You save at least 20% on insurance company costs and profits.
    The only time you may want to buy some life insurance is when you know you are going to die real soon from a condition the insurance company does not track in its contract. In such a case, buy it.

    1. Re:Don't buy life insurance! by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      Even better. Don't buy a life insurance at all. It is the most worthless insurance ever. Put the money you would pay to the insurance company on your savings account. That is a much better deal.

      My life insurance policy (through employer) of about $200K, costs about $3/month. That's about $36/year. Over 30 years, that's a whopping $1080 at the current rate. If I were to just put that money in a savings account and let it gain interest, it wouldn't amount to much.

      And hey, if I die in an accident, it's $400K. Score!

  45. It's called learning. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something religious livestock is of course incapable of.

    E.g. how it is not obvious to anyone, that grass (which grains are from) is not for humans but for cows, is amazing. It is an emergency thing, to pre-digest (=process) them outside your belly, to substitute what cows can do, to get something edible, even if boring, that can keep you alive for a bit, until it makes you sick.
    Because it is also obvious that high purification of only one of the many important things the body needs, is not good, as it means the lack the other ones. And grains do not even need to be purified, as they are already too imbalanced and pure by nature.

    Also, this has actually been known since forever. But certain industries like to walk over dead and suffering bodies to make a buck. (=psychopaths)

  46. 4 letters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    G.D.P.R.

  47. They are going to do what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have got to be shitting me.....

    But, this was the end game that everyone kept saying was a conspiracy theory.

  48. Thoughts from someone familiar with life insurance by turp182 · · Score: 1

    Actuarial background.

    For life insurance, risk analysis and pricing is done at the time of sale. How healthy are you now? For 1 year term (policy expires in 1 year) this is very accurate. For a whole life policy (inforce until you die or stop paying premiums) policy this is a statistical question. Thus actuaries... Policies can be on the books for up to 100 years (issue around birth, inforce until death). (Aside: This is a technical debt nightmare from a systems perspective)

    The article says there are discounts for things like exercise, insurance is traditionally a fixed premium situation (excepting UL/VUL policies where premiums have a floor but can mostly be determined by the insured - there are tax limitations). That's interesting and novel.

    What are they attempting? John Hancock is trying to pre-select who they insure. They want to focus on those who have a healthy lifestyle and are willing to be tracked. They want to only sell Preferred policies (skipping table ratings for more risky individuals). Makes pricing much easier, and they can probably undercut competitors who to some degree subsidize more risky individuals via a bit higher premium on preferred customers.

    Finally, I highly doubt the phrase "will stop underwriting traditional life insurance" because they will still want to know if you smoke or have pre-existing medical conditions. They may be skipping the medical testing (I'm sure they won't for larger policies).

    It's a rather clever play on "If you don't have anything to hide...".

    --
    BlameBillCosby.com
  49. Thus a new market emerges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A new market emerges for people to exercise for you. Just to keep your rates down. I wonder how many trackers one "exerciser" can wear without getting caught for near duplicate data? Maybe one on one wrist and one on another and that's it? Anyway it gives an answer to the other post today about AI Devastating the Developing World. ( https://news.slashdot.org/stor... ) At the end of TFS, it says developing countries need to build up human-centered service industries. Coming soon: "We exercise for you!" The will have to do it like call centers do - off hours - and on hours where the person being exercised for isn't at work or whatever. But they can figure out those details.

  50. Activity robots by sinij · · Score: 1

    I have a business idea - open a robotic "gym" next to a pub. After work you drop off your bracelet for a "workout" and go out with buddies to have a pint and shoot some pool.

  51. Panopticon by jbmartin6 · · Score: 2

    I've mentioned before, the real danger of a dystopian panopticon future comes from insurance companies, not governments.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:Panopticon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is an old SF meme.

  52. I hope they're not our underwriters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they crash and burn.
    Your premiums are going up reason you ordered too many pizzas last week...
    And the pizzas costed double because they had to go through two orange zones to deliver it...
    1984 is being force down our necks but too many normies are in denial.
    What's happening in the EU and specifically in the UK is most alarming.
    Coming to North America soon....No thank you.
    This is why the US voted in Trump, Nanny State hand in hand with Corps to turn you into a good boy/girl drone.

  53. Pretty fucking evil. 2010s = loss of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows 10 steals your data, Smart TVs steal your data, Smart phones steal your data, FREAKING ROOMBAs STEAL YOUR DATA.

    This is getting old. Who are we electing these days?

  54. EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by gosand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Where I work we have a health plan set up with Virgin Pulse, and everyone is strongly encouraged to get trackers for #of steps etc.
    Pretty much everyone has them, because hey - they're cool right? And it automatically uploads your info. Luckily for me, you are still able to manually enter your steps and other info - so I wrote a script I run every morning to go log into the site and enter them. Why would I even bother? Because they charge you a lot more for your policy if you don't. You have to hit a certain goal for the quarter or they penalize you.. whoops, I mean, you don't get the discount. And it is several hundred dollars.

