So what exactly is the Data Sharing Notification we're getting, actually sharing ?

[SeanIsElsewhere]

Thank you for sharing! Let's hope this is not a game of whack a mole where they're still selling it, but via a different channel. Definitely great news either way.

No doubt! I really hope not also..

I’ve said for years that I’d be happy to take some profit share if companies wanted to collect and share my data. Give me a cut, and a decent one at that! Idk the math involved but I’m sure it’s a pretty penny per person/dataset per year.

Sponsored

 

[NoelPR]

Interesting find while looking into VeriRisk’s site this morning. Doesn’t look like they are sharing any longer as of earlier this month

What if the data share is done the 9th of every month?

 

[SeanIsElsewhere]

L

What if the data share is done the 9th of every month?

Lol will check the site again May 10th…

 

[Krazydan19]

Jesus, I just found this post and just turned the data sharing off. Wow hope I’m not F’ed by the slowest car to a 100 I own. I mean shit I’m 13.5 mpg. Everybody knows how you drive to get that . Damn computers. I knew they would screw up everything

 

[optronix]

What if you never connect to the Internet, does it still transmit data in another fashion? I know I was extremely happy to find out the AcuraLink was severely limited in the Type S as compared to the A Spec, I figured we didn't have any of it.

WARNING! Soapbox rant ahead.

I always drive safely, but seldom do I drive lawfully because the laws remain unchanged for the realities of modern vehicles, (I believe) purposely to the benefit of government budgets. Most of the enforced laws are an easy cash cow, and quite literally highway robbery, instead of genuine public safety policy.

So if you drive like a dangerous moron doing 5 under the limit in the left lane causing road rage and increased risk for everyone around you, this reality doesn't get factored into the insurance algorithms (spyware) which only uses speed and acceleration to determine risk. But they don't care for reality either because they too can benefit financially from this safety fraud.

This is nonsense. A "dangerous moron" is only dangerous because the idiot who wants to go 120 and doesn't see the car going 50 in the right lane until it's too late and kills a family of 5.

You won't change my mind on this, and in my eyes your "fun" is pretty much unforgivable. Stop trying to rationalize and take it to a fucking track.

That said, this conversation will go right down a political rathole if you wanted to actually find a way to curtail automakers and whoever else from doing stuff like this. You have the ability to turn it off, otherwise:

 

[Integra23]

This is nonsense. A "dangerous moron" is only dangerous because the idiot who wants to go 120 and doesn't see the car going 50 in the right lane until it's too late and kills a family of 5.

You won't change my mind on this, and in my eyes your "fun" is pretty much unforgivable. Stop trying to rationalize and take it to a fucking track.

That said, this conversation will go right down a political rathole if you wanted to actually find a way to curtail automakers and whoever else from doing stuff like this. You have the ability to turn it off, otherwise:

Please stay in the right lane. The left is for passing only.

 

[optronix]

Please stay in the right lane. The left is for passing only.

Don't give me that shit, you know as well as I do that most of these "philosophical speeders", any lane is fair game to them. If you're an "honorable speeder" and you "only" speed in the left lane, ok. Cool, I guess? I'd rather deal with some putz in a Subaru going 40 in the left lane than some asshole who will literally kill someone I love because they think rules shouldn't fucking apply to them.

This is NOT Germany, there IS a speed limit, this whole "you're focused when you're speeding" is hilariously stupid, and you'll get no sympathy from me on any of it. That's what the race track is for.

Is it clear yet that you won't get anywhere with this discussion with me?

 

[Integra23]

Don't give me that shit, you know as well as I do that most of these "philosophical speeders", any lane is fair game to them. If you're an "honorable speeder" and you "only" speed in the left lane, ok. Cool, I guess? I'd rather deal with some putz in a Subaru going 40 in the left lane than some asshole who will literally kill someone I love because they think rules shouldn't fucking apply to them.

This is NOT Germany, there IS a speed limit, this whole "you're focused when you're speeding" is hilariously stupid, and you'll get no sympathy from me on any of it. That's what the race track is for.

Is it clear yet that you won't get anywhere with this discussion with me?

You seriously go exactly the speed limit or below it.
I prefer to behind those going over the limit. Most who drive slow have Buicks or are distracted drivers texting and are more likely to cause a wreck. Someone going moderately over isn't a safety concern.

 

[SilverRocket]

This is nonsense. A "dangerous moron" is only dangerous because the idiot who wants to go 120 and doesn't see the car going 50 in the right lane until it's too late and kills a family of 5.

You won't change my mind on this, and in my eyes your "fun" is pretty much unforgivable. Stop trying to rationalize and take it to a fucking track.

That said, this conversation will go right down a political rathole if you wanted to actually find a way to curtail automakers and whoever else from doing stuff like this. You have the ability to turn it off, otherwise:

I usually respect your point of view but on this one you are way off the mark, creating strawman arguments to support your irrational half truth belief.

