Rivian Automatically Records "Incidents" - Privacy Concerns

[ukyank]

I have incidents turned on and have nothing there.

Same

Sponsored

 

[domoplaytime]

Then, you can opt into one of the insurance company's voluntary programs.

I have accumulated numerous incidents since moving to Maui. Whether it's slamming on the brakes to avoid deer, braking hard avoid another vehicle who is stopped for some crossing nene, or slamming on the brakes to avoid a distracted driver who cut me off... clearly I need to slow down. I drive like a mainlander still.

But I have also never had a wreck in my entire 26 years of driving. So I have opted into USAA SafePilot for a sizeable 20%+ discount on my service in exchange for their monitoring of my behavior via my phone. I also have Rivian drive cam incidents turned on to protect myself from claims from other drivers. If either service were mandatory, I would change vehicles and insurance.

With great power comes great oversight responsibility. Or, at least I wish people took more personal responsibility for everything in their lives. People suck.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I have accumulated numerous incidents since moving to Maui. Whether it's slamming on the brakes to avoid deer, braking hard avoid another vehicle who is stopped for some crossing nene, or slamming on the brakes to avoid a distracted driver who cut me off... clearly I need to slow down. I drive like a mainlander still.

But I have also never had a wreck in my entire 26 years of driving. So I have opted into USAA SafePilot for a sizeable 20%+ discount on my service in exchange for their monitoring of my behavior via my phone. I also have Rivian drive cam incidents turned on to protect myself from claims from other drivers. If either service were mandatory, I would change vehicles and insurance.

With great power comes great oversight responsibility. Or, at least I wish people took more personal responsibility for everything in their lives. People suck.

I completely support this message. I’m completely behind taking personal responsibility in what you do and a time and place for everything.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

Yes. I would rather insurance profit more off of unsafer drivers then have to pay for the risk associated with them via the shared pool method currently employed. Bring on the telemetrics & make cost more fair.

That’s all fine and well, until they decide you are not safe for some reason then come up with based on the data. Then what….

 

[SPITmadFIRE]

That’s all fine and well, until they decide you are not safe for some reason then come up with based on the data. Then what….

We were just making fun of cybertruck owners earlier this week for getting dropped from major insurers. What is your point? They can discriminate against you today for any reason that's not a protected class. You are already living the nightmare you describe.

 

[ndmiller]

@eskudo12791 You want to live in a nanny state that's on you. I don't. I also explained how telematics could be misintepreted based on perfectly safe activities once already, but apparently I need to do it again.

You do already. There are cameras and recording devices everywhere, your phone has GPS, your connected online and your vehicle may have a toll tag. Everything that happens with you online, your phone or vehicle are tracked by someone. Lawyer up and live your life or remove everything electronic from your life and move on.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

We were just making fun of cybertruck owners earlier this week for getting dropped from major insurers. What is your point? They can discriminate against you today for any reason that's not a protected class. You are already living the nightmare you describe.

Not really. My point is that if you voluntarily give this information, it builds a profile. So an insurance company can raise your rates. And that profile can affect your ability to cross-shop. So why make their job easier?

And, no. You cannot discriminate against someone simply because they are not a member of a protected class. If you are a member of a protective class, you will have an easier time getting relief. But if you are not a member of a protective class you can still get relief. Think of, for example, whistleblowers and retaliation issues.

 

[godfodder0901]

Not really. My point is that if you voluntarily give this information, it builds a profile. So an insurance company can raise your rates. And that profile can affect your ability to cross-shop. So why make their job easier?

And, no. You cannot discriminate against someone simply because they are not a member of a protected class. If you are a member of a protective class, you will have an easier time getting relief. But if you are not a member of a protective class you can still get relief. Think of, for example, whistleblowers and retaliation issues.

Whistleblowers are a protected class.

Think about the old 'no shoes, no shirt, no service' policies. These are 100% legal, and shop owners can descrimninate all they want. Same goes for employment. In 'at-will' employment, you can be fired for any non-protected reason.

 

[SPITmadFIRE]

Not really. My point is that if you voluntarily give this information, it builds a profile. So an insurance company can raise your rates. And that profile can affect your ability to cross-shop. So why make their job easier?

