I&#x27;d be interested in hearing more from insurance companies on how they calculate &quot;safe&quot; driving. Are they applying a simple model where speed, acceleration, and braking are the only inputs considered? Or are they actively gathering data on many different inputs and correlating them with accident data?<p>Also, of course, the insurance companies have different incentives than I do as a driver, or, indeed, society as a whole. The the stereotypical clueless&#x2F;passive&#x2F;elderly&#x2F;(dare I say Prius) driver who accelerates incredibly slowly, brakes incredibly slowly, vaguely lists from lane to lane (without signaling) is a terrible driver, and is arguably dangerous to everyone around them. However, they might move <i>so</i> slowly that other drivers are able to anticipate and avoid them, so the accident claims data might not show them as high risk. (although they might tend to make lots of parking lot claims as they &#x27;feel&#x27; their way into a parking spot). As a society we don&#x27;t want to encourage clueless driving; on the other hand (if they can avoid parking lot scrapes), the insurance company might well prefer this driver.<p>The insurance claims-based model absolutely incentivizes attentiveness, as you can avoid both your <i>own</i> accidents, as those that others attempt to cause. It&#x27;s certainly not perfect (particularly when paired with things like credit checks), but I&#x27;d hate to see drone-like driving preferred over attentive driving.<p>Another thing to note is that folks with an active interest in driving (engaged, sometimes drive fast, have advanced training, etc) will absolutely avoid these technologies because they&#x27;re all convinced they&#x27;ll be punished in the model -- so even if the insurance companies are actively collecting data in an attempt to refine their models, it will have a selection bias.<p>The main thing these data will be lacking is context. Did I brake hard because I was texting and almost hit the car in front of me? Or did I brake hard because I goddamned felt like it? Were there cars behind me at the time, or was I driving in such a manner that there was no risk of collision? Can it separate inputs that are likely to cause two vehicles to collide, versus inputs that might cause a single-vehicle collision (in which case context doesn&#x27;t matter)?<p>Hell, just last week I unexpectedly threw my brand-new car into a full ABS panic stop to avoid some deer. Then again, I guess the insurance company doesn&#x27;t care why. It&#x27;s better than a collision, but they&#x27;d prefer that I never drive anywhere I might ever get in an accident. Actually, they&#x27;d just prefer I don&#x27;t drive anywhere at all.