Re:A glut has used-car depreciation accelerating
by oasisbob on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @10:05AM
(#15081618)
Instead of barking the names of logical fallacies at people, perhaps consider why the auto insurance industry employs scores of actuaries and takes driver history into account so heavily.
Re:A glut has used-car depreciation accelerating
by bluGill on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @12:20PM
(#15082773)
It is still a fallacy. Insurance companies don't look at someone who is 40 with no accidents and insure them for free because even the lowest risk drivers get into accidents sometimes.
Re:A glut has used-car depreciation accelerating
by mikestew on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @02:11PM
(#15083733)
Gambler's Fallacy. Prior incidence has no effect on future occurrence.
We’re not gambling, we’re driving cars. And the fact that the current F1 champion has won some races means that he is more likely to win the next one than I am. And the fact that I have a lower-than-average rate of driving collisions means that I have a lower-than-average chance of having a collision in the future. If you doubt me, ask an insurance actuary.
Re:A glut has used-car depreciation accelerating
by mateo411 on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @04:04PM
(#15084578)
The Gambler's fallacy doesn't take independence from different trials into account.
However, since it's the same driver for each of the "trials" then the Gambler's fallacy doesn't really apply.
Gambler's Fallacy. Prior incidence has no effect on future occurrence.
A lot of the new safety features are for low-speed collision protection, automatically sounding horn and applying breaks when your car gets close to another, say in traffic. Unless you go top-range you generally won't get actual driving automation. Other than that it's just convenience; Climate control instead of air con, reversing sensors and camera instead of (as well as) mirrors and turning your head around etc.