30
C0D4
2y

Son of a... insurance tracker
You hit delete and I’m stuck with this reply!?!

Stuff it, I’ll rant about it instead of commenting.

How’s an insurance e company any different to google tracking your every move, except now it’s for “insurance policy premiums” and setting pricing models on when, how, and potentially why you drive.

Granted no company should have enough gps data to be able to create a behaviour driven ai that can predict your where and when’s with great accuracy.

The fight to remove this kind of tech from our lives is long over, now we have to deal with the consequences of giving companies way to much information.

- good lord, I sound like a privacy activists here, I think I’ve been around @linuxxx to long.

Comments
  • 5
    I hate when people delete their rants while I'm typing a comment πŸ˜‘
  • 2
    @linuxxx what have you done to me😦
  • 2
    @Stuxnet nothing like yay a decent comment, post, invalid rant ! Wtf!!!!
  • 4
    But I'm gonna stand by my comment of this is a viable option for most people that aren't concerned with their privacy.

    As long as it's not mandatory, then by all means let people who want to use it, use it. But the moment it's mandatory is when it crosses the line.

    And @Linuxxx I can already hear your comment about it "becoming the future" and something like "should be stopped now." I've got no answer for that, so your welcome for saving you time πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚
  • 1
    @C0D4 I am sorry, I was down...
    and so I did just like @jase does

    maybe in my rant I went too far.

    anyway, this is not the way of making road a safe place. If human are not trusted drivers the solution is self driving cars.
  • 2
    @mngr I find people are more conscious of their behaviour if they are being watched, or at least feel like they’re being watched.

    Granted a tracker has its own issues with privacy, but on the other hand, if it stops people from being dickeads then why not (in an opt-in scenario)

    Self driving cars are no different unlesss they are fully autonomous, but then they have tracking aswell so 🀷‍♂️

    As for @Real-Jase, I stopped ++ him long ago πŸ˜‚
  • 5
    @C0D4 @Stuxnet the thing is that whether or not you care about your privacy, exposing data (or choosing not to) might eventually have (a great) impact on things in your life.

    From price differences to whether or not you're rejected for insurance, etc etc.

    For example (something that COULD become reality), we've got an online-only supermarket here and they of course keep a record of everything you buy. If you drink a lot and insurance would be allowed to reject you based on drinking amounts, if they'd be able to buy (or whatever) a profile/data of your online supermarket shopping habits and be able/allowed to reject if you appear to be drinking a lot according to the supermarket data, you'd be fucked regardless if you care about your privacy or not.

    Find that a crazy example? A law passed here recently which allows banks to sell user spending/etc habits. Imagine what you could do with that data...
  • 2
    @C0D4 @irene
    Fully autonomous does not actually REQUIRES tracking, it is an add on feature.
    maps can be stored locally and the controller IS BETTER TO BE LOCAL and not depend on connection.
  • 4
    As for people who'd say that this is a choice (in the UK it is), it's not always a choice even if it appears so, the best example I've got is that with some insurance providers one can choose to get a tracker which tracks driving habits and pay the normal fine or choose not to get it and pay 1K extra. If you don't have that money, it's not a choice anymore for you.

    And yes, I'd pay that money.
  • 1
    @linuxxx
    it’s these things that boggle my mind, we have nations advocating for privacy (GDPR - for example) and yet we have the same nations allowing company’s to sell and trade and use our private lives for any thing they please - privacy doesn’t work 2 ways, it’s just a false sense of security.

    I do accept the more we do digitally the more power these pricks gain, but in a world where we have become so reliant, its like saying no to the candy man.
  • 1
    @mngr can and will be, I doubt they’ll have local anything unless it’s a must, otherwise your now dealing with mass updates when you can just serve the data down as needed.
  • 0
    @C0D4 @irene
    just gps... That positioning is tracking....

    but I am not aware of any way to self locate without it...

    today there are road signals, these does not track! are they replicable digitally?
  • 0
    @C0D4 when I receive the needed data I can save them, and periodically check for updates.
    Like a local cache, it also reduce network utilization!
  • 3
    Speaking of Google knowing too much πŸ˜‚
  • 1
    @rEaL-jAsE there were plenty of seats available on this train.

    I guess that’s what happens when your going back out of the city.
  • 0
    @irene I know. Google knows my route and times a little too well, and suggests alternatives from time to time.
  • 2
    @irene I've embraced it and started to enjoy modern technology.

    Guess I'm an awful person for getting the most out of the technology I purchase 🀷🏻‍β™‚οΈπŸ€·πŸ»‍♂️
  • 1
    good thing I got my tinfoil hat and use a rat as a phone
  • 0
    @irene @mngr a minor point
    As far as I know, GPS is receive-only. It's just a bunch of timing signals sent from the GPS satellite network. So any tracking is done in software, not by GPS itself. So it can be removed.
  • 1
    @irene There's definitely no way out of tracking but there's still, in many cases, the choice to use or not to use something/a service which is known to track or not which makes that the choice is there in quite some cases.
Add Comment