Safety Score

[Daniel in SD]

We are far away from AI having the I to understand context. Until then, these ratings are at best based on statistics. But statistics are just that, and don't say a lot about an individual. The only metric that should matter for an insurance company is how often you are involved in insurance incidents.

But a large percentage of people are never involved in insurance incidents. It's been about 20 years for me (and I wasn't at fault in that incident). If you're trying to get the top few percent of drivers that doesn't work.

 

[Eno Deb]

But a large percentage of people are never involved in insurance incidents. It's been about 20 years for me (and I wasn't at fault in that incident). If you're trying to get the top few percent of drivers that doesn't work.

And do you think it would be fair by your insurance company to now raise your rate based on, say, accelerometer data, even though you have a stellar 20-year safety record?

 

[GbrilliantQ]

Since I'm on Android and waiting for the app to update for the safety score. I have 4 roads I travel home on that are 55 mph, but are incorrectly marked as 30 and 40 mph in the navigation. After looking through Tesla Support for the Safety Score it never mentions speeds over the speed limit. So, I hope I'm okay.
Won't know until the Android app updates.

 

[tastela_krist]

a gamified safety rating system patronizing

Not sure why you think it's "gamified" and "patronizing". I think it's just like a credit score but it's for your driving behaviors. Do you also think credit score "gamified" and "patronizing"?

 

[MarcG]

So what’s interesting is that hard acceleration is not counted and braking over 0.3Gs is. Does that mean you can gun it at stop lights and let regen (0.2g) slow you down without affecting your score?

I thought standard regen went up to 0.3g, at least above a certain speed - which would be unfortunate because that would mean that, besides low speeds, tapping the brake pedal at all would increase deceleration beyond 0.3g - thereby qualifying as “hard braking”..

 

[Daniel in SD]

And do you think it would be fair by your insurance company to now raise your rate based on, say, accelerometer data, even though you have a stellar 20-year safety record?

Yes, if that's what the statistics show.
I'm not going to volunteering to have accelerometer data determine my insurance rates though. I don't think I would do well by that metric...

 

[Saabstory88]

Not sure why you think it's "gamified" and "patronizing". I think it's just like a credit score but it's for your driving behaviors. Do you also think credit score "gamified" and "patronizing"?

There's no objective argument to be made here, these are totally subjective feelings. I'm not trying to convince anyone else that they should also feel this way. Are you suggesting there's only one right way for people to feel about this issue?

Sometimes credit scores are a useful tool to help people regain the trust of institutions, sometimes they are used to implement predatory and/or racist policies against disadvantaged communities. It depends on what your goals are as to how you ultimately see them. But I don't see how that's really relevant. I just don't want to drive a car that implements these systems because it doesn't make me feel good, it's no more complicated than that.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I thought standard regen went up to 0.3g, at least above a certain speed - which would be unfortunate because that would mean that, besides low speeds, tapping the brake pedal at all would increase deceleration beyond 0.3g - thereby qualifying as “hard braking”..

I don't think so. The only data I can find is for the RWD Model 3 was 0.16G. I haven't seen data for AWD but I don't think it's that high.

 

[MMMS]

I live in a hilly area. Think steep downhill with a 4-way stop at the bottom. Getting dinged on hard breaking due to a bunch of those it seems.

 

[MarcG]

I don't think so. The only data I can find is for the RWD Model 3 was 0.16G. I haven't seen data for AWD but I don't think it's that high.
View attachment 714240

I must have been remembering regen in Track Mode.. looks like 0.2g in standard and 0.3g in track mode.

 

[johnmodely]

Makes me wonder if NAV driving even counts on the safety score. After all, we're fairly limited on what we can affect while on NAV in terms of the safety criteria. After signing up I drove 9 miles but almost all on easy suburban roads using NAV. Nothing showed up on the safety app.

Then drove 18 miles, about half on NAV. Finally got a score.

Chill on, follow set to 7 - driving like a granny. Got a ding for an "aggressive turn" - no idea where. Not sure I want to play this game. Rules are ambiguous.

They got all the rules and even the formula used on the blog.

I just don’t see how “aggressive turning” counts towards you being a bad driver or not…what if I want to go on a twisty road and enjoy myself?

