Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Property - Casualty / General Insurance
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


View Poll Results: Will self driving autos kill car insurance?
Of course 42 16.80%
Maybe but not for a long time 179 71.60%
I'm a luddite... 29 11.60%
Voters: 250. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:00 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge View Post
Because now I can spend an extra hour a day reading, working, studying, or playing Words With Friends, instead of staring at a stripe of pavement. I can't imagine why people would routinely forgo that, unless they are a car enthusiast. And even then, I can't imagine they get much enjoyment from the daily commute.
Oh right, I forget people commute for hours sometimes. My commute is 15 minutes round trip
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:01 PM
nonactuarialactuary nonactuarialactuary is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
I can't imagine why people would routinely turn their life over to a computer when they didn't have to and it didn't get them there faster.
There are plenty of situations where people turn their life over to someone else. Taking a cab and letting your spouse drive on a long road trip are two examples that come to mind. Presumably, the driverless car is safer than both the cabbie and your spouse, so its really not that inconceivable that youd trust your life to someone/something else.

Also, even if top legal speeds on highways remain the same, driverless cars could still get you places faster. When was the last time you were able to go anything even close to the speed limit on a highway during rush hour? On side streets, how much of your daily commute is spent stuck at traffic lights? Driverless cars can make the travel experience in both situations much smoother, and especially in the long term, where cities can re-design their infrastructure in ways beneficial to driverless cars, getting from point A to point B would be a much quicker experience.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:16 PM
nonactuarialactuary nonactuarialactuary is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McUSA View Post
Those are great points, Mountain Hawk. I think 2050 is too long - I think we are talking about 2025 here. Maybe manual driving banned by 2035.
2025 sounds about right for 5% adoption or higher in industrialized nations, but manual cars being banned by 2035 seems aggressive. That will eventually happen, but much further down the line. When it does, it will probably be passed with some sort of phase-out provision to allow people time to adjust. After all, cars have useful lives of around 10 years without doing anything special, and properly maintained, they can last much longer. The provisions of a bill banning manual cars passed in 2050 probably wouldn't go into effect until 2070.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:18 PM
r. mutt's Avatar
r. mutt r. mutt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Extreme fever swamps of the left
Posts: 10,150
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
Hell, we've had one more recent than that:

http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actu...ght=autonomous
__________________
(\ (\
( ^_^)
(_(")(") It all comes full akchigs eventually. ~ Full-On Devi
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:34 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by r. mutt View Post
Hell, we've had one more recent than that:

http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actu...ght=autonomous
That was a exclusive we, meaning only here in the P&C forum, not out with the riff-raff
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:39 PM
Heywood J Heywood J is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonScandopolous View Post
A driverless car needs to learn to mimic all of the minor decisions that humans make before it can, in nearly all situations, be safer than human drivers.
I disagree strongly. What is optimal for humans isn't necessarily optimal for computers. We do what we do to optimize our decisions around our limitations. We need to a see a ball to avoid hitting a child, because we can't react in time once we do actually spot a child. Automated cars would simply react instantly once they detect a child in their path.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:47 PM
Heywood J Heywood J is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
I doubt collisions with animals will drop that much. Most of them are generally unavoidable. Google can't change the laws of physics and make a car moving 100mph (since they will presumably go faster) stop in 15 feet before it hits the deer.
You don't need to stop from 100 to 0 to avoid a deer. You just need to avoid being in the same place at the same time. You can accomplish that by either swerving for a fraction of a second, or just slowing down a little to give the deer more time to move out of the way. All of that can be done if you just react fast enough, and that's where humans fail, and computers will excel.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-23-2013, 12:47 PM
McUSA McUSA is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Studying for Life
Posts: 945
Default

I could imagine a scenario for insurance like this:

In order to for the automated system to work, it must be up to date (latest software, etc). The manufacturers are going to charge something for this - and this will include the insurance (whether specifically mentioned or not). If you don't pay the monthly fee, the car won't drive. The manufacturer would be liable for any accident.

So why the expsosure would be GL, this will no doubt be self insured as manufacturers will be large enough to self insure. In addition to liability, an accident would probably be considered a warranty claim, so there might be the opportunity to write coverage for out of warranty physical damage? A small premium that is.

Oh well, whether this is coming in 20 or 40 years it is clear that the days of car insurance as we know it are numbered.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-23-2013, 01:03 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heywood J View Post
You don't need to stop from 100 to 0 to avoid a deer. You just need to avoid being in the same place at the same time. You can accomplish that by either swerving for a fraction of a second, or just slowing down a little to give the deer more time to move out of the way. All of that can be done if you just react fast enough, and that's where humans fail, and computers will excel.
You've never actually seen a deer, have you?

Most of these collisions aren't poor timing, they are because the deer freeze in the headlights.
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-23-2013, 01:05 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McUSA View Post
I could imagine a scenario for insurance like this:

In order to for the automated system to work, it must be up to date (latest software, etc). The manufacturers are going to charge something for this - and this will include the insurance (whether specifically mentioned or not). If you don't pay the monthly fee, the car won't drive. The manufacturer would be liable for any accident.

So why the expsosure would be GL, this will no doubt be self insured as manufacturers will be large enough to self insure. In addition to liability, an accident would probably be considered a warranty claim, so there might be the opportunity to write coverage for out of warranty physical damage? A small premium that is.

Oh well, whether this is coming in 20 or 40 years it is clear that the days of car insurance as we know it are numbered.
I would bet $100 right now that this will be covered under a PAP, because BOTH the car lobby and the insurance lobby will want it done that way.
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.39593 seconds with 11 queries