    But I REFUSE to be tagged and tracked like a wild animal, all for the sake of "fitness". Which is a total sham. The "nutrition advice" and pseudo-medical tips they constantly hammer you with on their site are garbage. I lie on the surveys, and tell them what they want to hear. Not because I eat garbage and don't want them to know, but because I know better than their one-size-fits-all advice. I know what I know through personal research, and listening to actual experts on these things. I have been at my ideal weight for 6 years, and the only "concern" with my health is high cholesterol - which I don't really know if it is a concern or not. I haven't tried to get a real lipid panel done because my insurance won't cover it. There are 5 indicators for metabolic syndrome, and my cholesterol is the only one that isn't perfect. Yet doctors will try to put me on statins - based on one overly generalized test that tells you nothing valuable. High cholesterol, in and of itself, tells you nothing about possible risks to your health. "any history of heart issues?" Yes, my father had 2 stints put in a couple of years ago. "ahh, I see... so we should put you on statins". Oh, by the way, my father has an absolutely normal lipid panel. So why do you want to prescribe statins to me again?

    Our healthcare and insurance industries are abysmal. I went for a checkup once (required by the healthplan) and all was well. A couple of weeks later, I got a letter from my life insurance company that said I was required to enter rehab in order to keep my policy. I called my agent, who I knew pretty well, and he said he couldn't talk about it. I tried to call my doctor, and doctors don't talk to you. This went on for a few days, and finally I was a bit frantic and my life insurance guy said "your doctor indicated that you use drugs, so you need to attend rehab to keep your policy". I was LIVID. I left a VERY terse message at my doctor's office and did something that I hate - I threatened legal action if they did not contact me. I eventually found out that the medical assistant, who had done the whole "do you smoke... do you drink... " questions at the beginning of that visit had checked that I use marijuana. Which I do not. I still never found out why, but have to assume it was some mistake - why would I say I did? Anyway, I demanded that they send a letter to my insurance company to tell them it was a mistake on their part. Now... I don't tell my doctor anything. I answer all their stupid little questions the way they want me to, and I go about my life. What REALLY burns me about this is that it was my life insurance company (not my health insurance) that knew about this mistake - but because it was protected information, they couldn't actually tell me what was going on. It's an old word, but "cahoots" is about as perfect of a word that can be used to describe it.

    My point is - don't play into these types of programs. It may seem easy, but it is such a slippery slope. It's only paranoid if they aren't out to get you - and these fuckers are out to get you! Not to mention that their data collection is only to benefit them, not you. If you think all the people who have those fitness trackers are getting healthier because of them... think again. Everyone is still the same. The overweight lady who wears her tracker and goes to the gym every day is still gaining wei

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh ye of little imagination. You want to know why I have cats? Fitbits make perfect cat collars. I pretty much agree whole heatedly with you though.

    2. Re:EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      quiet down there fatty

    3. Re:EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't tried to get a real lipid panel done because my insurance won't cover it.

      So you're encouraged to wear a tracker (they even call them that outright!), but you can't get a routine lab test. That should tell you all you need to know about the insurer's agenda and priorities.

    4. Re:EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Daily felon.

      Fraud.

      Now you need to identify the other two felonies/day you commit.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re: EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      I swim and cycle competitively and I also have high cholesterol, but the doctors here (Canada) specifically avoided statins because they can cause muscle cramping, which tends to reduce exercise volume. I'm not saying that there are no unscrupulous doctors here that are swayed by pitches from big pharmaceutical companies, but it does seem less likely when the system is actually concerned with your health and not you as an ongoing profit stream.

      (The doctors also said the high cholesterol is likely genetic and not to worry about it, despite the history of heart disease in my family. Being an active athlete with a decent diet is already the most they could ask me to do.)

    6. Re:EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by gosand · · Score: 1

      I haven't tried to get a real lipid panel done because my insurance won't cover it.

      So you're encouraged to wear a tracker (they even call them that outright!), but you can't get a routine lab test. That should tell you all you need to know about the insurer's agenda and priorities.

      By "real lipid panel" I mean an extensive one, that will test for particle size, etc. There are only a couple of labs in the country that do those. The basic one that everyone does tells you nothing useful. Even if I could get the real panel done and it was covered, I don't know if I would - because then the insurance company would know if I had a higher risk of heart disease. Bottom line is, I don't fucking trust them with any of my health information!

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    7. Re: EVERYTHING about this is wrong... by gosand · · Score: 1

      I swim and cycle competitively and I also have high cholesterol, but the doctors here (Canada) specifically avoided statins because they can cause muscle cramping, which tends to reduce exercise volume. I'm not saying that there are no unscrupulous doctors here that are swayed by pitches from big pharmaceutical companies, but it does seem less likely when the system is actually concerned with your health and not you as an ongoing profit stream.

