Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
"More than ten, under" is just as correct an interpretation as "more than, ten under", so your application for the pedantic dickweed badge is rejected.
You must have the wrong form, I applied for the "pedantic douche" title.
-
Ah. No that's other queue.
-
I believe the guys in the Netherlands also removed the kerbs so that pedestrians and traffic were mixed, The result was that vehicles drove more carefully and pedestrians took more care.
It is also while in the UK we have the mini roundabout which is like a 4 way stop but with the main rule being someone in the junction has right of way rather than based on order of arrival. It is designed to confuse people and make them stop and think before driviing on.
And I liked I-905 in LA . It made me feel right at home just like the M25. Just bigger. much bigger.
-
kerbs
You're from the UK, aren't you? The US spelling is "curb".
It is also while in the UK we have the mini roundabout
Looks like it.
-
-
-
SoCal: 2-3 times the lanes with drivers that are 10 times as bad.
-
TIL:
the busiest and most congested freeway in the United States. The freeway's annual average daily traffic between exits 21 and 22 in Seal Beach reached 374,000 in 2008, making it the highest count in the nation.
Exit 22 (although they weren't numbered in those days) is where we got off/on when we went to visit my grandparents. It may be congested now, but back in the day it sure beat Sepulveda Blvd., Pacific Coast Hwy., Studebaker Rd., and whatever else we used to have to take.
-
San Diego drivers, in a nut shell:
-
In a car it can probably do it even without orientation gyros unless the car skids a lot.
Modern cars with stability control know where you're going compared to where you're pointing. They know when you've lost traction and the slip rate so they can apply brakes appropriately to bring you back in line. Most of the raw sensor data is available on the ODBII port.
-
Okay, so things are obviously a bit different where I am, possibly due to variations in national road rules such as maximum axle loads. I pretty much buttumed things had changed there since the "18 wheeler" label became common, just as they have changed here.
What I see predominantly by a large margin are bogey drive prime movers with triple axle trailers (22 wheels) because they maximise load for their licence class:
http://www.redxpress.com.au/images/fleet9.jpg
For smaller loads, single drive prime mover, double axle trailer (14 wheels):
We also have a lot of B-doubles, again with two triple-axle trailers (one is a half-trailer with kingpin turntable) (34 wheels), again because they maximise load for their licence class and road restrictions:
We don't allow more than three axles in an axle group without a special permit. B-doubles are usually cab-over, not conventional, because length.
Then there's road trains of two to four trailers (or seven half-trailers, I think) but they're heavily restricted in where they can drive.
http://www.sizercogill.com.au/images/triple road train - hay.jpg
22 wheels for prime mover and first trailer, 20 more per dolly and extra trailer.
I spent a week or so in New Zealand earlier this year and things are different again there. They allow larger axle groups and heavier Gross Combination Mass (GCM), so lots of twin steer bogey drive prime movers with quad-axle trailers (lotsa wheels):
-
also sometimes seen are 20 wheel variants where wheels 19 and 20 sit on an axle just in front of 11-14 and are usually elevated off the road unless the truck is loaded sufficiently to compress the suspension enough to lower the wheels into contact.
Those trailers have airbag suspension, ride height doesn't change regardless of load. Those axles have been lifted by deflating the suspension and the driver will lower them by inflating the air bags if he carries a load.
-
So many wheels.
http://www.frensvandersluis.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/truck-trailers-ads-hot-wheels.jpg
-
-
What I see predominantly by a large margin are bogey drive prime movers with triple axle trailers (22 wheels) because they maximise load for their licence class:
Are the wheels on the trailer not 2 wheels per axle rather than 4? Making it 16 wheels.
-
Are the wheels on the trailer not 2 wheels per axle rather than 4? Making it 16 wheels.
Perspective trick. What you can't see is there's a third wheel in the middle of each back axle, so it's a 19-wheeler.
-
Are the wheels on the trailer not 2 wheels per axle rather than 4? Making it 16 wheels.
All axles except the steering axle are usually four wheels per axle, two per side. There's also super singles which are single tyres each side. They're wider to reduce road pressure and have some kind of puncture resistence and I think can only be used in a multi-axle group, not a single axle, so loss of tyre isn't an instant disaster. They only complicate the axle count and they're not so common so I didn't mention them.
I think the trailer in that photo has them though, which would make it 16 wheels. I didn't look that closely before posting, look what it got me. :(
-
Exit 22 (although they weren't numbered in those days) is where we got off/on when we went to visit my grandparents. It may be congested now, but back in the day it sure beat Sepulveda Blvd., Pacific Coast Hwy., Studebaker Rd., and whatever else we used to have to take.
That's what I was implying. When I spent a few weeks in Southern California, the thing that struck me most was that the 405 can have so much volume and not slow down. Back home, half that traffic volume on a similar road would bring it to a stop.
-
you don't need GPS to reconstruct that information.
That, right there.