Buckle up because this will be a deep dive into the logical reality of speed.

Firstly let's acknowledge speed doesn't kill, rapid deceleration does. If you were loaded into the white matrix expanse you could theoretically go 300 mph and with nothing to hit you'd be safe even if you spun out.

With that building block let's go to the next concept, relative speed of impact. Continuing with the 300mph matrix analogy let's add a single other car doing 299mph and you bump into them. You understand the force of impact is like hitting a parked car while doing 1mph right? The danger only comes if the shunt is enough to destabilize the car which leads to an uncontrolled deceleration for the remaining 298mph.

Anyway this is just to cover the physics, demonstrating it's the differential in speed that counts not the outright speed. Same reason head on collisions are so dangerous, 30mph while not that fast, when in each direction is like hitting a wall at 60mph. In reality that 1mph difference is easily brakable and there in lies the main issue.

People driving too fast for their and/or their car's ability given the conditions, that's the problem. 120mph in an open stretch no cars is world's difference than 120 weaving in and out of traffic. 120 in the ITS (open road) is also very different than 120 in a rusted out shitbox with Chinese brand tires and finished brakes.

Basically if you have a good car, on a nice day and open road with miles of visibility, don't freaking lecture anyone that going fast is dangerous because my reply will be that you've bought the "speed kills" propaganda hook, line and sinker. The way it is enforced is not for safety but for additional tax revenue.

In conclusion, I don't care if you disregard this post completely, I wrote it for those on the fence about the matter and who have an open mind. There will always be those who will only see the mph becoming enraged by anything "X" mph above the posted limited and those are the same people who fail to ask; under what conditions. That makes all the difference between a good and bad driver.

 

[StingertimeNC]

The only thing I will add in defense of some aggressive driving, is that it can be done on backroads, with clear conditions and good visibility. In essence, you can have some fun without putting the general public at risk. Weaving in and out of traffic on an interstate, etc. is dangerous, but I do have access to wide open country roads where you can goose it, brake harder than normal, etc. Basically stuff that would make your "data" appear aggressive, when in fact it is still well under control.

 

[optronix]

I usually respect your point of view but on this one you are way off the mark, creating strawman arguments to support your irrational half truth belief.

Buckle up because this will be a deep dive into the logical reality of speed.

Firstly let's acknowledge speed doesn't kill, rapid deceleration does. If you were loaded into the white matrix expanse you could theoretically go 300 mph and with nothing to hit you'd be safe even if you spun out.

With that building block let's go to the next concept, relative speed of impact. Continuing with the 300mph matrix analogy let's add a single other car doing 299mph and you bump into them. You understand the force of impact is like hitting a parked car while doing 1mph right? The danger only comes if the shunt is enough to destabilize the car which leads to an uncontrolled deceleration for the remaining 298mph.

Anyway this is just to cover the physics, demonstrating it's the differential in speed that counts not the outright speed. Same reason head on collisions are so dangerous, 30mph while not that fast, when in each direction is like hitting a wall at 60mph. In reality that 1mph difference is easily brakable and there in lies the main issue.

People driving too fast for their and/or their car's ability given the conditions, that's the problem. 120mph in an open stretch no cars is world's difference than 120 weaving in and out of traffic. 120 in the ITS (open road) is also very different than 120 in a rusted out shitbox with Chinese brand tires and finished brakes.

Basically if you have a good car, on a nice day and open road with miles of visibility, don't freaking lecture anyone that going fast is dangerous because my reply will be that you've bought the "speed kills" propaganda hook, line and sinker. The way it is enforced is not for safety but for additional tax revenue.

In conclusion, I don't care if you disregard this post completely, I wrote it for those on the fence about the matter and who have an open mind. There will always be those who will only see the mph becoming enraged by anything "X" mph above the posted limited and those are the same people who fail to ask; under what conditions. That makes all the difference between a good and bad driver.

No, I didn't read all of your post. As soon as people start breaking out their personal logical fallacy chart, my eyes glaze over.

You can get defensive over your irresponsible driving all you want! It doesn't change the fact that the worst accidents are caused by speed, and I've personally seen too many absolute fucktards driving in a way that would absolutely get someone killed if the slightest unexpected thing were to occur to cut you any slack. If that shoe fits, then you're my target. If you're going to keep waxing poetic on how you're still being "safe" while going 100+ mph on public roads? However you want to sleep at night buddy.

