I get the logic, and I&#x27;m personally fine with this approach[1], but there&#x27;s a tradeoff between privacy and non-freeloading (don&#x27;t know the technical term).  Some types of data collection are so &quot;icky&quot; that people prefer to tolerate free loaders, and this feeling is common enough not to cause the adverse selection problem that forces everyone to accept the loss of privacy or pay impossible rates.<p>Consider the extreme case: let&#x27;s say technology allows an external observer to directly read your thoughts as they happen.[2] Hey, people that think worse things are riskier, so what&#x27;s the problem if they get higher rates? If you don&#x27;t want higher rates, don&#x27;t think about cutting through traffic and running red lights!<p>I just hope no one breaches that database and learns what you think of Suzy...<p>[1] as a safe driver long resentful of the statistics of my demographic<p>[2] Because of the &quot;control&#x2F;choice&quot; issue, assume there&#x27;s a difference between deliberate and unchosen thoughts and the device only takes the former.