2. It's a wealth of data that can be used to generate other things about you. It's also data that's traditionally very hard for other parties to get a hold of - your car's make, model and your address is typically not secret information, but for the most part nobody but you knows everything about how you spend your time.

And once your insurance company has this information, you lose control over it. They can share it with other companies, with law enforcement, with parties that may not be relied on to keep the information secure.

Wrong inferences can be made about you, can be shared out.

First and foremost, it's only ever going to be used against me if it is used. I would basically have to bet I was never in an accident, which, given I've been hit three times while legally stopped in the last 5 years, I'm not willing to do. I suspect for the vast majority of drivers, the monitor is a net cost, not a net savings.

But also, there is not a one-to-one relationship between liability and safety. Insurance companies care about liability first, and if they care about safety, they care about it second. I'd like to see some studies on how these monitors influence driver behavior before even considering getting one installed.

For another, the monitors lack context. It is safer to travel at 75mph in a 65mph zone if traffic is going 75mph and the road (and your vehicle) otherwise supports that speed. (Put lazily without citation: At that speed there is almost no difference to increased speed in terms of serious injury or fatality, but at that speed variance, the likelihood of a crash occuring is higher. Net result: more serious injuries and fatalities driving at the slower speed.) But the monitor will only see you going 10mph over the speed limit.

And then, as a sibling poster mentions, there are the privacy issues. If it monitors your location, it is monitoring far, far more than your driving habits.

So do you have a citation?

From memory, the TL;DR of the study was "speed differentials cause accidents, not speeding" along with "speed differentials cause more likely to be fatal accidents". A car going 75 MPH rear ending a car going 70 MPH is going to do less damage and potentially be less fatal than a car going 75 MPH rear ending a car going 55 MPH.

I'll see if I can find the actual study.

[0] https://sites.psu.edu/siowfa15/2015/09/18/is-driving-faster-...

I think the privacy line is already drawn too far, but aside from that, I think if monitoring 'driving behaviour' involves GPS tracking, it crosses the line because you can use it to infer the people and groups you associate with.

A GPS will collect a lot of data that can be used for blackmail by rogue employees.

These are just some cheap consumer model ones the boss picked up for about $100 each.

The more advanced and expensive ones he showed me, could give you even more detailed real time.information.