Saw this story on Techdirt a few days ago, referencing an earlier story from the NYTimes.
Short version:
Automobiles get more and more computerized every year, from entertainment systems to navigation technology.
It’s to the point now that when you buy a car, you need to accept a complex software EULA, same as when you install Photoshop or activate an iPhone or whatever. And just as most people scroll down and click OK without reading the terms of service, car buyers are doing the same.
By doing this, the car’s owner is unaware they may be agreeing that any data the car collects — say, from the navigation system — can be shared with third parties.
Turns out, in the case of GM at least, they’re sending driver data to a broker, which then passes information on driver behavior to insurance companies. The insurance companies crunch the data to identify drivers whose habits are statistically associated with a higher claim rate (say, speeding, or regular hard braking), and then those drivers’ insurance rates are increased without explanation.
Eventually consumer advocates start to suspect something like this is happening, investigation and news coverage follows, and outraged kerfuffle erupts.
Personally, I have no problem with shitty drivers paying higher insurance rates. Before the availability of data like this, the only way to identify a shitty driver was after-the-fact. At best, the insurance company flags them after a couple of speeding tickets. At worst, it’s after an actual crash, resulting in damage and potentially injury or death. Now, though, the car is recording everything you do, and it becomes technically possible to look over your shoulder and recognize if you’re more likely to be a problem relative to other drivers. I am a very safe and responsible driver, and I’m irritated when I see jackwagons tearing around on the public roads, following too closely, failing to use signals, and otherwise making themselves a hazard. I used to wish there was a way to tag those people to call some sort of attention to them and disincentivize their selfish behavior. Now, there is.
However, I’m not a fan of this kind of sneaky, underhanded corporate behavior, which is about protecting profits and increasing margins rather than serving public safety. I’d be all for a program that puts this kind of thing in the open, based on a collective understanding and agreement that, if you drive, your data will be used to profile you, and your insurance rates will directly reflect how good or bad a driver you seem to be. Want to pay less? Then don’t drive like an asshole. In the short term, the insurance companies get paid more, as the assholes are flagged and get reamed on the invoice; in the long term, public safety is improved, as all but the most determined assholes mitigate their behavior.
But do it in the open. Otherwise it looks like what it is, which is corporate collusion to pad the bottom line without an associated policy framework or long-term objective.
So. Do you trust your car? 