And, no. You cannot discriminate against someone simply because they are not a member of a protected class. If you are a member of a protective class, you will have an easier time getting relief. But if you are not a member of a protective class you can still get relief. Think of, for example, whistleblowers and retaliation issues.

I'm confused how you think insurance rates work. If they want to charge more because my car is green they can do that. If they want to drop my coverage because Rivian starts with an R, they can do that. If they want to discriminate against me because I checked the app at 2am, they can absolutely do that.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

You do already. There are cameras and recording devices everywhere, your phone has GPS, your connected online and your vehicle may have a toll tag. Everything that happens with you online, your phone or vehicle are tracked by someone. Lawyer up and live your life or remove everything electronic from your life and move on.

So I should just what? Keep letting corporations harm the general public for increased profits? Insurance companies are a business; they aren't on the verge of closing now; they make billions of dollars in profits. The multi-billion dollar company executives can make a little less and the general public a little more. None of this tracking is done for the good of the public. It's mostly done at the expense of the public and it's long past time we started caring about it while we still have some privacy left to lose.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

Whistleblowers are a protected class.

Think about the old 'no shoes, no shirt, no service' policies. These are 100% legal, and shop owners can descrimninate all they want. Same goes for employment. In 'at-will' employment, you can be fired for any non-protected reason.

Sigh. I’m not going to have an argument with you because I do not think you understand this field. Whistleblowers are not a protected class. They are indeed protected from retaliation, but they are not a protected class.

And again, you can still win a lawsuit against someone or an entity who discriminates against you, even if you are not a member of a protected class. Not that this is even relevant to the topic at hand.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

I'm confused how you think insurance rates work. If they want to charge more because my car is green they can do that. If they want to drop my coverage because Rivian starts with an R, they can do that. If they want to discriminate against me because I checked the app at 2am, they can absolutely do that.

Of course they can do all that. But, then you get to take your business to a company that is sane and has reasonable pricing. But, if all this data out there is associated with you and that data is deemed to demonstrate that you are a “bad” driver, then every auto insurance company will raise your rates and you are screwed.

Think of life insurance. If there is no data on you, you apply for it and you get 10 offers. 2 are stupid and they want to charge you 50% more because your name starts with a “W.” Well, your recourse is to go with the other eight who have reasonable pricing. But, once your cancer diagnosis is in your record, every single life insurance company will render you uninsurable. That’s the power data can have regardless of who you are.

 

[mkennedy1996]

Yes. I would rather insurance profit more off of unsafer drivers then have to pay for the risk associated with them via the shared pool method currently employed. Bring on the telemetrics & make cost more fair.

True, but the problem becomes who defines "unsafe". Having no accidents and breaking no laws, but "they" decide they don't like the data that they see and charge you more. One man's - having fun and breaking no laws is another man's - unsafe and must pay more. And, this process is very opaque to the consumer.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

True, but the problem becomes who defines "unsafe". Having no accidents and breaking no laws, but "they" decide they don't like the data that they see and charge you more. One man's - having fun and breaking no laws is another man's - unsafe and must pay more. And, this process is very opaque to the consumer.

Well said. This is the biggest issue I have with the whole telematics conversation.

 

[ndmiller]

So I should just what? Keep letting corporations harm the general public for increased profits? Insurance companies are a business; they aren't on the verge of closing now; they make billions of dollars in profits. The multi-billion dollar company executives can make a little less and the general public a little more. None of this tracking is done for the good of the public. It's mostly done at the expense of the public and it's long past time we started caring about it while we still have some privacy left to lose.

Yes 100% or leave. They don't care what you think and they are playing the game within the rules that are written. Run for office and change the rules, don't whine about the good of the "Public".

Insurance companies don't charge for the actual risk people take in US. If you live near or around water or 100 year or less flood zones you should pay 100X for insurance than someone else. If you speed or drive recklessly or have accidents or drive while using your phone you should pay 100X for insurance that people who don't. Or have get rid of insurance and let people take responsibility for their own situation not make the "Public" fund FEMA.

While advocating for executives to make less, will you take a paycut as well for someone who thinks you make too much?

Sponsored