I think running a red light or grossing yellow divider is more important than aggressive turns…

 

[AndreP]

I live in a hilly area. Think steep downhill with a 4-way stop at the bottom. Getting dinged on hard breaking due to a bunch of those it seems.

You'd think their team would have considered stuff like this

Part of me wonders if these values are based on FSD Beta's limits for these actions, knowing that the regulators are looking at the system's capabilities in terms of g-forces the system can handle in turns etc. If you frequently drive routes with steep hills that require braking beyond 0.3gs, maybe the system won't be able to handle those hills?

Probably not the case but it makes me wonder

 

[Eno Deb]

Nonsense. This is like what naysayers say about FSD - until its "perfect", noone should have it.

Do you say the same thing about credit ratings ? After decades they don't still take into account the context.

Credit ratings are in large part based on past behavior. E.g. missed payments and bankruptcies have the largest negative impact on credit scores. For a car insurance the equivalents would be past minor and major accidents.

At the end of the day, credit and insurance scoring models are designed to maximize profit for the company overall, not to accurately assess an individual. To protect individuals from being wrongly penalized there should be limits to what companies can do, in particular when it comes to constant surveillance. Not everything that is becoming possible due to new technology is also ethical.

 

[KArnold]

Makes me wonder then which improves our odds. Lots of miles but 95% on AP, which would be my norm. Or driving without AP but with hopefully high good percentages?

Or maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe its not the "top 10%" (hypothetically) best, as it might be NOT the "bottom 10%". Maybe it's a random draw from those not on the bottom?

I surely do not know but I'd guess the latter approach.

 

[Dan D.]

They got all the rules and even the formula used on the blog.

I just don’t see how “aggressive turning” counts towards you being a bad driver or not…what if I want to go on a twisty road and enjoy myself?

I think running a red light or grossing yellow divider is more important than aggressive turns…

LOL, we have slack-liners here crossing canyons with no safety harness. They're having a great time. Are they being risky... well yeah.

Do you want to enjoy yourself or do you want FSD beta? Their rules apply, until it's non-beta. They may add other unsafe driving infractions to the formula as it evolves.

 

[momo3605]

I must have been remembering regen in Track Mode.. looks like 0.2g in standard and 0.3g in track mode.

Right yea, I believe it’s 0.3g for track mode. So full regen in a regular model 3 should not trigger unsafe braking. And I guess neither should stoplight pulls!

Anyone want to test it out and report back

 

[Ml007]

Interestingly, I got dinged on the Forward Collision Score rating when parking in my garage (I always use the proximity sensors to stop 12 inches from the wall). Guess I need to stop at 13-14 inches now.

 

[tastela_krist]

There's no objective argument to be made here, these are totally subjective feelings. I'm not trying to convince anyone else that they should also feel this way. Are you suggesting there's only one right way for people to feel about this issue?

Sometimes credit scores are a useful tool to help people regain the trust of institutions, sometimes they are used to implement predatory and/or racist policies against disadvantaged communities. It depends on what your goals are as to how you ultimately see them. But I don't see how that's really relevant. I just don't want to drive a car that implements these systems because it doesn't make me feel good, it's no more complicated than that.

No offense but I'm just curious why you think it doesn't make you feel good. Because the mechanism of calculating the safety score is too simple? Or you just don't like the feeling of being judged? Or something else?

 

[Saabstory88]

No offense but I'm just curious why you think it doesn't make you feel good. Because the mechanism of calculating the safety score is too simple? Or you just don't like the feeling of being judged? Or something else?

I think probably because I would constantly have that number in the back of my head, constantly measuring every move against it. It would sap the moments of joy these cars currently bring me. Having every aspect of life quantified like this is not something that makes me happy. Optimizing to a score has a lot of malignant failure modes such as we see in ridesharing and online reviews in general. It makes me feel bad to participate in that.

 

[EVNow]

Interestingly, I got dinged on the Forward Collision Score rating when parking in my garage (I always use the proximity sensors to stop 12 inches from the wall). Guess I need to stop at 13-14 inches now.

Doesn't sound good. They definitely should filter this out ... I've a tight garage that we actually use to park cars instead of storing junk.