Didn't someone bring up Montana earlier? Because I literally just saw this "study" this morning.

https://jalopnik.com/these-states-have-the-most-aggressive-drivers-study-1851451839

And no I don't go 55mph or below "all the time". I've been guilty of being a fucking idiot in my past as well, and lucky I made it out of my youth alive. If you're an adult and have common sense, you should know that the guy going 80 in the left lane with little to no traffic is not who I'm raging about. That guy might be me. It's you "going to Mexico" douchebags that rationalize your insane behavior to the point you think everyone else is wrong that I'm talking about. Privileged, entitled assholes who are literal walking talking time bombs. If you want to paint me as the bad guy because I don't hesitate to call you out on your stupidity, joke's on you because I'm into that shit.

 

[Integra23]

No, I didn't read all of your post. As soon as people start breaking out their personal logical fallacy chart, my eyes glaze over.

You can get defensive over your irresponsible driving all you want! It doesn't change the fact that the worst accidents are caused by speed, and I've personally seen too many absolute fucktards driving in a way that would absolutely get someone killed if the slightest unexpected thing were to occur to cut you any slack. If that shoe fits, then you're my target. If you're going to keep waxing poetic on how you're still being "safe" while going 100+ mph on public roads? However you want to sleep at night buddy.

Didn't someone bring up Montana earlier? Because I literally just saw this "study" this morning.

https://jalopnik.com/these-states-have-the-most-aggressive-drivers-study-1851451839

And no I don't go 55mph or below "all the time". I've been guilty of being a fucking idiot in my past as well, and lucky I made it out of my youth alive. If you're an adult and have common sense, you should know that the guy going 80 in the left lane with little to no traffic is not who I'm raging about. That guy might be me. It's you "going to Mexico" douchebags that rationalize your insane behavior to the point you think everyone else is wrong that I'm talking about. Privileged, entitled assholes who are literal walking talking time bombs. If you want to paint me as the bad guy because I don't hesitate to call you out on your stupidity, joke's on you because I'm into that shit.

Shame on you for speeding.
Your article lists mostly road rage, gun violence ,careless driving, and aggressive driving. Only one mentions speeding tickets. I don't remember anyone on here stating they were swerving and cutting people off then pulling a gun on them. Seems like you generalized that everyone on here are reckless road rage drivers.
Maybe your right since I do lower my tire pressure for the sustained speeds of 130+mph on the freeways.

 

[optronix]

Shame on you for speeding.
Your article lists mostly road rage, gun violence ,careless driving, and aggressive driving. Only one mentions speeding tickets. I don't remember anyone on here stating they were swerving and cutting people off then pulling a gun on them. Seems like you generalized that everyone on here are reckless road rage drivers.
Maybe your right since I do lower my tire pressure for the sustained speeds of 130+mph on the freeways.

You sound really salty rn.

If the conversation doesn't apply to you, then why take such deep offense?

 

[SilverRocket]

Montana was mentioned by me in another thread (I think) but it's because they temporarily removed the day time speed limit and traffic death actually declined during that period and seat belt use increased while the average road speeds only increased 5-10mph. It was cancelled because the state needed the Uncle Sam Bux from D.C. they were no longer getting because they didn't subscribe to the national speed limits. Btw, upon restoration, traffic deaths went back up.

Quite simply in a nut shell, the track is a place not to "drive fast" but more accurately to push your limits and make yourself better in a controlled environment. For some, again with a big asterisk on in the correct conditions, 130mph is a Sunday cruise, and the ITS is absolutely solid up to that speed. But you know what, in my first civic with rear drum brakes and budget tires, I never drove faster than 85 because the steering started to get floaty, so if I wanted to push 100 I would have taken it to a track to test it out.

TL;DR the # in mph/kph is useless without context. Case and point, 30mph might be absolutely stupid fast in dense fog or a bad snow storm on all seasons.

Back to the original point, the stupid spyware system does just that, takes perceived risk factors completely out of context and penalizes people who can technically be driving safer than someone doing the speed limit.

 

[optronix]

Montana was mentioned by me in another thread (I think) but it's because they temporarily removed the day time speed limit and traffic death actually declined during that period and seat belt use increased while the average road speeds only increased 5-10mph. It was cancelled because the state needed the Uncle Sam Bux from D.C. they were no longer getting because they didn't subscribe to the national speed limits. Btw, upon restoration, traffic deaths went back up.

Quite simply in a nut shell, the track is a place not to "drive fast" but more accurately to push your limits and make yourself better in a controlled environment. For some, again with a big asterisk on in the correct conditions, 130mph is a Sunday cruise, and the ITS is absolutely solid up to that speed. But you know what, in my first civic with rear drum brakes and budget tires, I never drove faster than 85 because the steering started to get floaty, so if I wanted to push 100 I would have taken it to a track to test it out.

TL;DR the # in mph/kph is useless without context. Case and point, 30mph might be absolutely stupid fast in dense fog or a bad snow storm on all seasons.

Back to the original point, the stupid spyware system does just that, takes perceived risk factors completely out of context and penalizes people who can technically be driving safer than someone doing the speed limit.

What makes your interpretation any better than an insurance company?

Sponsored