In-Car Surveillance Cam Gives Parents Peek Into Teen Driving Habits
from the they're-watching dept
While lawmakers continue to explore pointless laws and increased surveillance as means of improving road safety, one insurance company is experimenting with a new approach to get people to drive better. When the company sells insurance for teen drivers, it's offering to install a camera inside the car that parents can watch to monitor their kids' driving skills. The camera doesn't record everything, rather it only captures 10 seconds before and after a major event, such as a rapid deceleration. The point isn't to catch teens driving badly, rather it's to deter them from driving badly in the first place. And according to those who have participated in a study, the camera does have a deterrent effect. This of course raises all sorts of other issues. Will the insurance company watch the video or use its content to set rates? They say no, but it's conceivable that down the road, the company might be able to offer lower rates to those drivers that agree to have a camera installed. It's also the kind of thing that teen drivers aren't going to like very much, although the fact that it's not recording everything they do in the car might make it a bit more palatable. And if the driver gets the bright idea of taking down the camera, or covering it up, the parents will find out rather quickly. Still, even if this particular form of surveillance is less offensive than others, because it's voluntary, it still fits in with a broader societal theme, whereby safety, or the perception of it, trumps any other considerations.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What I really like to know is how the camera knows to start capturing video BEFORE the event occurred. Now that is progress!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How it Captures BEFORE
Many cars already have this kind of technology embedded in them (think corvettes) that store the last 20 seconds of data (I think that's right).
With cheap GPS chip sets and plenty of computing power available within a car it won't be long before your entire driving history (accleration, deceleration, orgination and destination and time) can/will be stored. All in the name of "lower" rates -- but when was the last time anything got cheaper? It'll just allow them to punish "bad" drivers and increase their margins through fewer (or dispute more) claims.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The device records on a continous loop but only saves the 10 seconds of video prior to the event.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even the consent part is iffy for me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just What We Need
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just What We Need
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just What We Need
"check this sh** out", driving, crashing, "Ooop!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
new market
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Trust Them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Survellience
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
temperamental POS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are we kidding here?
Another ploy to violate our privacy and catch me doing 90 on the way home. Screw you Insurance companies, eh. nothing a BB gun cant fix... I'll tell you one thing anytime I see one of those things I will shoot it out... TRY ME.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
liability
i don't personaly enjoy having the camera in the truck with me, but it has saved my butt a twice now.
Person pulling out on me once and another time while the truck was parked another car with a faulty e brake rolled into my truck... it looked like my fault but video showed otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm ok with this..
Also, the insurance companies might be able to offer some younger drivers an added discount for adding the camera if it shows it makes them safer. That could be a big bonus for some of them who pay very high rates by being lumped into a category of potentially higher-risk drivers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
half the picture
Cameras with recording devices can only establish visible facts after the event. Those facts are limited to the field of view and the timeframe of sampling, nothing more.
The false assumption is that surveillance can prevent accidents or crimes. It cannot. You are no safer on an urban street covered by 10 cameras than on an empty country trail. You may enjoy an illusion of safety, but that is all you have. Sure, the camera may be of use to a detective in apprehending a criminal after the fact. That's no use to the victim if the crime is robbery, assualt, rape or murder. All that a recording does is ensure that the victim and their family can now suffer the indignity of having the crime shown to complete strangers on YouTube or Crimewatch television for their voyeuristic titillation.
When it comes to road safety the same truths hold. The camera will not improve driving or reduce the occurance of dangerous events in the environment. It merely enables a person to later observe a very partial and subjective representation of what happened.
Of course I agree with James and others that this might actually be rather useful. If admissable it is a useful witness in an accident.
However, we should remember that insurance companies are not courts of law. They have no mandate to pass any kind of judgement based soley on the evidence of an installed camera. In a disputed RTA the insurance company can only base its settlement on the decision of a legal court or tribunal. Therefore it is only useful to the driver if the courts accept this footage as admissable evidence.
Which leads to an interesting question. Who owns that footage? If two vehicles are involved in a RTA can the court sopeana the footage from one of the parties?
Essentially the video footage obtained must remain the property of the driver who must be able to take a copy whenever they so wish. Having a "closed" system where the insurance company install a black box into the vehicle which only they can access is not an acceptable proposal, while one which serves the driver is acceptable and would provide a good motive for them to install the device.
The folly is to believe that any video footage gives a complete picture of events. It may give an impartial picture, but not a complete one.
Ultimately the evidence of real human beings at the scene must always trump what is captured on a camera with a limited field of view.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: half the picture
Whatever happened to
Kids having freedom
It doesnt prevent anything bad from happening so whats the poin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If parents want to know
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If parents want to know
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While this technology may result in marginal savings for those who volunteer for it (more than likely, however, all rates will go up and the "discount" will be the currnt rate), the major winner of this technology will be insurance companies and the legal system which has another data point for when accidents happen. Guess what, since the video camera will probably be pointed at the drivers it will be lousy at proving your innocense but very good at pointing out when it's your fault.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A violation of privacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Camera in teen cars
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
web cam in trucks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
trunk monkey
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]