      (The doctors also said the high cholesterol is likely genetic and not to worry about it, despite the history of heart disease in my family. Being an active athlete with a decent diet is already the most they could ask me to do.)

      Wow, something that makes sense. Who would have thought? There is one thing that having high cholesterol will definitively tell you though... that you have high cholesterol. That is it. There is no absolute link between high cholesterol and heart disease.. or any other major problem. If that link was there, then every person that had heart disease would have high cholesterol. But that is not the case. Just like saying "eating fat makes you fat" - people have been trained to believe it, and even doctors think it in the face of no evidence to prove it.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  55. But it IS their business by PraiseBob · · Score: 0

    As much as I hate their policy, I have to disagree with your point that it isn't their business what you do in private. They are selling you life insurance, and thus could lose money based upon your bad choices. It is in fact directly within their business model to care about what you do in private, that is the basis of their business.

    1. Re:But it IS their business by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      It is in fact directly within their business model to care about what you do in private

      You are flat out arguing that it is reasonable that your right to privacy is defined by an insurance company's business model.

    2. Re:But it IS their business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People die. It doesn't matter whether it was due to a bacon overdose or simply old age, the outcome is the same. It's literally unavoidable. It's gonna happen.

    3. Re:But it IS their business by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Your user name is in agreement with your post. John Hancock is not forcing someone to give up their right to privacy, it is offering the prospective purchaser lower rates if monitoring shows healthy behavior. The purchaser's actions are voluntary. You don't sacrifice your right to privacy by speaking in public, which is a much broader dissemination of information than fitness monitoring.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    4. Re:But it IS their business by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What is the LD50 of bacon?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:But it IS their business by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Your user name is in agreement with your post.

      Ooh, a name flame. How original.

      John Hancock is not forcing someone to give up their right to privacy,

      I didn't say they were. Even so, if you work for someone who provides that as a benefit, and you don't want to have to pay for it out of your own pocket while others get it as a perk, you have no choice. I'll point that this is very similar to the issue of insurance covering abortions. If it is not provided under the "company plan", then women would be forced to buy insurance or pay for the operation out of their own pocket. Case law says this is discrimination.

      What I was responding to was the claim by the OP, which you didn't read. He said that it was reasonable for the insurance company to demand you waive your right to privacy if you want their insurance BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR BUSINESS MODEL. Read all the words, please.

    6. Re:But it IS their business by PraiseBob · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, I do NOT think their actions are reasonable. I think it's a horrible invasion of privacy, and absolutely object to it being a requirement, and don't want it to spread to other companies. However, the colloquial phrase "none of their business", doesn't apply in this case. It IS their business- in the sense that they make profits and losses and business choices, based on this data. It, quite literally, is their business model.

      P.S. You are complaining that parent didn't read, but then made up the word reasonable, which I never ever said....

    7. Re:But it IS their business by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, I do NOT think their actions are reasonable. I think it's a horrible invasion of privacy,

      You said:

      As much as I hate their policy, I have to disagree with your point that it isn't their business what you do in private.

      If you disagree with someone who thinks it is unreasonable for this policy to exist, then you are defacto saying you think it is not unreasonable. Whether you hate the policy or not is a different matter. People can hate even the most reasonable policies for any number of reasons. For example, I hate the policy of an online library I use that you can borrow audio books for only a limited time. I want it to be longer, even though I think their policy is reasonable in context.

      However, the colloquial phrase "none of their business", doesn't apply in this case. It IS their business

      Which is it? Is it unreasonable and none of their business, or a reasonable policy based on their business model?

      P.S. You are complaining that parent didn't read, but then made up the word reasonable, which I never ever said....

      You said the equivalent, and if you can show me where I quoted you saying that specific word I'd appreciate it.

  56. everybody wins by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

    Not people who think those devices are nothing but toys and hate installing unnecessary apps on their phone.

    Just another company to stay away from.

    --
    The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
  57. Will_Fitness_Track_4_U (LLC) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We know your busy life style and classified working environment prevents you from obtaining cost effective insurance by giving up your privacy. Not to worry! Will_Fitness_Track_4_U (LLC) has a cadre of healthy atheletic people eager to take your tracker for a workout.

    Surrogate Rates (Per day prices subject to location adjustments)

    Teens - $.75
    20's - $2
    30's - $3
    40's - $4
    50's - $6
    60's - $8
    70's - $12
    80's - $50

    Our surrogates endeavor to limit themselves to no more than 100 trackers at a time for you!

    Disclaimer: Extended use of surrogates my preclude the abilty to stop.