I imagine it's fairly easy to figure out when the vehicle is at its "home" (it's not moving from 6PM-7AM... hmmmmm). From that, you can use speed (thus distance traveled) plus compass, gyroscope, or even accelerometer data to determine what the direction of travel is. It's not gonna be perfect, but you can create a reasonably accurate track of where someone's driving. Not that I think they're doing that, but it could be done with the equipment they have. No GPS needed.EDIT and this is being discussed already. Yay Discourse!
-
Not that I think they're doing that
So, if you don't think they are doing it, why bring up the fact that it's technically possible?
-
Because it's interesting?
-
So, if you don't think they are doing it, why bring up the fact that it's technically possible?
Because it's interesting?
^thatYou could technically reboot your computer by shorting pins with a paper clip - I don't think people generally do that on a regular basis though... Just cause it's possible doesn't mean people are doing it. They'd have nothing to gain, except for liability in case the drivers crash - they know the're speeding and didn't do anything about it - that's enough room for a possible lawsuit (probably not a successful one, but that's never stopped people before...)
-
They'd have nothing to gain, except for liability in case the drivers crash
However, this is exactly what we are talking about. There are hundred of posts from earlier about whether "exceeding the posted speed limit" is a significant factor in road safety. These devices were brought up specifically to point out that the one group that would financially gain from accurately judging safe driving habits actually has hardware installed in millions of cars that is capable of determining speed and location (and therefore looking up the posted speed limit), yet they don't use that in their calculations.At least three times, someone has piped up with a "but they could be using inertial navigation" comment. In the context of this discussion, the only direction to go with that comment is to infer that insurance companies are actually using that data to check if the driver is exceeding the posted speed limit and factor it into in their calculations, but pretending they are not with the statements on their web sites that blatantly say they do not use speeding as a factor.
I highly doubt insurance companies are afraid of being sued for negligence. Going to court over matters like this is what a large fraction of their employees do for a living. They already are in the business of enabling dangerous drivers to get on the road. It's no worse knowing a driver is a habitual speeder and giving him one of the key documents necessary to get on the road than it is to do the same for a habitual drunk driver. Yet, every driver with three DWIs and a large enough pile of cash can get insurance. I've never heard of the insurance company that gave a drunk driver insurance being included in a vehicular manslaugter case, yet they are happy to try to go after the bartender and anyone else that may have seen the person drunk and didn't do anything.
-
determining speed and location
Educated guessing speed and location. Without any GPS data, I'd fight it if my rate got affected by that... I really doubt that would win in court. It may be a highly accurate guess, but it can still be fought.
I guess I should've reworded my original. I can see the information being used for more of a generalized guess of where someone's driving to. In fact, you can probably figure it out very accurately. But I can't see it being accurate enough for a rate change. I would be somewhat interested to see someone actually try that though - I'd do it but that would be too expensive and too much work...
the only direction to go with that comment is to infer that insurance companies are actually using that data to check if the driver is exceeding the posted speed limit and factor it into in their calculations, but pretending they are not with the statements on their web sites that blatantly say they do not use speeding as a factor.
Pretty sure that would be false advertising if they were doing it. And I'm pretty sure there would be a leak by now of that...
-
Educated guessing speed and location. Without any GPS data, I'd fight it if my rate got affected by that... I really doubt that would win in court. It may be a highly accurate guess, but it can still be fought.
Which is why the record of heavy braking is more useful. Which isn't to say that you can't use heavy braking where necessary — sometimes squirrels are plain suicidal — but if you're using it frequently, you're probably not a good driver, in that you're just reacting to events instead of anticipating what the road conditions will be a bit earlier so you are better prepared for things.
-
Which is why the record of heavy braking is more useful. ...
I would wager a lunch (the mid-day meal, not "hunch") that mostly they're just gathering data at this point, in order to figure out what correlations they can find and use for rate-setting. (Probably validating data they have from smaller tests.)
And, getting us accustomed to the idea... ;) :tinfoilhat:
Filed under: look at Vegas - the casinos aren't gambling.
Neither are the insurance companies.
-
-
Nice!
If I change my avatar, it will be to this.
IJIJ, Believer in BigDiscourse, "The Truth is Out There"
waaay... out there, man
-
If I change my avatar, it will be to this.
go for it! GIS to the rescue (or does that make you less likely to use it?)
-
I would suggest the tin-foil hard hat
... because it offers protection to the clue bat too!
-
Fine with the GIS (probably should shop it tho for paranoia's sake ;))
I kind of like my Discourse-I, and I'm lazy, and I should be working - so I'm thinking about starting working.....
-
protection to the clue bat too
protection from the clue bat.
Clue bat does not need protection.
-
Not sure if there was an event going on downtown where I live today, but morning traffic was a lot heavier than normal once I reached the downtown area.
Normally this wouldn't be a problem, but the more people on the road, the more stupid people on the road. Like the guy who stopped at a two-way Stop then turned right in front of me.
Problem is, I was on the road that didn't have Stop signs there, forcing me to slam my brakes to avoid hitting him. I guess he assumed I was going to stop there?
