Electronic Driver Monitoring

My iPhone already has this feature as part of a recent OS update.

I would not sign up.

From what was written the only things being monitored is speed, abruptness of braking and steering. Time of day, routes taken, kilometers definitely factor in but then there is a similar system in place where our rates currently are set by our location.

If they would monitor appropriate lane usage, signalling for lane changes & turns with enough notice to improve traffic flow, using correct headlight beam for safety of self and on-coming traffic, not impeding traffic, distance between vehicles, vehicle maintenance and appropriate tires, courtesy to other drivers and pedestrians. There is so many other aspects of driving that come in to whether one is a safe driver or not that just do not get monitored.

Which brings me back to my usual complaint. If the cops would enforce a few more rules of the road other than speeding, cell phone, impaired and seat belt usage I believe we would see a reduction in accidents. As it is all they are interested in is enforcing the easiest.

Why is it Canada is way down on the list of highway safety yet countries that have higher speed limits have lower accident rates?

It is time we started looking at all aspects of driving rather than a select few.

As well as scores for phone use, the Cellcontrol app gives a set of driving scores for each trip consisting of the following: Braking, Cornering, Acceleration, Speeding, Aggressiveness

You can view the route of each trip on a map, sometimes weirdly incorrect in parts, and usually, but not always, see where and when points were lost for each trip.

Based on my use of this software over the last two weeks and getting an average phone score 100/100 and drive score 98/100 I have some concerns about the accuracy, even though I received only 2 out of 100 off a "perfect" score.

Braking - Most of the points I lost were for "mild braking" events where I do not think marks should have been lost. I correlate these events with a few times when I approached a traffic light, the light changed to amber before I had reached the point of no return, and I braked smoothly to stop for the light as required when this can be done safely. Never exceeded the limit while approaching the intersection and no sudden stopping.

Cornering - No loss of points recorded

Acceleration - a couple of points lost for rapid acceleration that I found puzzling as I do not use the rapid acceleration that my Electric Vehicle is capable of. I wonder if the sensor can distinguish properly between potholes or bunps and rapid acceleration since at least one event was reported on a straight stretch between intersections.

Speeding - I don't think the device/app knew when I was speeding as I know I have driven at 55 km/hr in a 50 km/hr zone e.g. on roads where the average speed was 60 km/hr, yet lost no points for speeding. Where the traffic averaged 65 to 70 km/hr, e.g. down the hill on Southridge Drive, Bby, I may have reached close to 60 km/hr.

Aggressiveness - I lost points for agressive driving events twice, but the device/app didn't say where. One of the events was recorded with a time a few seconds before the trip had started, so must have been recorded while I was still in the garage, which I back out of extremely slowly due to limited visibility in the lane.

I conclude that most of the points the app docked for parameters other than speeding should not have been taken off, but the app failed to take any points off for speeding that had happened.

As well as concerns about accuracy,  I have concerns about privacy, specifically about the possibility for all the data that is reported by the app being used by third parties for purposes not related to intended uses such as insurance,  discouraging unsafe driving, or assisting in enforcement of driving laws. Given the commercial value of personal data on travel patterns, there is a risk of serious breaches of privacy similar to other well-known apps.

Unfortunately all these systems rely on equipment that was never intended for this kind of use: Accelerometers and GPS

Cellular phones have processors that were stuffed with all the useful features that the designers could think of. We have silicon based accelerometer, barometers and even a satellite receiver (GPS).
The accelerometer on a typical cellphone CPU is prone to artifacting and a software algorithm is constantly adjusting the unrealistic peaks along the 3D axis. The spikes can be caused by many things, its a fact of life that these accelerometers are not precise devices. There is a separate class of devices called gyrocompases, typically installed on ICBMs and Cruise Missiles, which can be relied to with-in meters over a thousand kilometers. Those are restricted technology. Any consumer technology will be nerfed to not replicate the precision of those devices for national security reasons. We don't want people to build precise cruise missiles using cellphones.

GPS - US Army network of satellites which broadcast a unique signature and a relatively imprecise timestamp which your phone receives. 7-8 satellites are required to be seen by your antenna to provide an accuracy with-in 2-3 meters, but usually with-in 10 meters. The GPS network also broadcasts a much more precise timestamp which enables GPS precision with-in 20 cm. That broadcast is encrypted and is off-limits to general population. We don't want people to build precise cruise missiles.

Because of the limited access to the truly precise stuff, all these apps and dedicated monitoring devices are only marginally precise. Algorithms are hard at work hundreds of times per second leveling out the artefacts and cutting peaks. Everyone has seen their GPS position jump back and forth wildly from spot to spot, while they were not actually moving - that happens because software is applied to hardware sensors which are outputting a really garbage signal.  That means all monitoring devices/applications would have to adopt some kind of strategy of fighting these inconveniences - some will forgo somethings, and some will down-mark based on false data.

But even if there was suddenly access to really precise reliable technology, do we really want to tie our money to the judgement of a mostly blind machine?

Currently, today, any day, there are hundreds of thousands of motorists zooming happily along the roads equipped with cellphones, which are systemically tracked (where do you think Google Maps gets its traffic info?). Most cellphones have a credit card / credit account attached. Most drivers speed, even if they don't consider it, as well as don't Stop fully at Stop signs or when turning right at the traffic light.

I position that right now, as in today, we have the ability to lawfully ticket every single vehicle owner electronically for speeding based off their cellphone tracking (averaging their speed from A to B) and take their money from their credit cards or charge it to their cellphone accounts. Considering that the average driver commits a ticket-able offense every few blocks, we could literally take $2,000-$5,000 from someone in just a day of driving.

What kind of uproar do you think this would cause? But whats the problem - they were all speeding or not stopping proprely, which was legitimately recorded, and the appropriate amount of money got charged.

That's where we come to the realization that the "lack-luster" enforcement is a necessary part of the system that provides punishment for actions that don't realistically affect anyone.
So before we move to an absolutely tracked system we must demand absolute victim tracking as well.

Because what good is the law in a lawful society if it punishes society members for seemly doing no harm.
The only reason it works now is because of the loose enforcement.

Personally I think we should move to a negative point system with no monetary penalties at all. The only penalty should be the removal of the offender from the road once the "unsafe allowance" has been spent.
Unsafe - meaning affecting other road users - unsafe lane switches, failure to give the right of way, and a whole bunch of other conditions in the top-10 accident causing indiscretions as per ICBC data (speeding is #11 btw).