  58. Creating a new market! by eth1 · · Score: 1

    If this becomes at all widespread, it won't be long before someone develops a device that spoofs these things to make it look like you're doing exactly what these companies want in order to give you a discount. Just slap the fitbit on the DiscountWrist(tm), and go about your business as usual.

    As long as the device costs less than about a year's worth of discounts, they'd sell like hotcakes.

  59. It was bound to happen by p51d007 · · Score: 2

    Busy bodies want everyone to live, eat, breathe like THEY do, so now they are getting us use to having our heart rate, activity levels on our phones, watches for "your convenience", then the insurance companies will start using the data, as well as the government allowing or not allowing health care, once they end up taking over the health care industry in a few years. They are also getting us use to not paying "in cash" by using our phones, watches, of course, for your convenience. Once people ditch cash, they can just make it a law that you CANNOT use cash. Once THAT happens everything you do, everything you buy will be MONITORED. Tie health care into that, and then when you want to order a cheese burger, your card, tap, implanted under the skin chip will not be allowed, because you were too fat at your last mandated government checkup. Plus, if the government gets in trouble, like they did in Greece, just take the money from the banks. It's all just data anyway, no "cash" that you can hide. DON'T think it can't happen!

  60. this wont work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cant wear fitness tracking devices for all fitness related activities. Martial arts and contact sports, for starters will have a problem with you carrying your cell phone. So will swimmers. As far as I know, the step counters dont work great for bike riding or skate boarding either.

  61. This is probably illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Want to see a court challenge to this.

  62. And so it begins-debt. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Serious answer: life insurance is geared towards somebody who is a major provider for the family.

    Usually, but not always. Remember one can borrow against the value of the policy for say emergency purposes, or if one dies taking care of after death expenses. e.g. funeral, closing one's estate, etc.

  63. Panopticon-self-sufficient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which makes for a VERY strong argument for being as self-sufficient as possible. Pair that with our low savings rate, and you'll see why they have us by the balls.

  64. How about combat sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will said insurance company pay for one fitbit per month (and I may be optimistic here, for some martial arts) so they can get the activity tracking?

    Not to mention the injuries your partners may get from the bracelet...

  65. Holy Fire by Bruce Sterling by werepants · · Score: 1

    This is where it all begins...

    In the book, everyone's behavior is tracked, and risky behavior reduces your eligibility for life-extension therapies. So someone who is smoking, drinking, eating fast food, riding motorcycles, getting in bar fights, driving too fast, neglecting exercise, etc - will not be deemed a good investment of the life extension tech. What makes the novel a good read is that this is certainly a reasonable first pass at a fair model from a utilitarian perspective - you don't want to drop a limited resource on people who will waste it. What's the good of extending someone's life by 300 years if they are likely to die from risky behavior in the next 5?

    It's an interesting discussion to have. Assuming the technology exists, who should get to live forever? The people who can afford it? The people who show they won't squander it via behavior tracking like this? Random lottery?

  66. I wish I could get health inssurance discounts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish I could get health insurance discounts for being healthy too. I would be all over that as I exercise at least an hour every day anyway.

  67. Imagine being in your 30s... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And having not had a life because this shit has been ongoing since the 00s, and every job has asked for far too invasive of personal information, from SSNs before hiring to drug tests, invasive background checks, and nickel and dime raise opportunities while you're busting your ass.

    I'm long past wanting to check out of this society, but alone I've got nowhere to go.

    I did however meet a few dozen people last week who didn't do social media! They were all out of Utah though.

  68. Re:Free Health Care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting. My post had some people who had replied to it and was modded up. Now it is at minus one. I've never bothered to understand how slashdot's system works. Why are all the replies to my post now gone?

  69. Business Opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Create a device that 'wears' your watch and jostles it in such a way as to convince it that you are as active as the policy requires.

    Ka-ching.

    Your welcome.

  70. mounting evidence against obesity == unhealthy by p0larity · · Score: 1

    Considering mounting evidence shows no real link between hight weights and health outcomes, and that some obese people are even healthier than skinny people so long as they are active and eat healthy, this whole scheme seems like yet another way to attempt to shame obese people into being skinny

    Shaming obese people simply makes them eat more and be depressed. It causes a cortisol concentration in their blood which even in skinny people makes you eat more and want to be comfortable, among other negative health outcomes.

    So can we stop shaming fat people already and just learn to live with the fact that some people are bigger? It's proven that they rarely keep weight off with dieting. Giving them stress over it is the act of a douchebag masquereding as someone who cares.

    Full disclosure: I've been skinny all my life. If I do light exercise I get pipes. I have no skin in this game other than compassion for other human beings.

  71. With GPS by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Work out for 2 hours, man your clothes are soaked. Washed up, go home, stop by McDonalds. Log in only to notice that you have a net increase in your rate because you were hungry, it cross referenced your McDonalds app to find out you chowed down on 2 large shakes, 3 big macs, 2 packages of fries.