-
sometimes squirrels are plain suicidal
Braking hard for a squirrel is bad driving. You don't brake hard for something that won't hurt your vehicle or incur legal / civil penalties.
-
I would wager a lunch (the mid-day meal, not "hunch") that mostly they're just gathering data at this point, in order to figure out what correlations they can find and use for rate-setting. (Probably validating data they have from smaller tests.)
And, getting us accustomed to the idea... ;) :tinfoilhat:
Filed under: look at Vegas - the casinos aren't gambling.
Neither are the insurance companies.At this point, Progressive probably has more than enough data to justify the rate adjustments. They've been doing the snapshot program for more than three years. I can say that because I've been at my current job for three years, and I did the snapshot tracking before I started this job.
-
At this point, Progressive probably has more than enough data to justify the rate adjustments. They've been doing the snapshot program for more than three years...
FWIW, I only play a doctor on TV...
At this point, they can probably place reasonable odds on bets on insuring folks a lot like you.
Add to that lead-time for regulatory filings, being careful about extrapolating to people not like abarker (older, younger, differently-employed, less willing to plug a whattiz into their car)...
They have enough data that they are "test-driving" it internally against IRL experience, I'm sure.
I'm still of the opinion that the current discounts are essentially a way of buying more data, for the moment.
Compare with the steady increase in pressure on smoking via health insurance premiums - right now your car-driving-data discount is an "Oh cool! I'm saving" thing, when it heads towards "C**p I have to use this dongle-thing or I'm getting screwed" then it certainly will have changed.
-
Compare with the steady increase in pressure on smoking via health insurance premiums - right now your car-driving-data discount is an "Oh cool! I'm saving" thing, when it heads towards "C**p I have to use this dongle-thing or I'm getting screwed" then it certainly will have changed.
Except I only had to use it for 60 days. I'm still saving about 27% three years later. It's not a continuous thing. It's just a temporary plug-in for a long-term discount.
-
Google has free for long time...
Data is valuable.
27%?? Wow! Might have to rethink some... Dang facts.
-
27%?? Wow! Might have to rethink some... Dang facts.
Yeah, you can get up to 30%. I just checked, and I misremembered the overall discount. It actually comes out closer to 18% for my policy. My wife follows closer than I do, and has more "hard brake" events as a result, which means her 11% discount really drags down the average.
Also, a new change since I did the tracking:
-
Keyword: currently. Don't worry, they'll start using it in rate calculations at some point.
-
Keyword: currently. Don't worry, they'll start using it in rate calculations at some point.
But like I said, I've already sent my device back, so I really don't need to worry about that.
-
True, you don't...
-
Educated guessing speed and location. Without any GPS data, I'd fight it if my rate got affected by that... I really doubt that would win in court. It may be a highly accurate guess, but it can still be fought
There's no possible way it could be a highly accurate guess without an initial GPS ping every time the car started. The court would laugh them out of the courtroom (and if we're lucky, fine their ass for stupidity!)
-
The court would laugh them out of the courtroom
How would insurance rates ever get into a courtroom?Plaintiff: They raised my rates.
Insurance Company: Our underwriting division changed their algorithm and this is the rate that was spit out. We sent a renewal notice at the new rate and the plaintiff agreed by paying it.
Judge: Judgment for the defense. Dismissed.
-
How would insurance rates ever get into a courtroom?
Insurance rating algorithms are strictly controlled. Before an insurance company can apply any adjustments to their algorithms, they must get the changes approved. Unfortunately (for the insurance companies) these controls and approval processes are handled by the states. Based on my experience, some states are better than others at making sure that their rules are actually enforced (when I worked in the home and auto insurance industry a few years back, New Mexico was pretty bad corrupt in this area).
Now, since all rating algorithms are available from the appropriate government department in your state, you can request a copy of the documents for your insurance company for the state in which you reside, for a processing fee of course. If you are able to determine that the rating algorithm doesn't not comply with your state's rules and regulations, you could take your insurance company, and the state, to court.
-
Insurance rating algorithms are strictly controlled.
I have never heard about such a thing with respect to auto insurance. Sounds more like health insurance.
-
I have never heard about such a thing with respect to auto insurance. Sounds more like health insurance.
My first programming job was for a company that provided comparative rating software for auto and home insurance to independent insurance agents. Anytime we needed to build a module to rate for a company that wouldn't work with us, we would go to the insurance authority for the appropriate state to get the filed and approved rates. Sometimes we'd get them to play nice when we discovered they weren't using the approved algorithms, and we'd threaten to turn them in.
-
I googled around and found some statutes from my state that support all this. Of course, it's a highly competitive industry and so I suspect the regulation has less effect than the competition. Especially since auto insurance is still really, y'know, insurance.
-
I googled around and found some statutes from my state that support all this. Of course, it's a highly competitive industry and so I suspect the regulation has less effect than the competition. Especially since auto insurance is still really, y'know, insurance.
You may be right about that.
-
My first programming job was for a company that provided comparative rating software for auto and home insurance to
..and there you go, letting me run off at the
mouthkeyboard...
