|
This is scary:
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
The province also wants to introduce "smart hydro meters" to try and force people to do laundry at midnight.
This insurance scheme below is disguised as discounts but in the end we all know we will be paying more unless we drived the prescribed way at the prescribed time of day in the prescribed areas.
Whats amazing is how willing people are to let big brother control them.
| quote: | AP) Drivers trade privacy for insurance discounts
-- For two months, Jacob Sevlie's insurance company tagged along whenever he slid behind the wheel of his Honda Accord.
An electronic monitor the size of a matchbook closely tracked Sevlie's driving time and behavior. If he had a heavy foot or was a sudden braker, the auto data recorder would betray him.
Disconnected from the car and hooked to a PC, the device relayed Sevlie's digital driving diary to his auto insurer, Progressive Corp., with the click of a mouse during a pilot program earlier this year.
Although privacy advocates say the gadget smacks of Big Brother, Sevlie signed up and sent monthly data in hopes of saving money on his insurance bill. In return, he got a $25 stipend and the promise of a 15 percent rate cut when the program launches.
Mayfield Village, Ohio-based Progressive is now promising discounts of up to 25 percent as it expands the so-called TripSense pilot program to 5,000 Minnesota customers. Sevlie, of Bloomington, Minn., is among them.
Progressive says it will use the data only for potential discounts and not to penalize customers whose devices reveal risky driving habits.
The monitoring has the potential to cascade through the insurance industry, said Charles Samuelson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Minnesota.
"What happens is Progressive does this and gets a little bit of market share growth because they've lowered prices. Then it gets copied by other insurance companies," he said. "Pretty soon you don't have any choice.
"You have to surrender all that data to insurance companies or they won't insure you," he said.
Company spokesman William Perry says use of the auto data recorder will not be mandatory for Progressive customers.
"The key thing for us regarding the privacy aspect is the program is completely voluntary. It's not imposed on anybody," he said.
Julie Rochman, spokeswoman of the American Insurance Association, denied suggestions that the entire industry would adopt the monitors.
Most companies are comfortable with their current systems for measuring risk, which typically lump drivers into groups based on a variety of factors, she said.
"The bottom line is this is interesting, and they'll watch it," she said. "I'm not aware of any rush to do this kind of thing."
Drivers are under increased surveillance, by insurance companies and others. For example, cameras at intersections in many urban areas snap license-plate pictures of vehicles running red lights.
Many automakers already install so-called black boxes that record information for investigations into a crash or malfunction, although the data are not routinely transmitted. Last month, federal safety officials called on all automakers to install such devices.
From 1998 to 2001, Progressive ran a trial program in Texas that included a satellite tracking device to monitor where participants drove so they paid only for the insurance they used. The program was canceled because the gear was too expensive, the company said.
Insurers abroad are trying the data recorders, too.
In August, Norwich Union, the United Kingdom's largest auto insurer, announced it was testing a "pay as you drive" program involving 5,000 customers, under an agreement with Progressive. It tracks via satellite, like the Progressive program in Texas.
Robert Ledger, the U.K. program's director, says interest has been phenomenal: "We could have filled the pilot twice over with the amount of requests we've had from interested motorists."
Progressive's latest test in Minnesota, however, doesn't track where people drive. Sevlie said that would have been a show-stopper for him.
"That would scare me," he said. "If they were to do something like that, I would probably not want to be involved."
Progressive's Minnesota program requires a device that's plugged into a car's diagnostic port, available on all recent models. Besides driving habits, the device monitors when it's connected and disconnected so drivers aren't tempted to unplug it before speeding up to 100 mph. If a unit hasn't been connected 95 percent of the time, there's no discount.
But critics fear the information -- or, worse, the lack of information from participants who don't want to send negative data -- might be used against them.
And after the data are collected, individuals have no say in how it's used, Samuelson said.
"Once you give them the data, they own it," he said. "They can sell that data to anybody they want to, and you have no claim on it."
Perry, Progressive's spokesman, said the company will only use the data to determine discounts. It won't be used to increase rates if it reveals a customer with a lead foot, he said.
"This is strictly a discount program. We're very upfront with how we will and will not use the data," he said. "The only way we will use it is to look at it and say, 'Based on this, we're going to take X percentage off of the cost of your insurance for that vehicle.' Period."
And if the data is subpoenaed in legal action related to a driver's behavior?
"Generally speaking, if we are subpoenaed, we comply with the law," Perry said.
. |
|
|
|
| amb_ |
| quote: | TORONTO (CP) _ Ontario residents may soon be forced to allow
hydro, building and other inspectors into their homes as part of a
planned crackdown on marijuana grow-ops.
Legislation will be introduced this fall to give the inspectors
the power to enter homes if they suspect the illegal activity,
Community Safety Minister Monte Kwinter said Thursday.
