I was reading the latest issue of Time Magazine, and it looks as if our cars are equiped with Event-Data recorders (EDRs). In short the device records speed, brake activation, and several other parameters in the event of a crash.

The debate is raging between people who support the recorders and people who believe it to be an invasion of privacy.

Some insurance companies are offering discounts for policy holders whom install a six month recorder (extended recording duration) in their cars, and the goverment is pushing for an standard in data recording and commercially viable readers of the data.

Extremist vioce that with EDR's and GPS you could be giving speeding tickets by a system (not human) and insurance companies could be raising your pricing based on those tickets.

Also the possibility that insurance companies could demand to review your data recordings prior to offering insurance is alive.

What do you think?
Are you pro or con extended recorders?
Do you think other people shouuld be able to see your driving behavior?

and by the way two teens where convicted and are serving prison terms based on the speed recorded by one of the devices in a fatal crash.....

 

What!? This is all new to me. And I say that it's probably an isolated thing. A lot of these major publications take an extreme situation and then cite misleading statistics or something that make it seem like it happens all the time. Privacy advocates are very loud. Look at the stories on RFID: that's a major breakthrough that people are freaking out over because they think it will cause some shadowy figures to track your every move. Imagine what they'd say about this. People already hate insurance companies. No way it would work.

 

Well no one told you or me of the existance of the device in our cars...... humm

And progressive thinks it would work, since they are offering rebates for the six month recorder....

Also based on the case of the teens in jail ....the results already hold up in court....

 

As a risk manager (not connected however with auto insurances), I'd have to say this sounds reasonable. The reliability of the recorder itself would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt though. I like the idea of insurance discounts for having the device and (provided the technology is proven reliable) I like the idea that it in fact might be able to prove fault in terrible circumstances involving death, extreme physical injury and major property damage, etc. This especially when there are no witnesses.

From my personal side, I would only see this as an invasion of privacy if the product was not proven over 99% reliable in extensive testing. Otherwise, as prudent and **** as this may sound, when we drive, we truly do take the safety of other people's lives and property into our own hands. Driving is a prviledge, not a right.

OK... That's the hard side from a truly unconventional person who also manages to avoid running down the street at night in his underwear even though the urge is incredibly strong sometimes. [sm=happy046.gif]

 

LOL @celenztah

It has upheld in court both for guilty and not guilty veredicts.

Apparently a guy was sentenced to jail because a someone said that the driver was going over 90mph when his vehicle struck another causing harm, the EDR revealed his speed was 60MPH.... So as far as that it seems to work both ways.

It does make me unconfortable that data can be mined to perhaps market target certains individuals based on drive location and or habits.... On the other hand it could become the "free lojack".

Also for those of us who tweak the car a little...[8D].... If you get in an accident severe enough to deploy your airbags.... whether or not you reset the computer to stock and do the battery thing...... don't forget there is a slew of parameters that the dealer may be able to "review" in determining conditions leading to the crash.... humm