``What happens now is that some of these people just aren't
allowed to enter into a private home,'' said Kwinter.
``We want to make sure that they have the ability to combat what
is becoming a real scourge.''
Being able to knock on a door and demand entry is a power not
even police have, unless they have first obtained a search warrant.
The problem with that, Kwinter said, is that it's difficult to
get a warrant without first knowing what's inside.
``This will give authority to various of these agencies to be
able to go in and do an inspection.''
Kwinter said inspectors would ``hopefully'' only act if they have
``probable cause'' to believe there's a grow-op inside.
That could mean an unusual pattern of hydro use or excessive heat
coming from a home, indicative of the bright lamps used for growing
pot indoors.
Grow-ops are estimated to cost $80 million a year in electricity
theft and there are also serious safety issues as they pose a major
fire hazard and some of the homes have had children inside. |
|
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| There is no doubt that we are allowing the government to whittle away at our privacy and freedoms. The worst part is that many people actually support this. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
There is no doubt that we are allowing the government to whittle away at our privacy and freedoms. The worst part is that many people actually support this. |
I happen to be directly involved in the upcoming smart metering business, and I also happen to know that this business about rights and privacy is nothing but inflammatory bullplop from paranoid freaks.
Commercial and multi-residential owners generally save 50% or more on their hydro bills after sub-metering their buildings, especially when those meters are smart meters. We don't have the technology they have in Europe with live cost/kW and cost/kWh feeds (yet), but after-the-fact time-of-use data alone is a HUGE cost-savings device, and for the government, an energy-savings device as well.
The purpose of the live feeds is not to force you to do your laundry at a certain time but rather to inform you when the cheapest time to do your laundry will be. It's a given that smart-metered buildings will also be sub-metered, so if you have a smart meter, you'll be paying for your own electricity usage, not your landlord.
Call it "disguised" as discounts if you like, but think about this: My company makes almost all of its profits from cost savings to building owners, and those profits have already gone way up in recent years WITHOUT the government's support. Not only that, but the actual cost to owners and tenants is virtually nothing - capital costs are taken care of by an admin fee which the owner pays as a fraction of the bulk bill, who in turn gives the tenants a RENT REDUCTION because they are paying for their own electricity. But the best part is, tenants end up paying less overall anyway because once they see how much they're using, they start conserving.
So to put it bluntly, with smart metering, EVERYONE PAYS LESS. This initiative was started years ago not by government, but by the BUSINESS SECTOR, with nothing but the most honourable of intentions. It is those businesses that have presented their findings numerous times to the government in order to gain support from government-owned generators (like Hydro). Private companies can and will compete with LDCs on this.
Blame the government if you must for introducing legislation that will allow them to investigate possible grow operations, but don't you dare try to pin the technology down as a power grab or an invasion of privacy. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
You have to admit however that it does leave the door open to potential future price gouging. If they know that a household tends to run a drier at a certain time and have the ability to adjust the prices dont you think the potential is there to abuse it?
Im not saying your company, or even this current government is intending to do that. But, in the future who knows what could happen. These meters IMO do leave the door open for abuse.
Remember that Einstein worked on relativity and nuclear fission for peaceful energy production uses and we ended up with the A bomb.
Im not nec against this technology as long as you can convince me that it is failsafe against abuse and invasion of privacy. If you can then im for anything that saves people money. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
You have to admit however that it does leave the door open to potential future price gouging. If they know that a household tends to run a drier at a certain time and have the ability to adjust the prices dont you think the potential is there to abuse it? |
Technically, there is already that potential, since Hydro bills are based on demand (peak power at any point at all over the course of a billing cycle). They "could" adjust rates based on the demand people use, but they don't, the rates are based on the actual amount of electricity generated.
For interval (time-of-use) billing, this is essentially taken care of by the Independent Market Operators (IMO), who set the standards and pricing but do not directly collect one cent of profit from it, since they neither generate nor distribute. So no, there is not really the potential to use and abuse it, just like there isn't in the current system.
| quote: | | Im not saying your company, or even this current government is intending to do that. But, in the future who knows what could happen. These meters IMO do leave the door open for abuse. |
My company is only a data collection and billing agency - we don't set the rates, we never will, and neither will the government. It's simply not up to them. Any electrical meter leaves the door open for abuse - it's an essential service with a variable cost. At any point in time, Ontario Hydro can come out and say that they are now charging $300 per kWh - but do you really think that's going to happen?
| quote: | Remember that Einstein worked on relativity and nuclear fission for peaceful energy production uses and we ended up with the A bomb.
Im not nec against this technology as long as you can convince me that it is failsafe against abuse and invasion of privacy. If you can then im for anything that saves people money. |
Nothing is "fail safe" against abuse and invasion of privacy. You of all people should know that if the government really wants to encroach on your personal space, they'll find a way.
Your logic is so fundamentally flawed though, and the simplest example I can think of is P2P file sharing. The RIAA would have you believe that it was created by Satan himself, and yet P2P technology certainly does have legitimate uses (search engines, distribution, and even co-lo systems and networks). Where do you think we'd be right now if people like you had had their way and prevented the technology from ever coming into existence because it "could" be used for abusive purposes?
Further to that, you use the A-bomb as an example of how a "peaceful" technology went "bad", but where do you think we'd be right now if it wasn't for the USA's success with the A-bomb?
Technology is a double-edged sword, but there is no point in hampering innovation by ignoring the merits of a technology simply because of the potential demerits. Rather, it's up to us as a society to ensure that we stay on the right track by protecting the rights of everyone involved. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
you make a good point here. However these meters definately open the door a bit wider for abuse.
"people like me" are just worried about how technology is opening up once private aspects of our lives. It's gone from the seemingly benign collection of data to sell to advertisers to using this info to gouge the consumer. Im not saying this has happened in your industry but the insurance experiment is very unsettling for sure. As is giving hydro authorities the right to enter your home.
Question. Do these meters have the ability to track and transmit usage habits in real time? This is the part that scares me because its the same principal as those coke machines that exist that jack the price up when the temperature reaches a certain level.
I am highly suspicious of people trying to sell me a wolf in sheeps clothing. Try this it will save you money! Now why on earth would a company spend tonnes of their money to try and save me money? This goes for electricity and insurance. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
you make a good point here. However these meters definately open the door a bit wider for abuse.
"people like me" are just worried about how technology is opening up once private aspects of our lives. It's gone from the seemingly benign collection of data to sell to advertisers to using this info to gouge the consumer. Im not saying this has happened in your industry but the insurance experiment is very unsettling for sure. As is giving hydro authorities the right to enter your home. |
I don't agree with giving hydro authorities the right to enter a home. But then again, that enters into the whole set of drug prohibition laws that I never agreed with in the first place, so it's a moot point...
| quote: | | Question. Do these meters have the ability to track and transmit usage habits in real time? This is the part that scares me because its the same principal as those coke machines that exist that jack the price up when the temperature reaches a certain level. |
That depends on the technology. Some meters might track consumption every hour, or every 15 minutes. We may start using ones that track every minute, although how much we'll be able to do with that much data is questionable due to the performance issues. You'd be surprised how many TOU-metered customers actually want to see this data, though - once people are off the "utilities included" system, they suddenly become very interested in how much they're using and when. ;)
Nevertheless, as I said before, it's the IMO that's responsible for most of the administrative and financial stuff and not the people who do the billing and collections. Check out http://www.theimo.com, it should explain a lot of this to you.
| quote: | | I am highly suspicious of people trying to sell me a wolf in sheeps clothing. Try this it will save you money! Now why on earth would a company spend tonnes of their money to try and save me money? This goes for electricity and insurance. |
The answer is very simple - because that's how we get paid. ;)
You save money, we make money, that's how it works. We get paid a certain % of the savings - administrative costs are just to cover the equipment capital. So you see, there's really no "wolf" here. This business was around long before the government started seeing ways to "use" it. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
well thats how your company makes money. Im assuming you work for a private company but whats in it for the utility?
Hey if this works and doesnt get abused the im all for it. But these questions im raising are very valid and should be addresed.
Speaking of electricity i read today how mcguinty is about to go ahead and deregulate just like harris tried to do. I guess mcguinty lied again when he said he was against that.
Figures... |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
well thats how your company makes money. Im assuming you work for a private company but whats in it for the utility? |
Only that the utility doesn't need to distribute as much power or energy, which saves them money. Plus, they can send out 1 bulk bill as opposed to 400 tenant bills, so less administrative costs.
It works for everyone specifically because people waste so much energy. After all, we all know how extravagant people get when it's on somebody else's tab!
| quote: | Hey if this works and doesnt get abused the im all for it. But these questions im raising are very valid and should be addresed.
Speaking of electricity i read today how mcguinty is about to go ahead and deregulate just like harris tried to do. I guess mcguinty lied again when he said he was against that.
Figures... |
Those questions are of course valid. I don't think private industry is in any hurry to support minor political power grabs, since that type of thing would cost us time and money and not really bring in any profit (unless the government paid a load for it). Think about ISPs in Canada though - they protect the privacy of their customers even though the government might want that information.
Deregulation, now there's an issue I've always been undecided on. It goes against all common sense that prices would skyrocket when left to private industry instead of government, but I guess it's just such a commodity...
Well, when push comes to shove, you can always count on Ontario to copy everything that California did wrong with the justification that "we're going to do it the RIGHT way!" Typical Canadian arrogance. |
|
|
|
|
